►
From YouTube: Bellevue City Council Meeting - January 23, 2023
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
Welcome
to
the
regular
Bellevue
city
council
meeting
for
January
23rd
2023.
before
we
start
I,
just
like
to
take
a
moment
of
silence
for
the
families
and
the
loved
ones
who
are
involved
in
the
mass
shooting
over
the
weekend
in
California
and
for
those
who
are
wounded
in
trying
to
recover.
So
we'll
take
a
20-second
moment
of
silence.
A
So,
thank
you.
You
know
it's
such
a
tragedy
and
to
come
at
a
time
of
great
celebration
for
all
the
people
who
are
celebrating
the
Lunar
New
Years.
It's
just
really
shaken
the
community
and
the
nation.
A
So
our
thoughts
continue
to
be
with
those
who
are
ex
who
are
who
are
affected
by
that
and
for
those
who
are
trying
to
heal,
okay,
so
city
clerk.
Could
you
please
do
the
Roll
Call.
C
C
A
E
A
Those
in
favor
say
aye,
aye
aye,
any
opposed
city
Deputy
city
clerk.
Do
we
have
anybody
signed
up
for
oral
Communications?
Yes,.
B
A
A
B
G
G
Olympia
bureaucrats
would
not
know
our
neighborhoods,
they
don't
know
Lake
Hills
the
resulting
hodgepodge
of
what
HB
1110
would
allow
would
not
take
into
account
many
of
the
factors
which
created
non-affordable
housing
in
the
first
place.
Factors
of
the
city
of
Bellevue
knows
well
and
would
consider
our
city
is
well
able
to
plan
and
build
for
all
of
our
future
needs
without
Olympia
dictating
our
housing
decisions.
Our
city
council
knows
Our
Community,
Olympia
bureaucrats
do
not
I
would
trust
you
all
before
I
would
trust
them.
G
Furthermore,
access
matters
as
a
resident
of
Bellevue
I
have
access
to
city
council
members
from
past
experience.
I
can
tell
you
that
my
access
to
politicians
in
Olympia
is
very,
very
limited.
Diminished
access
leads
to
poor
decisions.
We
need
to
retain
access
to
our
city
council
members
for
these
planning
decisions.
G
I
Dave
Nazi
just
type
of
democracy,
fascist
map
and
psychopath.
My
name
Alex
Zimmerman
I
want
to
speak
about
something.
What
is
absolutely
critical
number
one
about
Puget,
Sound
Energy
and
why
you
don't
have
discount
for
senior
citizens
and
low
income
and
I
spoke
Richard
Fourier
ago
about
the
silverness
for
35
parties.
They
live
here.
I
I,
don't
hear
nothing
from
you,
you
are
you
Kirk
your
bad
tears,
that's
exactly
what
you
are
why
you
cannot
do
it
like
Seattle
doing
Seattle
doing
50
percentage
discount
for
senior
citizen
like
me,
low
income,
you
understand
about
a
token.
Why
don't
doing
nothing?
Why
are
you
so
quiet?
Ask
me,
give
me
a
question.
Why.
I
I
This
bandito
cut
is
size
console
because
it's
seven
people,
you
know
what
this
means
have
different
opinion.
You
are
real
bandito
you're,
a
real
Mafia.
You
know
what
I
mean.
Why
are
you
doing
this
I
demand
restores
more
people
is
better.
It's
more
freedom
of
speech.
More
opinion
is
America.
You
banjito
Cuts,
East,
Side,
Council
I,
never
seen
like
this.
Before
in
my
life,
we
I
speak
right
now
to
everybody
who
listen
to
me
stand
up
America.
We
need
cleansage
Chamber
from
this
creatino.
I
From
this
point,
it
is
a
real
Mafia
is
controlled
by
Democrat
fascists.
It's
exactly
what's
happened.
You
need
stopping
doing
this,
something.
What
is
bad
for
people
and
last
meeting.
You
know
what
has
been
your
approve
transportation
for
how
many
hundred
million
dollars
100
million
half
hundred
million?
Why
you
don't
approve
money
for
low
income?
For
housing,
this
exactly
what
is
I
took
for
many
years.
You
knew
something
doing
right
now:
life
terrible
price
from
Corporation,
sucked,
blood
and
money
from
us
for
everything
right
now,
food
triple
right,
now,
rent
30
percentage.
I
J
J
I
thought
they.
They
were
excellent.
J
J
I
really
wish
that
Bellevue,
rather
than
signing
in
as
other,
would
sign
in
as
Khan,
because
until
the
sponsors
can
show
where
and
how
those
measures
that
they're
proposing
have
succeeded
elsewhere
in
in
making
affordable
housing
I,
don't
think
that
they
should
be
taking
this
authoritarian,
broad
brush
across
the
state,
and
it
is
authoritarian,
as
Cynthia
noted.
J
So
one
thing
that
I
I
was
watching
this
morning
and
I
happened
to
catch
the
Senate
committee's
Law,
And
Justice
hearing,
and
they
were
discussing
SB
5258,
which
would
increase
the
supply
and
affordability
of
condos
and
Townhomes
for
ownership
and
I
would
really
like
to
encourage
the
city
to
to
follow.
J
Along
with
that,
it
sounded
like
it
was
a
reiteration
of
a
bill
that
had
come
before
and
not
passed
and
they've
done
some
tweaking
so
I'm
very
curious
about
that,
especially
since
it
would
you
know,
inspiration
of
ownership,
which
would
be
great
and
I
know.
We've.
We've
talked
a
lot
about
that
and
a
lot
about
the
barriers
with
building
condos
and
that
sort
of
thing.
So
please
follow
along
ownership.
E
J
Again
be
great
wow.
With
this
whole
affordability
issue,
I'm,
going
to
send
you
a
link
to
UBC
Professor
Patrick
condon's
presentation
that
he
did
for
the
vanishing
Boise
Group,
which
Boise
Idaho
is
facing
the
exact
same
issue
that
we
are
with
affordable
housing,
they're
even
larger
than
we
are,
and
his
YouTube
presentation
was
entitled:
Vancouver
Canary
in
the
coal
mine
and
addresses
the
fact
that
we
aren't
going
to
be
able
to
build
our
way
out
of
this
simply
and
I
think
that
it's
correct.
J
K
I
K
Okay,
it's
not
a
secret
any
longer
that
the
security
and
safety
in
the
in
the
city
of
Bellevue
and
surrounding
areas
is
drastically
changed
and,
sadly,
sadly
not
to
the
better
the
shoplifting
theft
of
the
male
and
doorstep
packages.
Car
break-ins
is
a
daily
occurrence
and,
most
of
the
time,
all
of
these
goals
unpunished.
K
All
of
this
is
the
result
of
our
local
policy
policies.
On
multiple
occasions,
I
personally
was
witnessing
episodes
of
store
theft
in
Target
of
factorial
Trader
Joe's
on
116th,
Avenue
and
QFC
on
8th
Street
and
Bellevue.
In
every
occasion,
those
people
just
came
into
the
store
held
themselves
with
the
merchandise
and
left
the
store,
without
paying
all,
in
plain
view
of
the
staff
and
other
customers
without
even
being
stopped
as
I
lead
as
I
learned
later.
You
know
this
was
the
store
policy
to
keep
the
workers
safe.
K
K
K
In
my
opinion,
this
is
absolutely
ridiculous
and
promotes
more
theft,
more
violent
Behavior.
It
makes
life
easy
and
pleasant
for
criminals
today,
I
just
want
to
say
that
before
it's
too
late,
it's
urgent
to
do
something
to
change
from
this
grave
State
back
to
normalcy.
K
We
have
a
very
bad
example
set
by
city
of
Seattle,
with
just
a
few
years,
as
you
know,
was
a
clean,
safe,
vibrant
and
beautiful
place
filled
with
Shoppers
tourists
and
thriving
businesses,
but
unfortunately,
it's
no
longer
the
case.
Even
the
Washington
Post
article
named
Seattle
is
dead,
made
us
Infamous
for
the
whole
world.
A
Excuse
me
I'm.
Sorry,
your
time
is
up,
but
you
can
email
the
rest
of
that
to
the
council,
so
we
can
see
the
whole
thing.
Thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you.
L
M
A
A
L
L
L
L
The
items
stolen
from
my
yard
and
my
car
were
costly,
stereo
components,
sunglasses
and
other
small
items
that
were
not
visible,
but
they
were
still
expensive
to
replace
and
I
feel.
This
needs
to
change.
I
no
longer
feel
safe,
going
to
my
own
grocery
store.
After
Dark,
because
I've
been
approached
in
the
different
crime
and
the
shoplifting
that
I
witnessed,
thank
you.
N
Thank
you,
hello,
mayor
Robinson,
Deputy,
Mayor,
Newman
house
and
the
rest
of
the
council.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
this
evening.
My
name
is
Matt
Arnold
and
I'm.
A
local
Bellevue
resident
I
just
wanted
to
take
some
time
to
raise
how
concerning
the
issue
of
shoplifting
retail
theft
and
allowing
this
type
of
criminal
Behavior
to
go
on
without
punishment
in
our
community
On
Any
Given
night,
you
can
walk
into
the
QFC
or
the
Bartels
over
on
Northeast,
8th
Street
and
be
assured
you
can.
N
You
can
watch
someone
shoplift
and
walk
out
the
door
without
any
consequence.
About
a
month
ago
my
wife
was
in
the
meat
section
at
QFC
and
a
guy
came
up
next
to
her
with
a
backpack
on
his
back.
He
removed
the
backpack
very
casually
proceeded
to
shove
steak
after
steak
into
the
backpack
he
he
was
doing
this
in
such
a
casual
way
that
my
wife
was
not
exactly
sure
what
to
think
once
he
finished
loading
up
15
to
20
Stakes.
N
He
zipped
up
the
backpack
and
left
the
store
when
my
wife
went
to
report
this
to
the
checkout
clerk.
His
answer
was
that
he
could
not
do
anything
about
it
and
seemed
pretty
indifferent
about
it
even
brought
to
his
attention.
This
type
of
behavior
has
become
simply
accepted
and
I
believe
this
is.
This
is
leading
us
down
a
dangerous
path,
because
where
does
it
end?
N
Criminals
are
empowered
to
steal
in
our
city
like
never
before.
Another
example
is
that
our
sun
frequents
Corner
sports
card
store
right
here
on
Bellevue
Way.
N
The
store
has
now
been
robbed
five
times
in
a
year
and
two
times
in
the
last
three
weeks
and
the
store
owner
is
starting
to
think
he
has
to
get
out
of
Bellevue.
This
would
be
a
big
loss
for
the
community,
as
this
store
is
a
favorite
among
many
local
teens
foreign.
N
What
has
happened
in
the
city
of
Seattle,
with
stores
like
Nike
Meridian,
theaters,
TR
International
and
pretty
much
the
entire
Pacific
Pike
Place
Park,
Pacific
Place
Mall
is
now
gone
and
and
if
you
there's
a
there's,
an
article
that
I
brought
copies
of
reference
in
a
recent
Seattle
Times
article
about
160
other
businesses
that
have
left
Seattle,
it's
my
opinion
that
if
we
continue
to
tolerate
or
allow
businesses
this
type
of
criminal
Behavior,
it
will
only
continue
to
get
worse
and
promote
further
crime
and
possibly
more
violent
crime.
N
My
request
from
the
city
council,
which
is
also
the
request
of
so
many
of
my
friends
and
neighbors,
is
to
address
this
issue.
Now
we
need
more
police,
more
emphasis
patrols
and
a
zero
tolerance
stance
for
this
type
of
behavior.
Please
make
this
quality
of
life
issue
a
priority
for
the
city
now
before
it
worsens.
Please
protect
bellevue's
reputation
as
a
safe,
City
I,
look
forward
to
Future
updates
from
the
city,
council
and
staff
on
how
you
plan
to
address
this
issue.
Thank
you.
A
B
A
Had
three
young
crimes,
so
we
can't
have
anybody
speak
to
that.
But
if
there's
any
other
topic,
somebody
would
like
to
speak
to
okay,
moving
on
Council
business
new
initiative,
so
I
am
asking
for
an
excused
absence.
I've
been
on
the
council
for
almost
10
years
and
I
think
this
is
my
first
completely
absent,
be
absence
from
a
meeting,
so
I
think
there's
a
motion.
If
somebody
would
like
to
make
it
there's
mayor
I.
F
F
E
A
O
You
I'll
go
ahead
and
just
tee
this
up
mayor
and
council
members.
It
is
a
public
hearing
on
the
proposed
land
use
code,
Amendment,
updating
the
shoreline
Masters
program
and
just
by
way
background.
This
was
last
before
Council
on
January
9th,
in
which
time
the
staff
reviewed
the
proposed
changes
to
the
instructional
line
master's
program
with
the
council
after
the
public
hearing
staff
are
seeking
Council
directed
and
prepare
land
use
code,
Amendment
ordinance
for
final
adoption
at
Future
meeting
joining
us
tonight.
O
P
You
great
thank
you
Liz
and
good
evening.
Council
members
so
for
tonight's
staff
are
seeking
Council
action
to
hold
the
public
hearing,
after
which
we
will
seek
direction
to
prepare
the
Luca
ordinance
for
final
adoption
at
a
future
meeting.
I'll
note
we
can't
be
adopted
tonight
because
we
have
some
additional
procedural
steps
with
the
Department
of
ecology
before
we
before
the
council
can
adopt
to
the
final
ordinance
for
tonight's
presentation,
we'll
first
go
through
the
background
of
the
Luca,
including
ordinance,
no
numbers
6670
and
6673.
P
Then
we'll
go
through
the
proposed
amendments
and
the
review
process
needed
for
this
Luca
for
s
p
amendments
and
then
finally,
a
staff
recommendation
how
this
compares
to
the
Luca
decision
criteria
so
for
background.
This
is
related
to
previously
adopted
ordinances
by
Council
number
6670
and
73..
P
6670
was
the
also
known
as
the
ebcc
sunset
Luca
and
removed
ebcc's
specific
Provisions
from
the
land
use
code
following
the
state's
termination
of
community
councils
last
year,
this
was
adopted
on
July
18th
of
2022.
for
ordinance
number
6673.
This
removed
Council
authority
to
hear
quasi-judicial
appeals
for
type
1
and
3
land
use
decisions,
and
that
was
adopted
on
August
1st
of
2022..
P
Neither
ordinance
included
amendments
to
the
Shoreline
master
program,
and
so
we
are
proposing
the
following
to
clean
up
the
s
p.
First,
to
remove
all
references
to
the
ebcc,
then
to
remove
administrative
appeal
path
for
Shoreline
process.
One
actions
which
just
include
a
shoreline
conditional
use
permits
for
appeals
for
Shoreline
process
ones,
actions
those
will
go
to
the
state,
shoreline
hearings,
board
and
then
process.
One
and
three
Shoreline
decisions
are
not
changed
under
this
Loop
cut.
P
Other
amendments
to
General
standards
have
been
found
in
2035,
which
are
some
of
our
general
procedures
for
all
land
use
actions.
So
those
are
also
proposed
to
be
cleaned
up
as
part
of
this
ordinance
in
terms
of
our
process.
We're
here
on
the
night
of
the
public
hearing.
Following
this,
we
will
be
submitting
a
package
to
ecology
with
all
of
the
Amendments
and
comments
we
have
received,
after
which
ecology
will
issue
an
initial
determination
of
consistency
and
then
Council
May
adopt
the
ordinance.
That
is,
we
are
thinking.
P
So
in
terms
of
the
Luca
decision
criteria,
staff
believe
or
staff
recommend
adoption.
It
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
policies,
specifically
those
that
encourage
a
reliable
and
predictable
permit
process.
It
also
enhances
the
public
health
safety
and
Welfare
by
ensuring
development
decisions
are
made
impartially
through
an
objective
process
and
finally,
it's
not
contrary
to
the
public
interest,
as
it
creates
a
uniform
set
of
standards
that
apply
to
all
Shoreline
properties
and
allows
Council
to
engage
with
the
public
on
Project
decisions.
P
A
Great
thank
you
so
with
that,
let's
open
the
public
hearing.
A
Those
in
favor
say
aye
aye
any
opposed.
Do
we
have
anybody
signed
up
to
speak.
A
A
I
A
I
Interrupt
me
it's
my
time
right
now.
Why
are
you
doing
this
trick?
You're
very
smart,
my
daughter
them
Nazi,
Fashions
yeah
map
and
cycle.
I
won't
speak
about
these
hearings.
What
has
made
me
absolutely
sick
and
you're
talking
about
this
is
Bellevue
Community
Council.
You
kill
this
community
council
six
months
ago.
How
you
can
refer
to
them.
Can
you
explain
to
me:
is
this
include
in
your
mind,
yeah
in
your
fantasy
yeah,
because
you're
very
super
smart?
It's
exactly
what
is
I
seek
here
every
day
for
35
years.
I
First
time,
I
speak
this
in
96
30
Euro
most.
So
this
is
a
rule.
What
is
we
have
in
you
very
quiet
about
this?
Because
probably
you
did
this
because
you
know
need
additional
opinion.
You
know
need
competition.
You
know
what
this
means,
but
put
this
in
your
hearing
you
know
East
is,
is
very
community
council
could
not
exist
for
six
months.
I
Where
is
a
problem?
Who
are
you
you
talk
about
sign?
Why
are
you
not
talking
about
this
BS?
What
is
you
print
here?
This
Bellevue
Council
not
exists
for
six
months
and
these
people
elect
by
people
how
you
cancel
them.
Why
you
did
this?
Why
are
you
acting
like
a
mafia
like
banjit?
Can
you
explain
to
me?
Your
demand
returns
is
back.
You
know,
I
demand
what
the
city
of
Bellevue.
So
this
crook,
who
is
this
chamber,
you
know
what
this
mean
and
return
East
Bellevue
Council
back
they
elect
about
people.
I
Only
people
can
cancel
them.
Not
you
you
understand.
By
talking
people
elect
them,
people
can
stop
and
says
we.
The
people
is
exactly
what
has
happened
in
America
for
250
years.
Why
are
you
acting
like
a
mafia
like
a
bandita
them
Nazis?
That's
exactly
who
you
are
a
new
lady,
you're,
very
good.
You
always
interrupt
me
I,
like
you,
you
know
what
this
mean
stand
up,
America,
there's
a
real
bandito.
We
need
cleanses,
we
need
establish
back
East,
Bellevue
Council.
They
elect
by
people
only
people
responsible
for
their
life.
Thank
you
very
much.
B
A
A
So
let's
is
there
a
motion
to
close
the
public.
Do.
Q
R
A
Opposed
okay.
So,
let's
start
with
a
motion:
Deputy
Mayor.
A
E
A
So
we
have
two
study
session
items
tonight.
Actually,
three,
but
one
only
two
in
presentation,
so
one
is
for
information
only
which
is
the
first
one
and
the
other
one
is
for
directions:
Sir,
Mr,
Miyaki,
I'm
gonna.
Have
you
introduce
the
first
one.
O
Please
sure
thank
you,
mayor
council
members.
This
first
topic
is,
as
you
mentioned,
the
informational
presentation,
and
this
is
focused
on
the
city
of
Bailey's.
Most
recent
2022
housing
needs
assessment
and
just
by
a
quick
way
of
background,
the
last
housing
needs
assessments
was
completed
back
in
2016,
which
informed
2017,
affordable
housing
strategy.
So
joining
us
this
evening
are
Michael.
Cotterman
director
of
the
Community
Development
Department
is
in
to
his
right,
is
Tara
Johnson
planning
manager
with
Adam
go
ahead
and
turn
over
to
you.
Michael.
M
Thank
you,
Mr
Miyaki,
good
evening,
mayor
Robinson,
Deputy
Mayor,
new
in
house,
members
of
the
council
says
Mr
Miyaki
mentioned.
If
we
have.
Our
presentation
of
this
is
for
information
only
this
evening
when
we
did
the
housing
needs
assessment
back
in
2016
and
I
was
working
on
that
directly
with
our
consultant.
Who
was
doing
that
work.
One
of
the
things
she
said
at
that
time,
which
has
always
stuck
with
me,
is
that
housing
data
is
data
rich
and
information.
Poor
and
I.
Think
that's
true.
M
When
you
look
through
the
housing
needs
assessment,
there's
a
lot
of
really
good
information
in
there,
but
it's
a
little
difficult
to
pull
that
out
and
whenever
I
try
to
read
it,
I
usually
glaze
over
after
about
page
three.
So
our
goal
tonight
is
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
put
everybody
in
the
council
chambers
to
sleep
and
have
you
glaze
over
as
we
try
to
hit
some
of
the
highlights
of
this.
M
M
What
we're
going
to
cover
this
evening,
we're
going
to
get
a
little
bit
of
background
that
we've
already
touched
on
and
really
hit
on
those
major
takeaways,
so
some
of
the
trends
that
we're
seeing
Bellevue
like
a
lot
of
other
cities
in
this
region,
most
other
cities
in
the
region
are
becoming
less
affordable
over
time.
Despite
all
the
good
work
that
we're
doing
and
others
in
the
region
are
doing
to
try
to
address
affordable
housing,
we're
swimming
Upstream
against
a
really
strong
current.
M
There
there's
also
a
widening
gap
between
income
and
the
affordability
of
those
units,
so
housing
prices
are
going
up,
faster,
rents
are
going
up
faster
than
incomes
and
that's
creating
that
wider
Gap,
also
the
types
of
housing
and
this
important
part
about
it.
It's
not
just
the
affordability
of
housing,
but
it's
also
what
types
are
available
and
how
we
can
provide
more
of
a
variety
of
housing
types
both
for
sale
and
for
rent.
M
And,
as
always-
and
you
all
know
this-
and
we've
talked
about
this
many
times.
The
greatest
need
that
we
have
in
terms
of
the
lower
income
is
in
the
zero
to
thirty
percent
range
of
area.
Median
income,
because
that's
an
area,
that's
not
provided
by
the
market,
requires
a
large
amount
of
subsidy.
So
with
that
I'm
gonna
think
we've
already
talked
a
little
bit
about
the
background,
as
Mr
Miyaki
mentioned
the
last
time.
We
did
A
needs
assessment
was
really
to
help
inform
that
affordable
housing
strategy
that
you
adopted
in
2017..
M
Now
we're
doing
this
to
help
inform
the
work
that
we're
doing
on
the
comprehensive
Plan
update,
of
which
the
housing
element
is
a
huge
portion
as
well
as
Wilburton,
Bel,
Red
next
right,
work
and
other
projects
that
will
be
going
forward
to
help
Implement
those
as
well.
So
with
that
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
Tara
and
she's.
Going
to
talk
some
more
about
the
major
takeaways
and
some
of
the
trends
that
we've
seen
in
the
housing
needs
assessment.
S
So,
as
Michael
said,
we're
going
to
provide
I
know
we
included
as
an
attachment
to
your
packet,
our
100
page
document,
so
not
gonna,
obviously
walk
you
through
the
entire
document,
some
light
reading,
when
you,
when
you
have
the
opportunity,
we're
going
to
be
providing
just
an
overview
of
some
of
the
high
level
findings
and
then
walk
you
through
some
of
the
implications
and
how
we
intend
to
use
the
housing
needs
assessment,
which
will
be
part
of
future
ongoing
policy
discussions
that
come
before
the
council.
S
So,
a
little
bit
on
some
of
the
trends
that
we'd
like
to
highlight
and
that
were
really
worth
noting
within
the
housing
needs
assessment.
S
S
That
age
group
really
has
unique
needs
things
like
Universal,
Design,
Assisted,
Living,
walkable
access,
we're
also
seeing
going
to
see
an
increase
in
diversity.
As
we
all
know,
Bellevue
is
a
very
diverse
community
and
we
really
anticipate
that
Trend
continuing
the
implication
of
that
relating
to
housing
is,
we
probably
will
need
types
of
housing
like
larger
homes
to
provide
multi-generational
opportunities
for
housing.
S
We
also
found
that
the
average
unit
size
has
been
decreasing
as
smaller
unit
types
tend
to
dominate
the
market.
We've
seen
a
lot
of
that
get
constructed
in
Bellevue
as
well
studio
and
one
bedrooms
primarily,
but
larger
unit
sizes
are
really
going
to
be
needed
to
provide
for
our
additional
families
that
live
and
want
to
live
in
Bellevue.
S
Also
Bellevue
is
also
referenced
as
a
wealthy
City.
That's
something
we
hear
a
lot
from
the
community
and
the
media,
but
the
disparity
between
high-income
households
and
low
income
has
increased
significantly
in
Bellevue
a
focus
on
meeting
the
needs
of
both
both
low
and
very
low
income.
Households
is
something
that
we'll
need
to
look
at
as
part
of
future
policy
discussions.
S
So
next
we're
going
to
touch
on
some
of
the
economic
trends
that
we
that
we
saw
and
we
would
like
to
highlight
for
you
in
the
needs-
assessment,
housing
and
income.
As
you
know,
a
very
interrelated,
it's
important
to
understand
the
incomes
of
residents
and
workers
to
in
order
to
understand
what
types
of
housing
is
needed
and
where
our
Gap
really
lies
and
exists.
S
S
S
Us,
okay,
okay!
Next
we're
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
cost
burden.
We
started
out
the
presentation
and
kind
of
defined
what
that
means.
It's,
where
households
spend
a
significant
amount
of
their
earnings
on
housing.
S
The
way
it
specifically
designed
defined
technically
is
households
that
spend
more
than
30
percent
of
their
income
on
housing.
That's
defined
under
HUD,
and
so
the
implication
here
is
that
those
households
have
less
money
to
to
spend
for
other
necessities
like
food
and
child
care,
and
things
like
that
also
the
that
Spectrum
or
that
demographic
are
far
more
likely
to
be
the
lower
income
are
far
more
likely
to
be
cost
burdened
than
the
general
community.
S
As
you
can
see
from
this
from
the
slide,
what
the
housing
needs
assessment
concluded
was
that
about
a
quarter
of
Bellevue
households
are
cost
burdened
and
then
three-quarter
of
bellevue's
lowest
income
households
spend
are
also
cost
burdens,
so
spend
more
than
30
percent
on
their
thirty
percent
of
the
income
on
housing.
S
S
S
S
We
also
have
a
stated
goal
to
increase
the
percentage
of
Bellevue
workers
that
live
that
also
live
within
Bellevue.
This
means
meeting
the
needs
of
people
who
work
in
the
city
having
units
that
they
can
afford
that
are
large
enough
to
really
sustain
their
needs,
also
providing
the
right
amenities
and
support
and
the
right
type
of
neighborhood
to
meet
their
needs.
So
things
like
Transportation
infrastructure
as
well.
S
In
order
to
meet
the
needs
of
those
who
work
in
Bellevue,
a
key
piece
is
to
understand
their
incomes.
This
chart
shows
the
largest
employment
groups
in
Bellevue,
so
of
course,
computer
and
the
tech
industry,
mathematical,
business
and
financial
operations
are
the
next
largest
group
office
and
administrative
support,
and
then
so
on.
S
11
of
those
who
work
in
Bellevue
fall
under
the
office.
Administrative
support
category
generally
earning
less
than
50
000
a
year
annually.
S
Someone
in
this
category
living
alone
or
supporting
a
child
or
partner,
could
only
afford
a
50,
Ami
apartment,
and
the
market
does,
as
I
said
before,
does
not
produce
these
units.
These
need
to
be
heavily
subsidized
without
enough
housing
to
support
these
workers.
Commune
commuting
increases
from
less
expensive
cities,
so
we
see
more
people
living
outside
Bellevue.
A
Can
I
ask,
can
I
ask
a
clarifying
question
absolutely.
S
A
S
A
S
S
We
wanted
to
touch
on
some
of
the
housing
types
that
we
see
in
Bellevue
today.
This
chart
shows
the
percentage
of
the
city's
units
that
have
been
single
family
versus
multi-family
over
time.
The
increases
in
single
families
such
as
in
2012
and
2013
have
largely
been
attributed
to
annexation,
rather
than
creation
of
new
units.
S
There
have
been
also
discussions
at
the
state
level,
as
well
as
several
bills
that
we'll
be
you'll,
be
talking
about
shortly,
around
missing
middle
housing
or
middle
housing
that
get
the
need
for
providing
something
in
between
single
family
and
multi-family,
so
really
providing
some
additional
housing
type,
housing
types
and
housing
choices.
S
Next,
we'll
cover
the
age
of
housing
units,
as
you
can
see
from
this
chart,
our
housing
sizes
are
decreasing,
so
we're
seeing,
of
course,
a
larger
number
of
multi-family
units
being
constructed,
primarily
because
we're
seeing
a
lot
more
density
in
our
downtown
and
Bel-Red
and
typically
those
types
of
developments.
You
see
a
predominance
of
one
bedroom
units
single-family
Redevelopment,
does
not
add
to
Total
housing
Supply
by
unit
count,
because,
typically
we're
seeing
single
family
replacing
single
family,
they
may
maybe
a
larger
size,
single
family,
that's
being
created
in
place.
M
H
M
T
S
S
So
this
shows
I
think
I
need
to
advance
those
who
are
struggling
to
afford
housing
in
the
city
either
do
not
have
their
needs
met
either
in
terms
of
affordability
or
the
types
of
units
that
they
seek.
While
most
affordable
housing
works
for
single
adults.
It
often
does
not
meet
the
needs
of
the
two
other
groups
which
we,
which
we
know
and
our
housing
needs
assessment
has
has
really
found.
Is
we
need
to
focus
on
opportunities
for
senior
housing
and
larger
households?
S
S
The
age
of
housing
also
relates
to
housing,
type
and
affordability,
so
our
affordable
housing
strategy,
which
you
get
an
update
on
twice
a
year.
It's
really
demonstrated
that
we've
made
significant
progress
when
it
comes
to
preservation
of
existing
of
its
existing.
What
we
call
naturally
occurring
affordable
housing,
so
it's
older
than
Sun
housing,
that's
naturally
affordable,
does
not
require
any
additional
subsidy,
but
is
is
in
the
community
it.
It
also
does
not
have
any
income
restriction.
S
S
So
that's
something
we
looked
at
these
areas,
aligned
with
one
another
and
really
gave
us
a
good
perspective
on
what
areas
we
really
need
to
look
out
for,
especially
as
we
look
forward
to
the
comprehensive
planned
periodic
update
the
picture
on
the
right,
the
illahi
apartments.
That
was
something
that
came
before
Council,
where
the
city
provided
additional
funding
to
help
preserve
that
at
those
at
the
zero
to
thirty
percent
Emi
level
and,
in
addition,
as
part
of
the
periodic
update
work,
we're
also
undertaking
an
equity
and
a
displacement
analysis.
S
This
doesn't
this
differentiates
by
renter
and
owner,
so
not
single
family
multi-family,
home
ownership
is
something
we
also
talk
here
about
and
discuss.
Frequently
at
city
council
also
hear
about
a
lot
from
the
community.
It's
also
an
important
factor
for
housing
type
ownership
builds
generational
wealth
and
stability.
S
S
Several
policies
may
be
able
to
support
additional
homeownership
opportunities,
particularly
targeting
some
of
our
underrepresented
groups.
Some
unit
types
are
also
more
conducive
to
ownership
opportunities,
currently
just
based
on
the
existing
cost
of
a
housing.
So
that's
where
middle
housing
is
so
critical,
things
like
town
homes
or
other
multi-family
types
of
housing.
S
Foreign,
this
next
graph
really
looks
at
a
change
in
households
and
really
looks
at
what's
happened
between
2000
and
2020
in
terms
of
home
ownership
opportunities.
So,
as
you
can
see,
there's
a
great
amount
of
disparity
and
some
of
that
is
allocated
to
when
Bellevue
grew
in
the
in
the
mid
20th
century.
Most
of
those
ownership
units
were
primarily
single-family
units
which
were
built
during
that
time.
S
This
history
allowed
generational
wealth
to
occur
for
some
families,
but
there
have
been
fewer
opportunities,
as
we
talked
about,
there's
been
185
percent
increase
in
property
values
to
build,
as
well
through
home
ownership
in
recent
years.
So
we're
really
what
this
really
demonstrates
is
the
types
of
households
that
Bellevue
has
gained
as
it's
grown
in
the
last
20
years.
S
And
then
we
want
to
conclude
our
presentation
talking
about
affordability.
That
is,
of
course,
a
critical
piece
of
the
housing
needs
assessment
and
one
of
the
components
of
a
housing
needs
assessment
is
a
gap,
analysis
which
really
looks
at
what
kind
of
housing
is
needed
between
between
now
and
our
next
growth
period.
So
our
next
with
that
aligns
with
the
periodic
update
between
now
and
2044.,
and
it
really
evaluates
and
what?
What
areas?
We
really
need
to
focus
on
to
really
provide
for
additional,
provide
additional
housing
to
address
that
Gap.
S
So
this
really
focuses
the
way
the
housing
the
methodology
used
under
the
housing
needs
assessment.
We
based
it
on
a
35,
000
housing
unit,
Target
that's
been
established
and
we
really
look
at
what
income
levels,
those
those
additional
35
000
units
need
to
be.
We
look
at
three
different
groups
to
identify
housing
costs
for
those
35
000
units,
so
people
who
already
are
existing
residents,
who
already
live
in
Bellevue,
will
be
found
under
this
category
was
there's
a
pretty
significant
Gap
under
the
50
Emi,
but
especially
at
the
zero
to
thirty
percent
Emi
level.
S
And
then
the
third
category
is
something
we
hear
a
lot
through
public
comment
and
and
a
council
discussions
residents
who
would
like
to
live
in
Bellevue,
but
do
not
do
not
have
the
ability
due
to
affordability
or
other
factors,
and
so
here
we're
really
looking
at
housing
need
across
the
Spectrum.
Both
at
either
ends
of
the
spectrum
at
the
lowest
level
and
then
the
highest
level
as
well.
S
So,
following
the
methodology
that
I
just
mentioned
in
the
in
the
last
slide
relating
to
the
Gap
analysis,
we
really
looked
at
housing.
Affordability
under
the
various
categories.
Gap
calculated
for
existing
residents
falls
into
both
categories
under
50
Ami,
but
the
remaining
Gap
was
calculated
based
on
a
broader
range
of
incomes.
S
What
the
assessment
found
is
that
most
housing
built
today
is
above
the
120
Emi,
based
on
market
trends
and
Market
factors.
S
Middle
scale,
development
in
less
in
less
expensive
areas,
may
be
able
to
meet
the
80
to
120
Ami
category
without
subsidy,
but
there's
what
the
assessment
really
concluded
is:
there's
a
need
across
all
Ami
levels,
but
of
course,
as
is,
as
is
reflected
by
the
regional
conversations
to
the
greatest
need,
is
at
the
zero
to
thirty
percent
Emi
level,
which
of
course,
re
requires
heavy
subsidy
and
then,
as
as
we
alluded
to
there's
the
ongoing
Regional
process,
which
some
of
the
council
members
have
been
very
involved
in
to
distribute
county-wide
need
across
various
jurisdictions
with
within
King
County.
S
S
So
next
steps
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
this.
The
way
the
this
existing
housing
needs
assessment,
the
2022
needs
assessment
is
really
going
to
inform
a
number
of
future
policy
discussions
and
initiatives.
S
The
next
right
work,
which
just
came
before
you,
the
comprehensive
plan
periodic
update,
which
is
ongoing,
as
well
as
the
Wilburton
Vision
implementation
through
all
of
these
policy
initiatives,
as
well
as
future
direction
from
city
council,
we
can
really
look
at
policy
support
for
our
most
cost
burden
population.
So
our
bipoc
communities,
our
seniors,
larger
households,
look
for
opportunities
for
preservation
of
existing,
affordable
housing.
We
do
that.
We
do.
We've.
M
So
a
lot
of
this
is
driven
by
requirements
of
House
Bill
1220,
that
added
some
specific
requirements
to
our
housing
element
of
our
comprehensive
plan.
But
a
lot
of
these
things
are
things
that
we
would
be
doing
anyway,
so
it
it
sort
of
it.
It
expands
on
those
it's
a
little
bit
of
additional
work,
but
it's
also
important
work
and
a
lot
of
it.
A
Q
No
I
think
this
is
an
overview
and
I
mean
I,
don't
see
any
need
for
big
discussions
of
this
I
think
we've
gone
over
this
quite
a
bit,
and
this
is
really
a
I
think,
a
very
comprehensive
review
of
where
we're
going
and
what
what
the
basis
for
this
is
and
I
think
that's
the
whole
point
it's
I
do
think
sometimes
of
just
looking
at
these.
These
these
would
be
hard
to
understand
or
interpret
by
people
who
don't
work
on
this.
Q
A
lot
a
lot
and
one
of
them
is
the
whole
the
question
of
Ami.
Why
is
it
not
just
a
hundred
zero
to
100
and
what
is
the
basis
for
it,
and
the
only
reason
I
bring
this
because
we're
talking
about
you
know
the
public
to
them
when
we
get
out
and
talking
to
it.
Q
It's
a
little
difficult
because
we're
talking
in
a
in
one
language
and
they're
talking
another
language
to
a
certain
extent,
but
I
think
overall.
This
really
gives
us
a
lot
of
information
and
understanding
of
what
the
what
the
challenge
is
basically
and
it's
follow-up
of
things
and
it's
consistent
with
our
affordable
housing
strategy.
It's,
but
it's
finally
getting
to
adding
real,
substantial
and
necessary
numbers
in
it.
I
think
that's
the
big!
Q
The
purpose
of
this
is
to
outline
that
for
us
and
what
we,
what
we're
facing
in
it
and
I
think
obviously,
when
we
get
to
going
working
on
this
and
we're
going
to
go
through
these
and
and
relate
these
outlines
or
the
the
whole
piece
to
the
different
parts
of
it,
how
it
comes
together,
but
I
really
think
it
helps
us
to
get
again
renewed
and
to
learn
more
about
how
what
the
what
the
situation
is
now
I.
Think
too
too
much
in
the
past.
Q
We've
kind
of
we
did
something
at
a
certain
year
and
five
years
later,
we're
still
talking
about
those
numbers-
and
this
is
a
very
good
to
have
this
up
to
date
on
this
and
and
look
at
and
plus
some
over
some
information
about
what
we're
doing
so
far,
but
I
think
it
really
does
set
it
up.
So
we
know
what
the
needs
are.
We
know
what
the
the
challenge
is
and-
and
we
go
from
there
so
I-
appreciate
that
very
much.
T
Robertson
no
I
mean
I
I,
think
that
with
great
presentation,
I
think
it's
good
information.
I
got
I,
saw
this
presentation,
Planning,
Commission,
I,
think
and
I
got
even
more
out
of
it
tonight.
T
So
I
think
that
what
the
data
shows
is
we
need
more
housing
and
of
all
types
and
that
the
lowest
income
levels
are
really
hard,
they're
really
hard
to
develop.
They
are
gonna,
they
do
take
government
and
non-profit
funding.
They
will
never
happen
at
the
market
rate,
so
1590
money,
state
funding,
other
sources
and
incentives,
I
think,
are
all
things
that
we
need
to
look
at
to
get
that
developed,
but
I
had
some
so
not
but
period.
And
I
had
some
questions
about
the
presentation
and
the
data.
E
T
You
have
them
animated,
so
it
takes
longer.
So
this
is
the
one
where
I
thought.
You
said
that
there
is
more
need
for
low-income
housing
now
than
there
was
in
2010,
but
I
did
the
math
here
and
it
seems
to
me
that
we
have
in
2010
we
had
38
of
people
below
100
percent
and
in
2019
we
have
33
percent
of
people
below
100,
so
I
think
that's,
although
we
have
one
percent
it
ticked
up.
One
percent
in.
T
T
M
T
M
And
I
have
the
same
reaction
this
this.
Those
numbers
are
a
little
bit
disconcerting
because
we
talk
so
much
about
affordable
housing
that
we
don't
necessarily
look
at
the
at
the
greater
need
overall,
which
is
really
the
benefit
of
doing
this.
Housing
needs
assessment
because
it's
not
just
about
affordable
housing.
It's
really
looking
at
all
of
the
different
types
of
Housing
and
all
the
different
income.
Housing
household
income
housing
needs
across
the
Spectrum.
I
didn't
say
that
right.
T
And
I
think
this
slide
is
really
good
because
it
goes
to
show
what
I
started
my
conversation
with
which
we
need
more
housing,
yes
all
types
and
then
on
slide
22.
You
talked
about
the
policy
support
and
I
just
had
a
question
on
that
was
for
bypoc,
low-income
and
seniors
and
I
had
a
question
on
how
we
can
possibly
Target
policy
to
support
vipoc
population.
T
Given
the
state
law
that
says,
state
and
local
governments
shall
not
show
preferences
based
on
race
and
sex,
the
you
know,
we
obviously
can
the
porn
and
firm,
poor
or
in
firm.
We
can
help
under
state
constitution,
but
under
state
law
we
absolutely
can't.
So
how
are
we
going
to
find
a
way
to
help
the
people
that
need
it
in
a
race-blind
way?.
S
S
Then
and
then
Michael,
you
can
add
on
so
house,
both
12
20
provided
direction
for
us
to
evaluate
and
the
guidance
is
still
being
worked
out,
worked
on
through
Department
of
Commerce
relating
to
racially
disparate
impacts
and.
S
And
it
includes
it
includes
an
audit
of
our
existing
policies
to
really
see
other
policies
that
have
led
to
these
impacts
and
how
do
we?
How
do
we
address
them
and
part
of
our
Eis
consultant
work
is
part
of
that
scope
is
going
to
be
evaluating
that,
so
we
are
going
to
have
an
equity
analysis
that
supports
the
Eis
and
the
comprehensive
Plan
update.
T
S
That
the
goal,
then
that
is
the
goal,
and
also
we
have
CPP
CPP
guidance
that
really
speaks
to
that
as
well.
So
our
housing
element
update
really
has
to
address
you
know
and
comply
with
the
cpp's
Envision
2050
direction.
That.
M
I
just
wanted
to
understand.
There
are
a
couple
of
parts
to
it.
So
what
what
Tara
was
just
talking
about?
One
is
having
an
understanding
of
what
what
the
existing
disparity
is
and
what
the
cause
of
that
is
and
looking
at
our
policies
and
our
code
going
forward
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
exacerbating
that
or
continuing
those
practices,
but
also
looking
at
and
the
other
thing
that
she
mentioned.
T
F
Thank
you
mayor.
Yes,
we
need
more
housing.
Indeed,
thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
really
like
the
the
the
next
steps
here.
I
mean
great
in
from,
as
you
said,
great
information
or
great
data.
F
The
information
is
some
of
it
clear
others
that
we're
trying
to
extract,
but
I
think
this
is
something
we
can
continually
go
back
and
look
at
and
as
we
get
into
the
next
right
work
and
the
comprehensive
plan
and
Wilburton
Etc
certainly
support
the
the
next
steps
in
terms
of
the
the
cost
burden
population,
especially
when
it
comes
to
ownership,
preservation
of
existing,
affordable
housing
and
I.
Had
a
question
on
that.
In
regards
to
we
had
mentioned
the
alihi
Apartments
I.
E
M
F
Was
so
are
we
as
part
of
ensuring
that
we
maintain
that
naturally
occurring
affordability?
Do
we
on
any
kind
of
Cadence
reach
out
to
those
owners
that
own
those
properties
to
ensure
that
if,
if
there
is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
help
or
or
purchase
or
maintain
those
units,
is
there
an
ongoing
program?
Where
do
that.
S
Right,
yeah
not
yet
so
the
intent
with
this
that
was
kind
of
the
first.
This
is
kind
of
the
first
step.
So
if
you
do
peruse
the
housing
needs
assessment,
there's
a
really
interesting
map
that
identifies
kind
of
the
locations
of
the
naturally
occurring,
affordable,
housing
and,
as
you
know,
Council
has
has
provided
funding
and
budget
for
additional
staff
to
work
on
affordable
housing.
So
there
will
be
opportunities
for
us
to
start
monitoring
and
just
build
Partnerships
and
right
now,
it's
primarily
working
with
Arch
and
King
County,
Housing,
Authority
I.
S
E
S
F
M
F
Terrific
and
then
on
slide
14,
just
a
quick
question
on
that
one
I
was
just
curious
if
that,
if
the
percentages
there
on
those
household
types
has
that
changed
much
since
I,
don't
know
10
years
ago
five
years
ago,
or
are
we
seeing
a
similar
mix
and
especially
from
like
the
single
adult
I'm,
assuming
that
has
gone
up
especially
downtown?
Perhaps
or
is
this
mix
somewhat
static,
or
is
it
changing
and
evolving.
F
M
S
I
am
not
sure,
that's
something
we'd
have
to
go
back
and
and
take
a
look
at
the
needs.
Assessment
is
really
looking
at
what
our
current
you
know
what
our
current
landscape
looks
like
right.
We'd
have
to
go
back
and
compare
it
to
how
much
that's
changed
from
the
2016
assessment.
Okay,.
E
F
You
know
we
see
any
dramatic
increases
in
one
area
or
reductions.
Another
I
think
that'd
be
interesting
data
point,
but
thanks
for
the
great
presentation
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
mayor.
E
A
Informative
and
helpful
to
have
that
as
I
know,
that's
not
your
Baseline,
because
I
think
you
did
it
before
in
2016,
but
just
really
helpful
to
have
those
periodically
I
have
a
few
things.
I
want
to
cover.
One
I
would
hope
that
we
will
be
changing
our
affordable
housing
goals
soon
more
than
just
the
units
that
we
set
in
10
years
that
we
would
like
to
create,
hopefully
we're
more
ambitious
than
that,
because
all
the
all
that
you
just
showed
us
indicates
we
need
to
be
far
more
ambitious
than
that.
So.
M
M
A
Okay,
great,
when
we
talk
about
our
current
capacity
for
developing
new
units
of
housing
versus
our
goal
of
30
000
in
the
next.
Was
it
by
2044.
A
Yeah,
oh
35,
I
thought
was
30.
M
S
A
S
To
clarify
so
our
existing
capacity
is
for
thirty
thousand,
but
the
Target
that
was
established
through
through
the
process
is
35
thousand.
A
Okay,
so
between
what
our
capacity
is
today
and
what
our
goal
is
we're,
8,
000
or
so
units
off
which
isn't
like
the
most
horrible
number,
but
it's
worse
than
when
I
thought
it
was
a
different
goal.
We
were
only
3
000
off,
but
still
8,
000
I
feel,
like
you
know,
we
can
address
that
with
all
the
work
that
we're
currently
doing.
Yes,.
M
And,
and
and
through
the
comprehensive
Plan
update,
we
are
looking
at
different
scenarios
for
additional
housing
capacity,
so
we're
starting
at
35
000,
because
that's
our
adopted
Target.
We
have
to
show
how
we
can
accommodate
that,
but
we're
also
looking
at
beyond
that
as
much
as
up
to
seventy
thousand
new
housing
units
over
the
course
of
those
20
years,
because
when
we
look
at
it
2050,
which
is
what
psrc
has
done,
we're
going
even
beyond
that.
But
but
by
doing
that,
it
gives
us
more
flexibility
in
how
we
can
address.
M
Not
only
the
overall
housing
need,
but
also
the
affordable
housing
need
so
and
we're
looking
looking
at
those
different
scenarios
as
part
of
the
comprehensive
Plan
update
and
that'll
that'll
be
coming
back
to
you.
That's
what
the
Planning
Commission
is
going
to
be
working
on
and
looking
at
those
scenarios
and
coming
up
with
a
preferred
approach
in
terms
of
land
use
and
housing
is
a
big
part
of
that.
Yes,.
A
A
That's
on
us
for
sure,
as
as
families
and
as
parents
as
a
community
I
will
underscore
yet
again
what
I
think
is
a
real
need
for
active
Independent,
Living
opportunities
for
our
senior
population.
We
just
don't
have
enough
of
those
and
then,
when
we
talk
about
rental
versus
home
ownership,
a
lot
of
the
work
that
we're
doing
right
now
and
that
the
state
is
talking
about
putting
legislation
in
is
for
rental,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
opportunity
to
create
rentals.
A
Is
home
ownership
and
particularly
affordable
home
ownership
and
I
just
want
to
say
I
did
I
ran
some
numbers
and
you
know
if
if
there
was
a
way
that
the
state
or
somebody
would
would
do
a
mortgage
with
a
five
thousand
dollar
down
payment,
a
one
percent
interest
rate
and
help
families
to
buy
a
seven
hundred
thousand
dollar
home,
which
is
maybe
possible
if
we
allow
more
than
one
house
on
a
lot
still
single
family,
but
just
two
smaller
houses.
Instead
of
one
Mega
house.
A
A
We're
not
overly
focused
on
rental
that
we
can
put
up,
because
none
of
this
is
easy,
but
relatively
speaking,
rentals
a
lot
easier
than
home
ownership
and
to
provide
people
the
opportunity
to
build
equity
and
have
access
to
a
home
that
they
own
and
I.
I.
Just
think
that
if,
if
you're
going
to
subsidize
subsidize
on
the
fees
of
a
mortgage,
you
know
give
people
that
opportunity
to
have
home
ownership
and
I
think
that
is
absolutely
something
we
could
do
in
Bellevue
and
I
hope,
that's
something
we
can
focus
on
councilmember
Lee.
Thank
you.
R
Thanks
for
the
presentation,
I
think
most
of
us
realize
how
things
are
important.
R
R
We
need
to
figure
out
what
do
we
need
to
do
and
how
do
we
do
it
right
and
so
part
of
the
equation
is
to
know.
What's
the
needs
assessment
is
so
I'm
glad
you
bought
it
back
here
and
we're
gonna
look
at
it,
and
but
we
have
a
lot
of
things
already
has
been
going
on
last
week
we
talked
about
some
of
the
ways
to
do
it,
and
so
I
asked
you
know,
email,
let's
say:
hey
I
would
like
to
know.
What's
the
needs
and
he
said
well,
it's
coming
next
week.
R
So
I'm
really
glad
to
see
you
here,
but
again,
I
would
emphasize
it's
what
and
how
the
mayor
has
just
made
a
very
good
proposal,
but
we
need
to
know
more
about
what
we
really
need
to
do
and
what
I,
what
opportunity
exists,
and
how
can
we
influence
other
people
who
controls
the
mortgage
rates,
the
money
all
that
stuff.
E
R
But
to
do
all
that
we
need
to
know
what,
especially
if
we
want
to
do
right,
we
can
do
it
thoughtfully.
Thoughtfully
means
that's
what
we're
talking
about
so
I
really
appreciate
this
by
that
side
started
looking
at
some
of
the
things
that
you're
presenting
I
started
jotting
down,
some
of
the
questions
I
want
to
ask
I
still
would
ask
a
couple
of
them,
but
as
I
go
through
the
charts,
I'm
confused
thoroughly,
you
know
I
believe
that
150
000
people
in
Bellevue,
most
of
them,
probably
are
confused.
R
When
we
talk
about
affordable
housing,
we
think
about
now
we're
talking
about
housing
for
housing,
we're
talking
about
rental
housing.
It's
about
ownership,
we're
talking
about
30,
Ami,
all
the
way
to
120
Emi.
We
talk
about
housing
for
aging
housing
for
ownership,
rental
people
who
are
not
even
here
yet
we're
talking
about
people
who.
B
R
Here
who
live
here,
it's
very,
very
confusing,
very
big,
so
we
some
of
us
may
know
what
we're
talking
about
and
we're
working
hard
and
you
guys
obviously
do
but
I
think
we
need
to
really
understand
even
about
ourselves
and
that's
a
lot
of
information
and
talking
to
me,
you
mentioned
slide
nine
I.
Look
at
it!
You
it's
live
15
right
in
front
of
me.
R
You
know
what
does
that
mean?
I,
don't
know.
How
do
you
help?
We
all
know
intrinsically
people
getting
older,
including
myself?
Yes,
I'll
need
change,
so
our
size,
our
need
our
requirement
change.
So
we
need
different
kind
of
housing.
This
makes
sense,
but
the
needs
might
change,
but
how
we
can
accommodate
the
change
might
be
different.
R
I
want
to
stay
in
my
house
now
it
is
if
I
can
afford
it.
I
will
do
so
if
I
cannot
well
I
gotta
to
figure
out
somewhere
else
and
if
I
could
downsize
I
downsize,
but
if
I
don't
want
to
downsides,
I'll
be
different,
so
it's
very
important.
We
understand
that,
but
we
cannot
get
it
all.
Obviously,
but
at
least
I
think
we
have
a
sense
of
a
survey
opinion
some
predictability,
some
understanding.
What
would
it
be,
then?
R
We
need
to
articulate
that
and
we
need
to
right
and
then,
if
we
get
a
sense,
that's
what
we
do.
We
always
have
to
make
the
best
most
thoughtful
predictions
as
we
can
and
then
we'll
have
to
shoot
that
as
a
Target,
then
I
think
that
may
make
sense.
We
didn't
know
what
we
have
to
do.
How
do
we
do
it?
Then
we
have
to
build
partnership
and
other
things
that
we
need
to
do
to
make
sure
by
the
year
2044.
R
If
this
determination
is
35,
000
addition
yield
is
in
fact
right
and
what
type
of
housing
would
this
35
000
be
right
and
how
people
really
want
to
live
there,
and
if
people
want
to
work
you
are
they
going
to
be
all
wanting
to
live
in
Bellevue,
not
necessarily
you
know,
I
mean
you
know,
it's
always
been
the
case.
People
walk
somewhere
else
and
people
live
somewhere
else.
R
Who
knows?
It's
always
been
the
way
that
we,
you
know
as
pandas
for
some
believe.
Well,
no,
they
should
work
where
they
live.
They
should
live
where
they
were
yes
buying
Lots,
but
I.
Think,
ultimately,
you
know
we
have
to
understand
what
you
know.
What
is
the
situation
that
we
can
reasonably
manage
to
make
sure
it
works
for
our
city
and
I.
Think
valvan
has
proven
to
be
very
successful.
We've
been
going,
we've
been
doing
well,
we've
been
doing
fine,
but
we
have
to
see
that
the
Dynamics
changing
the
dumbbell
for
changing.
R
So
we
got
to
make
adjustments,
which
is
what
we're
doing
so.
I
I
I
I
I,
like
what
we're
looking
at,
but
I
would
like
to
understand
that
better
and
maybe
think
through
some
of
the
more
detail
exactly
what
does
it
mean?
What's
the
income
what's
the
rental
and
so
that
we
exactly
come
up
with
a
number
I
I,
don't
mind
having
35
000
units
You
Know
by
2
2044.
So
that's
a
good
number
Good
Start.
We
can
make
adjustments
but
I
like
to
know
what
it
means.
How
can
we
make
changes?
R
R
R
U
U
So
that's
from
what
I
could
see,
14,
000
or
so
units
and
20
of
the
overall
need
is
in
the
30
Ami
and
below.
So
that's
going
to
be
a
really
tough
lift,
because
we
know
that
the
market
is
not
going
to
build
at
the
zero
to
30
or
necessarily
even
the
30,
to
60,
without
support
so
having
that
data
is
very
helpful
understanding
how
much
the
income
is
going
up
39,
but
how
much
the
housing
did?
U
You
say:
180,
185
percent,
that's
the
work
ahead
of
us
and
when
I
think
about
what
we
need
to
do.
I
agree
with
my
colleagues
about
you
know:
we
need
to
be
updating
our
affordable
housing
goals
both
for
rentals
and
Home
Ownership.
We
are
certainly
hearing
the
effects
of
the
lack
of
affordable
housing
in
terms
of
not
being
able
to
hire
for
retail
service
jobs.
U
Food
preparation,
we're
hearing
that
from
the
standpoint
of
this
particular
slide
here,
is
showing
38
percent
of
families
are
cost
burdened
and
we're
starting
to
see
that
in
a
drop
in
enrollment
in
our
K-12.
Where
we're
hearing
that
the
there
are
three
elementary
schools
that
the
school
district
is
looking
at,
closing
because
of
the
drop-in
enrollment,
so
actually
having
more
housing
stock
is
going
to
be
helpful
for
the
entire
Community.
U
Not
just
the
for
the
city,
but
as
well
as
the
school
district
and
how
we
actually
continue
to
keep
a
robust
K-12
system
in
place,
because
I
don't
think
anyone
wants
to
see
school
closures.
I
was
also
thinking
about
the
fact
that
you
know
this
is
also
going
to
mean
looking
to
potentially
the
state
I.
U
And
ultimately
you
know
our
tagline
is
the
city
of
Bellevue
the
place
where
you
want
to
be
and
we'd
like
to
think
that
we're
going
to
have
the
the
choices
of
housing
stocks
so
that
we
live
up
to
that
goal
of
Bellevue
being
a
place
where
you
want
to
be,
and
you
could
actually
live
here
if
you
choose
to
right,
not
everyone's
going
to
want
to
live
in
Bellevue.
But
currently
we
can
see
where
the
gaps
are
in
the
housing
stock
that's
been
built
and
where
the
gaps
are
so
I.
U
Guess
for
me,
the
more
that
we
have
this
type
of
data
so
that
we
can
really
auger
into
where
we
want
to
focus
on
housing
who
the
partners
need
to
be
it'll
be
more
and
more
helpful
for
us.
So
thank
you
for
getting
the
housing
needs
assessment
and
yes,
it
was
very
helpful
to
have
that
very
large
document
with
the
level
of
information
for
those
of
us
that
tend
to
be
kind
of
data
nerds.
So
thank
you.
A
C
Right,
thank
you
mayor.
Thank
you
for
this
report
and
presentation,
and
you
know
one
of
the
things
I
think
that's
that's
been
highlighted
so
far,
but
I'll
just
reiterate
that
this
helps
with
is
not
just
blanketly
talking
about
housing
and
affordable
housing,
but
being
able
to
talk
about
who
is
impacted
by
the
need
and
one
of
the
things,
especially
when
we
talk
about
the
zero
to
thirty
percent
Ami
is
that's
I.
Think
different
from
the
higher
levels
of
Ami
is.
C
If
you
can't
afford
to
live
in
Bellevue,
because
you
are
earning
at
zero
to
thirty
percent
Ami,
you
have
other
costs
that
actually
make
it
more
difficult
to
commute
to
work
right
that
other
Ami
levels
may
not
have
right,
so
you've
got
the
car
expense.
You've
got
gas
and
other
factors
right
that
just
add
to
that
burden
for
zero
to
thirty
percent
Ami,
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
will
often
ask
is
that
we
do
engage
people
who
currently
don't
live
in
our
community
and
it's
because
of
displacement.
C
And
if
we're
not
getting
those
voices,
then
we're
not
able
to
shape
our
community
into
a
community
where
the
people
who
are
most
impacted
as
you've
called
out
in
the
in
the
slides
in
terms
of
bipoc
and
low
income
and
our
seniors
and
I
think
we're
missing
out
on
really
being
that.
The
councilman's
points,
a
welcoming
community
and
an
inclusive
community,
I
guess
a
couple
of
questions.
One
I
think
it
would
be
really
important
to
track.
C
I
know
this
was
a
lot
to
collect
and
and
conduct,
but
if
we
could
pull
some
key
metrics
out
of
this,
that
we
could
track
over
time
like
more
regularly
I.
Think
that
would
be
helpful
so
that
we
can
adjust
our
strategy
ongoing
to
the
extent
that
is
feasible,
I'm,
especially
interested
in
how
we
can
better
track
displacement
as
well,
so
that
we
can
better
prevent
and
mitigate
displacement
and
then
I'm
curious
in
terms
of
home
ownership.
I
do
think
we
need
both
to
focus
on
rent
and
Home
Ownership.
C
One
of
the
challenges
with
home
ownership,
of
course,
is
you
have
to
have
certain
you
have
to
meet
certain
criteria
like
credit,
but
I
do
think
it's
important
to
allow
foreign
enable
homeownership.
My
question
is:
are
we
do
we
have
a
down
payment
program
or
any
any
sort
of
initiative
to
help
ease
that
to
the
mayor's
point
about
subsidizing
fees?
Do
we
provide
a
down
payment
program.
M
I
believe
there
is
a
down
payment
program
that
Arch
has
administered
in
the
past,
but
there
are
some
limitations
on
that
and
the
and
I'm
not
going
to
be
able
to
explain
this
I
actually
understood
it
at
one
time.
But
it's
been
a
while,
since
I've
I've
been
involved
in
that
because
of
the
thresholds
and
the
cost
of
housing
that
has
gone
so
far
beyond
the
thresholds,
it
really
I,
don't
think
the
program
is,
is
able
to
be
used
currently,
and
there
are
some
things
that
have
to
be
done.
M
But
there
may
be
some
other
programs
I've
been
reading
about
other
programs
recently
that
have
been
instituted
in
other
parts
of
the
country
and
some
of
those
I
think
are
in
Partnership
along
the
lines
of
what
the
mayor
was
talking
about,
where
we
can
maybe
work
with
lending
institutions
to
see
if
we
can
establish
some
some
programs
that
might
help
with
with
down
payment
and
closing
costs
and
setting
certain.
You
know,
mortgage
rates
and
things
like
that.
C
I
appreciate
that
I
I
think
I,
don't
know
I
just
remember
when
I
was
in
DC
and
you
know,
I
was
a
young
professional
like
looking
to
buy
and
I.
Think
I
leveraged
one
of
those
programs
to
buy
my
first
town
home
at
the
time
and
I
I.
C
Just
remember
if,
if
for
no
other
reason,
it
definitely
gets
people
thinking
about
home
ownership
and
trying
to
work
toward
it
because
they
see
that
there
is
a
possibility,
because
there
are
programs
that
make
it
more
feasible
and
the
last
thing
I'll
say
is
I'd
be
curious.
If
you
haven't
presented
this
already
to
the
CCC,
with
their
reaction
and
feedback
and
especially
the
Senator
Bellevue
Center's
community
centers
communities
of
colors
gosh.
What
is
this.
S
No,
we
we
have
not
done
that,
so
something
we
we
did
not
mention
as
part
of
the
presentation
we've
presented
to,
of
course,
the
Planning
Commission.
We
also
presented
to
the
chamber
policy
group
and
then
the
Bellevue
Network
on
Aging
we're
going
to
be
doing
a
presentation,
they're
very
interested
in
especially
the
senior
housing
issues,
so
we'll
be
doing
that
next
week
with
them.
We'll.
C
Yeah
and
I
think,
generally
speaking,
the
extent
to
which,
like
especially
when
we
talk
about
these,
the
most
impacted
communities,
the
extent
to
which
we
can
engage
those.
L
S
Are
engaging
not
not
specifically
related
to
the
housing
needs
assessment,
but
more
along
the
lines
of
the
comprehensive
Plan
update.
Mary's
place
has
reached
out
to
us
and
they're
wanting
to
do
kind
of
a
focus
group
with
their
staff
and
then
also
their
residents.
So
we're
going
to
be
doing
that
shortly
as
well.
E
A
O
This
next
update
is
a
State
Legislative
update
from
staff,
and
this
evening,
they're
checking
in
with
the
Council
on
the
latest
State
legislative
session,
now
underway
in
Olympia,
tonight's
staff
are
planning
to
present
an
update
on
one
of
the
council's
adopted
State
Legislative
priorities
and
that
is
affordable,
housing
and
land
use.
O
After
the
staff
presentation,
staff
are
seeking
Council
Direction
on
House
Bill
1110,
as
well
as
Senate
bill
5190..
So
with
that
I'm
joining
us
tonight
is
Genesee
Atkins,
our
chief
of
external
Affairs
to
her
right
is
Lacey
Jane,
Wolf
assistant
director
of
intergovernmental
relationships
and
both
from
the
manager's
office
and
to
her
left
is,
as
you
know,
Michael
cotterman
who's
going
to
make.
This
all
make
sense
for
us
tonight.
V
Mayor
Deputy,
Mayor
members
of
the
council,
thank
you
for
having
some
time
for
us
tonight.
We
are
here
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
an
update
on
the
state
legislative
session,
focusing
very
specifically
on
a
piece
of
legislation
that
is
in
play
right
now
down
in
Olympia,
so
without
further
Ado
we
will
get
going.
I'll
probably
need
to
point
it
that
way.
We
are
tonight
seeking
your
feedback
and
Direction
specifically
on.
As
the
city
manager
mentioned,
House,
Bill,
1110
and
5190.
V
We
are
offering
you
a
staff
recommendation
to
take
a
position
of
other
and
to
provide
comments
to
legislators
in
a
number
of
categories,
and
you
see
them
up
there.
That's
jumping
a
little
bit
ahead,
so
first
we'll
kind
of
dial
back
just
a
little
bit
and
give
you
a
tiny
bit
of
context
before
we
go
deep
into
this
bill.
V
So
we
will
do
a
quick
synopsis
of
this
year's
legislation
and
how
the
session
is
going
so
far
and
again
reiterating
bellevue's
adopted
priorities.
We'll
give
you
a
little
background
and
Analysis
of
the
bill
and
that's
where
Mr
cotterman
will
help
us
out
we'll
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
about
what
concerns
or
issues
or
positions.
V
So
briefly,
I'll
just
give
you
a
little
bit
of
the
lay
of
the
land
as
it
stands
right
now.
Right
now
we
are
beginning
we're
at
the
very
beginning
of
week,
three
of
the
legislative
session.
It
is
a
long
session,
as
you
know,
and
so
it'll
go
all
the
way
toward
the
into
the
third
week
of
April
and
with
the
legislative
agenda
that
you
adopted
for
us
in
November.
That
gives
us
pretty
clear,
Direction
and
marching
orders.
V
Isn't
it
and
is
a
great
statement
for
us
to
use
with
other
stakeholders,
and
especially
with
our
own
delegation
in
the
41st
and
the
48th
districts?
The
couple
of
things
I
want
to
call
out
specifically
here
is
that
affordable
housing
and
land
use
is
right
at
the
top
of
our
adopted
State
Legislative
agenda,
the
presentation
before
you,
while
this
was
coincidental
timing,
speaks
for
itself
in
terms
of
how
relevant
this
is
for
a
lot
of
the
decision
making.
V
That
is
happening
before
you
right
now,
and
it
calls
out
specifically
expanding
middle
housing,
and
so
we
wanted
to
really
bring
this
back
to
you.
We
wouldn't
normally
bring
all
the
bills
back
to
you.
We
are
as
Lacey
Jane
is
keenly
aware.
We
are
getting
input
and
relaying
input
on
literally
dozens
and
hundreds
of
bills
right
now
drinking
from
the
fire
hose
happy
to
do
it,
but
this
one
is
special.
This
one
has
a
specific
history
here
with
you
in
the
last
session
and
with
the
other
stakeholders
and
with
other
cities.
V
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
we
gave
you
a
really
careful,
thorough
explanation
of
what
this
bill
does
and
how
we
want
to
move
forward.
The
last
thing
I
will
mention
is
that
Bellevue
was
very
fortunate
to
be
selected
as
a
city
representative
in
the
association
of
Washington
cities,
Housing
Solutions
work
group
that
convened
during
the
interim
to
really
take
up
specifically
this
bundle
of
issues
to
really
try
to
unpack
these
and
say:
okay.
What
is
a
constructive
path
forward?
V
So
Emil
King
in
the
Community
Development
Department,
sat
on
that
group
and
provided
a
lot
of
opportunity
for
us
to
work
ideas
back
and
forth
with
him.
V
So
now
we're
going
to
turn
to
a
little
bit
of
analysis
and
background
on
this
bill
so
that
you
have
a
careful
understanding
of
what
this
bill
does
and
how
how
it
affects.
Bellevue,
Mr
cotterman.
M
Thank
you
so,
with
that
I'll
find
my
voice
and
give
you
a
little
bit
of
overview
on
the
on
the
house
bill
1110
and
Senate
Bill
5190.
They
are
identical,
so
their
companion
Bills,
going
through
each
of
their
respective
houses
at
this
point,
referring
to
it
as
the
missing
middle
housing.
Bill
requires
cities
of
six
thousand
or
greater
or
within
a
contiguous
growth
area,
with
a
population
of
200
000
or
greater
to
authorize
middle
housing
in
all
residential
zones,
and
that's
a
key
part
of
this.
M
M
This
would
require
Bellevue
and
other
cities
to
authorize
at
least
four
units
on
all
lots
for
residential
use,
so
this
would
be
in
any
Zone
in
the
city
that
allows
for
a
residential
use,
whether
it's
single
family,
multi-family
or
mixed
use.
We
would
have
to
allow
at
least
up
to
four
units
on
an
individual
parcel.
M
We
would
allow
have
to
allow
up
to
six
units
per
lot
in
all
those
residential
zones,
so
that
does
not
include
the
affordable
provision
that
would
just
be
flat
out
six
units
next
slide
and
then
the
other
area
that
we
wanted
to
talk
about
here
is
having
to
do
with
the
parking
requirements.
So
this
would
significantly
reduce
parking
around
a
lot
of
these
developments
so
requiring
off
street
parking
for
Middle
housing
within
a
half
mile
of
that
major
Transit
stop,
we
would
not
be
able
to
require
off-street
parking
within
that
half
mile.
E
V
Overview
of
the
some
of
the
biggest
components
of
this
legislation,
I
want
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
a
sense
of
where
we're
at
in
the
process.
To
date,
the
house
bill
House,
Bill
1110,
was
heard
in
the
house
committee
in
the
committee
on
housing
on
January
17th,
and
the
Senate
bill
is
up
for
a
public
Hearing
in
the
senate
committee
on
housing,
this
coming
Wednesday,
and
so
that's
where
we
are
in
the
process.
V
The
process
is
both
moving
very
quickly
and
has
a
long
way
yet
to
go
a
couple
of
notes
about
how
this
bill
differs
from
last
year.
It
does
have
the
same
Prime
sponsor
on
that,
both
the
house
bill
from
last
year
and
this
one
representative,
Bateman
House,
Bill
1782
the
bill
that
you
saw
last
year.
It
Exempted
cities
under
20,
000
population,
and
so
it
didn't
apply
to
those
this
year
that
are
between
six
thousand
and
twenty
thousand,
so
it
captures
or
applies
to
more
cities.
V
Statewide
the
Bill
last
year
had
this
one
has
an
additional
allowance
for
affordable
housing,
because
last
year
just
dealt
with
four
plexes.
This
one
goes
all
the
way
up
to
six
if
affordability
requirements
are
met
both
for
rental
and
for
owner
occupied
units.
Mr
Codman
mentioned
that
earlier
and
then.
Finally,
last
year's
Bill
offered
a
minimum
net
density
option
of
an
overall
gross
average
of
33
doing
units
per
acre.
This
bill
doesn't
have
anything
any
component
like
that,
so
it
does
not
have
that
in
it
as
well
moving
right
along.
V
One
of
the
things
that
is
also
different
this
year
last
year
was
a
short
session.
This
is
a
pretty
big
piece
of
legislation
to
take
up
in
a
short
session,
and
cities
were
caught
a
little
bit
flat-footed
this
year.
Cities
have
had
more
time
in
the
intervening
months
to
really
consider
how
they
feel
about
this
legislation,
and
there
is,
as
you
can
see
here,
a
bit
of
a
spectrum
of
where
cities
lie.
They're
sure,
I'm
positive.
V
There
are
other
cities
that
are
not
listed
up
here,
but
this
is
a
number
of
the
Cities
who
did
weigh
in
in
some
form
on
the
house
hearing.
Just
to
give
you
a
sense
that
there
is
a
variety
of
evaluation
of
the
positions
here,
you'll
see
across
the
state
a
lot
of
variation
both
in
the
cities
that
are
in
support
that
are
in
opposition
and
are
weighing
in
other
I
will
mention,
while
we're
on
this
slide.
Some
of
the
themes
that
are
coming
up
from
some
of
your
colleagues
at
other
cities.
V
There
are
a
number
of
concerns
and
they
kind
of
cluster
together,
depending
on
the
cities
that
are
talking
about
the
legislation.
But
there's
a
lot
of
recurring
themes
that
you'll
hear.
One
of
the
main
themes
is
around
having
the
same
number
of
units
per
lot
city-wide
in
residential
areas
versus
focused
or
tiered
levels
of
upzoning.
There's
also
concern
about
displacement
of
existing
naturally
occurring
affordable
housing
by
incentivizing,
the
Redevelopment
of
existing
affordable
homes.
V
There
are
also
concerns
around
increasing
density
in
areas
that
either
have
not
frequent,
don't
have
frequent
transit
or
have
no
Transit
at
all.
In
the
case
of
some
of
the
cities
where
there
is
not
a
Transit
Agency
serving
those
neighborhoods
deficiency
and
utilities,
that's
addressed
a
little
bit
in
the
bill,
but
for
cities
who
do
not
have
exclusive
control
over
utility
provision.
V
There
is
a
little
bit
of
a
you
can
petition
for
an
extension
which
is
outlined
in
the
bill,
but
again
for
cities
who
just
simply
cannot
cause
it
to
occur
where
there's
a
lack
of
sewer
water
or
storm
water.
That's
a
concern
and
then
also
concerned
about
the
parking
requirements
and
not
allowing
a
certain
amount
of
off-street
parking
for
some
of
the
lower
income,
cities
or
cities
that
have
a
larger
proportion
of
lower
income,
families
and
individuals
who
rely
on
their
cars
as
a
means
for
their
livelihood.
W
Thank
you
Genesee.
We
know
that
this
is
a
big
bill
with
a
lot
of
policy
elements
in
it
and
the
legislature,
of
course
moves
quickly.
So
we
really
appreciate
the
time
that
you've
given
us
tonight
to
come
to
you
and
talk
through
the
bill
and
make
sure
that
we're
weighing
in
and
we're
on
the
same
page
with
Council
and
how
you
all
would
like
us
to
proceed
so
to
give
us
a
starting
point
for
your
conversation
and
your
feedback.
W
Tonight,
staff
used
your
2023
State
Legislative
agenda
and
other
adopted
policies
to
develop
a
staff
recommendation,
so
I'm
going
to
walk
you
through
that
next,
as
Genesee
mentioned
earlier,
staff
recommends
that
Council
weigh
in
on
this
bill
as
other
and
submit
comments
on
four
priority
topic
areas.
These
are:
zoning
requirements,
density
near
major
Transit,
parking
requirements
and
affordability.
W
So,
starting
with
the
zoning
requirements,
you
will,
as
you
all
know,
middle
housing
is
intended
to
have
the
size,
shape
and
character
of
single
family
housing.
It's
intended
to
blend
in,
however,
five
plexes,
six
plexes,
Cottage,
housing
and
Courtyard
Apartments
all
differ
from
single-family
housing,
especially
in
terms
of
size
layout.
The
way
they
look,
they
just
don't
have
that
compatibility
and
the
Aesthetics
that
we've
heard
Council
speaking
about
recently.
W
W
The
second
priority
topic
area
for
comment
is
density
near
major
Transit.
Bellevue,
of
course,
has
a
Transit
oriented
growth
strategy
and
we're
planning
for
much
higher
density
near
most
future
Light
Rail
stations.
This
bill
seems
to
under
utilize
Tod
potential,
especially
near
Light
Rail
stations
and
bus
Rapid
Transit
stops
so
staff
recommends
asking
legislators
to
take
advantage
of
those
high
potential
areas,
as
Bellevue
plans
to
do.
W
A
third
topic
area
is
parking
requirements.
Bellevue
uses
a
scaled
approach
to
parking
requirements
based
on
proximity
to
Transit,
and
this
bill
takes
a
pretty
cut
and
dry
approach,
which
Michael
went
through
earlier,
really
restricting
cities
from
requiring
parking
for
Middle
housing
within
half
mile
Transit
and
the
other
requirements
that
he
noted
before.
W
V
You
team,
in
terms
of
the
process
ahead,
we
would
like
to
get
your
direction
feedback
this
evening.
What
we
would
do
next
is
provide
comments
and
weigh
in
at
the
as
the
bills
proceed
which,
for
the
Senate
bill
will
be
the
public
hearing
held
on
Wednesday
afternoon
this
week,
as
well
as
at
Future
Bill
hearings.
We
want
to
work
with
the
sponsors
and
the
stakeholders
on
amendments.
We
understand
right
now
that
that
is
already
starting
to
take
shape.
V
This
week
there
was
a
large
stakeholder,
meaning
just
this
past
Friday,
so
we're
our
timing
is
really
good
to
come
in
front
of
you
and
get
your
direction
to
go
forward
and
then,
if
needed,
we
would
come
back
to
council
to
get
further
Direction.
But
our
hope
is
to
get
really
clear
feedback
from
you
today.
That
would
give
us
really
a
clear
set
of
marching
orders
to
work
with
the
bills,
as
they
continue
to
change
a
couple
of
notes
here
about
the
dates
ahead.
V
V
You
have
just
over
a
month
for
those
bills
to
have
been
be
considered
by
the
opposite
chamber,
and
then
they
move
pretty
quickly
to
resolve.
What's
left
and
what's
still
alive
at
that
point.
So
again
with
your
direction
this
evening,
we
really
want
to
roll
up
our
sleeves
and
get
at
the
table
and
try
to
improve
this
bill.
V
An
articulated
position
is
work
with
our
own
members
in
the
41st
and
the
48th
districts
to
make
sure
they
know,
because
I
know
they're
keenly
interested,
not
only
in
the
next
right
work,
activity
and
actions
that
you're
taking,
but
in
how
all
these
things
come
together.
So
we
would
be
happy
to
field
any
questions
that
you
might
have
and
then,
of
course,
take
your
direction
if
you
so
choose
tonight.
Thank.
C
All
right,
thank
you
mayor.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation,
I'm
glad
this
is
coming
back
this
year
for
us
to
talk
about,
had
a
couple
of
questions
just
to
be
clear.
This
bill
authorizes,
but
does
not
require
the
development
of
right,
so
it
allows
for.
M
C
Got
it
which
makes
sense
so
I
guess
when
I
think
about
the
I
mean
to
me
what
that
means?
Is
that
seeing
it
like
people
aren't
just
going
to
go
Tear
Down
single
family
homes,
but
it
does
put
us
in
the
direction
of
getting
more
of
the
housing
that
we
need
throughout
our
community.
C
So
I
guess
I'll
touch
on
the
four
areas
that
you
mentioned
so
for
the
minimum
zoning
requirements
and
I
would
say
generally
I
understand
the
recommendation
to
to
go
with
other
I
guess
I'm
curious
too
about
if
we
agree
with
the
the
direction
of
it
right.
Can
we
not
say
Pro
but
then
provide
feedback
as
well
is
kind
of
what
I'm
curious
about.
V
That
that's
another,
that's
another
option
that
you
all
have
this
evening
is:
you
could
choose
to
go
that
direction
instead,
I
think,
given
the
number
of
concerns
that
we
still
have
with
the
current
version
of
the
bill,
I
think
our
position
probably
aligns
more
with
the
other
cities
who
have
currently
weighed
in
as
other,
and
that
gives
us.
V
We
hope
that
by
taking
a
position
of
other
and
providing
some
substantial
comments
that
we
can
improve
the
bill
it
would
you
know
it
is
absolutely
a
possibility
that
the
Brew
the
bill
gets
improved
to
a
point
where
we
are
clearly
in
support
of
it.
But
at
this
point
the
bill
that
is
presented
right
now
or
as
it
was
introduced.
C
Thank
you
and
then,
as
I
understood
it
from
the
zoning
perspective,
like
cities
would
still
have
the
ability,
as
long
as
it
doesn't
contrast
with
the
law.
To
kind
of
to
your
point,
I
think
Lacy
Jane
about
some
of
these
may
not
fitting,
or
maybe
you
mentioned
Genesee
but
fitting
within
the
Aesthetics
of
the
community.
I
mean
there
are
still.
There
is
still
some
flexibility
in
the
bill
for
design
from
standards.
From
what
I
read.
M
C
Okay,
so
going
to
the
density
near
Transit,
I
think
that
was
the
next
one.
I
support
increasing
the
amount
of
housing
near
Transit,
not
not
necessarily
an
exclusion
of
the
first
area
right,
but
obviously
I
would
support
that
and
then,
in
terms
of
parking
requirements,
I
mean
I.
Hear
you
on
the
scaled
approach.
We've
I
mean
the
reason
we've
taken
direction
to
decrease
parking
minimums
was
because
of
the
cost
impact
on
development
and
the
reason
for
the
parking
requirements.
C
Provision
in
this
bill
is,
for
a
similar
reason
right
to
lower
the
cost
of
I
mean,
and
there
are
cities.
Sorry
I,
always
reference
DC,
where
you
do
have
you
know
maybe
quad
or
six
plexes,
that
don't
have
upstreet
off
street
parking
and
there
is
sufficient
parking,
especially
if
you
take
strategies
like
zone
parking
right
or
for
residential
communities.
C
I
guess
I'm
a
little
confused
about
the
affordability.
Is
that
because
of
the
two
affordable
units,
if
you're,
building
a
Six
Flags
or
is,
is
that
what
you're
referencing
there
and
that
there
are
better
approaches
to
getting
affordable
units
compared
to
that.
E
C
U
Thank
you,
I'm,
very
glad
that
you
brought
this
before
us,
because
I
think
that
this
is
a
very
important
bill
and
getting
our
feedback.
So
we
can
better
understand
when
we
craft
our
state
ledge
agenda
when
we
get
to
these
nuances.
What
is
it
that
we're
trying
to
achieve
is
really
important?
I
mean
just
before
this
one.
We
heard
about
the
affordable
housing
Gap
in
our
city,
and
this
work
is
going
to
be
a
key
part
of
that.
You
know,
I
will
still
think
there's
an
urgency
to
getting
this
work
done.
U
What
I
hear
you
saying
is
a
recommendation
of
other
actually
gets
us
a
seat
at
the
table
and
so
I
guess
to
councilmember
barksdale's
point.
So
if
we
sign
in
Pro
we
wouldn't
have
that
ability
or
I
guess.
That
would
be
one
of
my
questions,
but
let
me
just
go
through
the
rest
and
then
on
the
affordability.
If
what
we're
talking
about
is
really
pressing
for
significant
State
Investments
I'm.
All
in
for
that
right
earlier,
we
talked
about
the
fact
that
you
know
the
market
isn't
going
to
build
it
alone.
U
We
don't
have
enough
money
to
build
it
alone,
so
completely
supportive
of
that
the
density
near
major
Transit
and
allowing
more
of
that.
So
what
I'm
hear
you
saying
is
the
way
that's
currently
worded
it.
It
actually
might
create
issues
where
we
want
to
actually
identify
more
like
a
TOD
and
that
language
might
be
a
barrier.
So
thank
you
for
catching
that
that's
definitely
an
important
part
for
us.
U
The
comment
about
parking
requirements-
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
clear
are,
is
the
bill
saying
that
we
as
a
city
can't
require
more
than
two
parking
spots?
If
the
lot
is
more
than
six
thousand,
but
the
deliver
the
developer
can,
on
their
own,
make
a
choice
to
put
in
parking.
Is
that
right?
So
I
just
want
to
be
really
clear.
This
is
just
the
fact
that
when
they
go
in
for
a
permit,
we
cannot
mandate.
That
thou
must
put
in
X
number
of
parking
stalls
is
that
is
that
right
that.
M
U
So
is
that
the
right
Direction
here
is
that
we're
letting
the
market
decide
or
or
something
else
it
says
we
use
a
scaled
approach
and
we're
recommending
a
similar
approach.
I
I,
don't
I,
didn't
quite
understand
what
that
meant
and
then
my
my
last
question
is
on
the
minimum
zoning
requirements.
So
are
we
saying
that
for
the
ones
we
want
to
Omit
from
this
11
10
that
we're
trying
we?
U
We
are
recommending
omitting
it
for
city-wide,
but
that
last
piece
says,
while
allowing
cities
to
permit
them
and
other
residential
zones,
so
we're
saying
that
we're
not
saying
that
they
wouldn't
be
permitted
anywhere.
We
just
are
talking
about
it
not
being
everywhere.
Is
that
right,
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
that.
So
anyway,
those
those
were
my
comments
and
then
a
couple
of
questions
embedded
in
there.
So.
V
Let
me
kick
that
off
and
I
think
I
think
I
captured
all
of
that
council
member,
so
in
I.
Think
in
order
I
think
you've
got
a
few
questions.
Yes,
if
we
took
a
position
of
being
pro
on
the
legislation
that
would
we
would
have
exactly
the
same
seat
at
the
table
and
it's
you
know
not
literally,
of
course,
a
table,
but
we
would
be
able
to
enter
the
conversation
and
provide
still
constructive
comments
seeking
amendments
if
we
were
Pro
or
other.
V
Frankly,
you
you
can't
you
get
also
a
seat
at
the
table
if
you're
con,
but
if
you
express
a
willingness
to
engage
in
practice,
if
you're
con,
you
can
be
kind
of
pushed
to
the
side
a
little
bit.
That
often
is
the
the
practice,
and
so
the
proponents,
if
you
are,
if
you're
against
this
bill
and
you're
not
providing
constructive
feedback,
it
sometimes
can
marginalize
how
well
you're
heard
or
how
much
traction
you
can
get.
So
our
recommendation
would
be
to
be
other.
V
But
again,
if
you're
and
and
I'd
say,
the
same
is
a
little
bit
true
on
the
pro
side
too
you're
on
board.
Okay,
got
it
you're
all
set,
and
so
I
think
the
way
we
think
we
get
the
best
Toe
Hold
or
the
best
responsiveness
at
this
point
is
to
be
other,
but
no,
you
would
get
to
see
that
you
know
you
get
a
seat
at
the
table.
You
get
to
weigh
in
no
matter
what
position
you
establish,
but
we
think,
given
the
level
of
desired
changes
that
we
are
seeking.
V
I
think
we
probably
are
more
representative
of
being
an
other,
but
that's
a
conversation
for
the
seven
of
you
to
have
so
I
hope
that
is
clear
as
mud
on
parking
I
know
that
we
were
trying
to
without
forcing
somebody
from
transportation
to
be
here,
which
we
probably
ought
to
have
done.
V
We
I've
been
boning
up
a
little
bit
on
our
parking
policies.
We
take
a
number
of
different
criteria
into
consideration
when
we
are
setting
those
permitting
condition
minimums
for
off-street
parking.
We
would
want
to
do
recommend
that
they
do
something
similar.
What
that
looks
like
at
a
Statewide
level
is
pretty
tough
and
that's
kind
of
what
we're
responding
to
is
that
what's
in
the
bill
is
pretty
it's
a
pretty
blunt
instrument,
your
interpretation
of
it
and
Mr
kahneman's
clarification
is
exactly
correct.
V
It
would
not
stop
a
developer
from
adding
more
off-street
spaces,
but
it
would
say
that
we
cannot
require,
above
that,
minimum
for
different
types
of
situations
and
scenarios,
but
the
way
that
the
bill
is
currently
written.
It's
pretty
Broad
and
pretty
blunt
and
doesn't
allow
for
a
lot
of
kind
of
fine-tuning
based
on
different
neighborhoods
and
what
is
available.
What's
naturally,
kind
of
what
is
the
on-street
parking
situation?
It
varies
quite
a
bit
from
neighborhood
and
neighborhood.
V
M
Want
to
add
anything
to
that.
No,
but
I'll
pick
up
on
the
next
one:
okay,.
V
And
then,
in
terms
of
zoning,
I
would
say
to
tee
up
my
colleague
your
the
way
you've
captured.
That
is
correct
in
the
sense
that
we
don't
want
to
preclude
five
plexus
six
plexes
Cottage
housing
and
Courtyard
Apartments
city-wide.
V
M
Yes,
thank
you,
so
just
what
I
wanted
to
add
to
that
is
that,
because
this
is
a
blanket
approach
that
says
Citywide
we
would
have
to
allow
for
all
of
those
different
types.
What
we're
saying
is,
through
our
comprehensive
Plan
update
we're
already
looking
at
areas
of
the
city
where
we
would
introduce
middle
missing
middle
housing
and
it
may
be
appropriate
in
a
lot
of
areas,
but
it
may
not
be
appropriate
in
every
area,
because
we
would
look
at
things
like
what's
what's
the
transit
availability,
what
are
the
what's?
M
The
infrastructure
availability
in
terms
of
parks,
in
terms
of
you
know,
fire
stations
and
schools
and
all
of
those
things
as
well.
So
when
we're
increasing
the
density
when
we're
increasing
the
the
density
not
just
of
housing
but
of
people
in
areas,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
taking
all
of
that
into
account
and
that
we
factor
that
into
where
we
allow
for
those
denser
types
of
housing.
So
we're
not
we're
not
saying
that
we
wouldn't
be
looking
at
that.
M
R
Thank
you,
I
appreciate
you.
Bringing
this
back
I
think
shows
how
you
are
Vigilant
to
watch.
What's
going
on,
you
know
for
us,
especially
in
such
an
important
topic,
and
so
also
appreciate
you
giving
up
your
you
know,
giving
your
observation.
What's
the
best
way,
you
know
to
reflect
the
our
Bellevue
interest
and
when
the
thing
you
mentioned
is
we
want
to
have
a
seat
at
the
table,
and
you
said
we
we
should
have
a
sealed
table.
It
probably
doesn't
see
the
table.
Maybe
that's
the
way
we
want
to
be
I.
R
Think
one
I
believe
that
we
do
have
influence,
because
I
was
because
I
believe
land
use
is
a
local
issue.
Everybody
recognized
it
this
local
issue
because
it
involves
so
many
different
issues.
So
many
different
things,
so
many
different
aspects
and
every
city
is
different,
so
I
think
it's
important
and
the
state
really
can't
understand
or
consider
all
and
they
don't
really
communicate
with
all
of
us.
R
They
do
it
through
us
and
I
think
that
the
fact
that
we
have
issues
with
the
state
law
I
think
they
would
appreciate
it
as
we
do
right,
because
they
want
input
and
these
Representatives
40
First
48.
They
are
from
our
district,
they
represent
us,
so
they
need
to
be
talking
to
us,
especially.
We
have
things
that
we
disagree
with
them
or
we
may
want
to
give
input
they
have
to.
If
they
say
we
don't
talk
to
you
unless
you
agree
with
us.
Well,
they
are
not
good
Representatives.
We
are
not
groups
of
this.
R
We
tell
our
people
say
if
you
don't
agree
with
me,
I
don't
talk
to
you.
Why?
Don't
you
listen
to
you?
I,
don't
represent
you,
that's
not
right.
So
I
I
believe
that
we
have
differences.
You
pointed
out
very
well
I
believe
that's
the
case
and
it's
very
characteristic
of
the
city
and
on
the
whole
topic
of
housing.
Just
we
just
went
through
housing
issues.
R
We
spend
a
lot
of
time
on
housing.
We
are
doing
very
well
housing.
We
are
a
model
of
housing
issues.
Thanks
to
you
guys,
you
know
we
we
look
at
things.
We
should
do
we
look
at
needs
assessment,
we're
not
done.
We
continue
to
do
so,
and
we
don't
have
questions.
We
don't
have
answers
to
a
lot
of
them,
but
we
have
control.
We
are
working
on
them.
They
are
dear
to
us
they're
dear
to
our
residents,
and
we
know
how
to
figure
out.
R
We
know
how
to
make
sure
they
address
our
answers,
our
differences,
our
characters
right.
We
don't
know
some
of
them,
don't
know
until
they
impact
our
citizens,
but
we
can
be
flexible.
We
can
be
nimble,
we
are,
we
have
proven.
We
can
do
it.
We
both
either
at
the
level
that
we
are
at
and
also
our
ability,
our
Council
of
willings,
to
do
it
we're
the
best
place
to
do
it.
R
So
I
believe
that
we
definitely
would
oppose
it
because
it
doesn't
address
our
issue:
okay
and
where's,
our
Pro
okay,
others
I,
don't
know
what
others
are.
There
may
be
other
things
you
can
see.
If
we
bring
us
some
any
others,
you
know
how
much
time
we
go
through
it,
how
much
we
have
to
talk
about
it,
how
much
the
public
have
to
be
engaged
in?
R
They
have
to
listen
to
us.
They
will
listen
to
us.
You
ask
our
legislature
it's
much
better
to
talk
to
them
individually,
representing
Bellevue
as
part
of
a
group
of
people
who
say
I
want
this
I
want
that
we
say
yeah,
maybe
maybe
not.
Let's
compromise
these.
Some
of
these
cannot
be
compromised.
I
believe
we
can
do
a
lot
more
effectively
a
lot
more
adequately.
A
lot
more
representative
of
the
city
of
Bellevue,
our
neighborhood
characteristic,
because
we
have
gone
through
it
all.
A
Thank
you
for
your
cover,
Lee,
so
I
feel
like
last
week,
we
exhibited
our
commitment
to
increasing
housing
in
Bellevue,
with
all
the
work
that
we
move
forward
on
an
affordable
housing
work
and
so
very
much
for
that.
Work
that
we're
moving
forward.
I
have
some
concerns
about
the
legislation
as
it's
written.
One
is
I'm
concerned
that
about
the
utility
infrastructure
in
some
of
our
neighborhoods
and
whether
it's
it
can
handle
it
has
the
capacity
to
handle
across
the
board
increase
density
like
that.
A
A
So
that
a
city
that
has
already
has
a
a
working
mfte
program
does
not
have
to
adopt
the
state's
recommended
one,
and
so
I
would
hope
that,
with
all
the
work
that
we're
doing
to
address
the
Deeds
for
more
housing
that
maybe
somehow
there's
an
exemption
for
a
city
that
has
an
affordable
housing
plan
and
is
showing
how
they're
addressing
the
missing
middle
housing,
which
we
obviously
are
missing
I,
would
like,
obviously,
a
more
of
a
focus
on
home
ownership.
I
think
that
you
make
a
good
case
this
afford.
A
A
I
think
there
is
a
place
for
five
and
six
plexes
I
Love
Actually,
Cottage
housing
and
Courtyard
housing.
I.
Don't
know
that
it's
right
for
every
part
of
the
city,
so
I'd
like
to
be
thoughtful
about
it.
I,
like
the
emphasis
on
Tod
increasing
density
there,
but
I
also
want
to
give
people
the
opportunity
to
live
in
a
single-family
neighborhood
if
they
choose.
A
F
All
right,
thank
you,
mayor,
first
of
all,
Lacey
Jane
and
Genesee
and
Michael
appreciate
you
staying
on
top
of
all
these
bills,
not
just
this
one,
but
certainly
this
one
seems
to
be
getting
a
large
share
of
the
attention
these
days.
F
So
got
a
lot
of
questions,
so
I'm
not
sure
I
can
touch
on
everything
as
as
the
mayor
just
just
did,
but
so
my
first
and
foremost
question
I
know
you've
been
on
some
of
these
calls,
with
the
with,
with
with
the
sponsor
and
and
co-sponsors
of
this
bill.
But
has
there
been
any
any
data
to
show
that
this
model
or
a
bill
or
a
law
like
this,
has
been
successful
in
any
other
City,
not
only
in
terms
of
creating
more
housing
but
affordable
housing.
V
V
If
it
came
up
in
the
AWC
Housing
Solutions
work
group,
it
did
not
Deputy
Mayor.
F
Well,
I
would
assume
that
the
sponsor
would
provide
that
so
if
they
didn't
provide
it,
it
probably
hasn't
been
been
done
yet
so
and
then
I
shared
the
the
the
mayor's
concern
about
the
the
infrastructure
in
place
to
accommodate
this
type
of
density.
So
do
we
know
that
we
could
even
accommodate
this
if
this
bill
were
to
pass
tomorrow?
Do
we
know
what
the
impact
would
be
to
our
infrastructure.
V
I,
don't
think
we
currently
have
an
estimate
of
whether
or
not
we
could
like
if
we
stamped
our
fingers
and
that
all
of
that
potential
additional
housing
units
would
show
up
I,
don't
know
that
we
could
accommodate
that
one
way
or
the
other
I
know
we
are
better
equipped
than
some
of
the
other
cities
that
have
been
expressing
concerns.
Sure
do
you
have
yeah
that.
M
Is
one
of
the
things
that
we're
looking
at
through
the
comprehensive
plan
updates
because
we're
doing
the
different
growth
scenarios?
We
will
look
at
our
infrastructure
at
a
more
of
a
macro
level.
We're
not
going
to
look
at.
You
know
each
individual
area
in
terms
of
pressure
zones
and
things
like
that.
But
we
will
look
at
the
infrastructure
overall
and
see
where
we
can
best
accommodate
those
increases
in
density.
F
Okay
again,
looking
at
the
the
the
the
sponsor
of
the
bill,
has
there
been
any
analysis
on
the
environmental
cost
to
this?
Obviously,
that's
of
concern
to
the
residents
of
this
city.
We
just
passed
our
ESI.
We've
got
a
tree,
canopy
goal
of
40.
Do
we
understand
what
the
potential
impact
could
be
to
our
city
and
then
also
for
those
cities
that
have
weighed
in
either
as
other
or
Khan?
What
are
there
any
other
concerns
that
you're
hearing
other
than
the
ones
that
you've
mentioned
already?
F
Is
there
anything
any
anything
else
that
we
should
be
aware
of
that
you've
heard
from
other
cities
either
on
the
other
or
con
side
that
you
haven't
mentioned
already
and
then?
Finally,
what
does
this
process
look
like
going
forward
if
we
do
move
forward
with
the
other?
What
does
that
process
look
forward
or
look
like
going
forward?
Would
you
be
coming
back
to
us?
F
Would
we
simply
just
try
to
massage
this
bill
per
the
the
four
items
that
you
message
there
and
and
hope
for
the
best
or
or
are
there
other
actions
that
we
might
take?
And
then
lastly,
I'll
say
you
know
if
there
was
an
exemption
that
if
a
city
did
have
an
affordable
housing
strategy
like
we
do
that
we
are
taking
middle
housing
very
seriously,
like
we
do
that
a
city
like
Bellevue
should
be
from
exempt,
because
it
is
something
that
we're
taking
very
seriously.
F
We
understanding
that
there
is
a
housing
crisis,
but
as
councilmember
Lee
so
eloquently
said,
we
understand
Bellevue
best
and
and
how
to
achieve
those
goals
and-
and
we
don't
necessarily
think
that
a
blanket
approach
that
might
work
in
some
cities,
but
not
all-
is
necessarily
the
the
best
approach.
So
I'll
stop
there,
because
I
gave
you
a
ton
of
questions
and
I'll.
Let
you
answer
some
of
them.
Thank
you.
I.
V
Will
I
will
kick
us
off?
I
two-year
first
question
around
the
data
about
how
effective
this
type
of
policy
approach
has
been.
I.
Don't
think,
I've
seen
any
data
to
that
end,
but
that's
something
that
we
can
look
into
and
actually
I
know.
V
I've
got
a
conversation
with
one
of
the
proponents
on
the
calendar
later
this
week,
that'll
be
a
great
question
to
ask
them
and
then,
in
terms
of
capacity
I,
think
Mr
cotterman
for
our
Utility
Systems
Mr
cotterman
has
talked
about
how
that
we're
going
to
look
at
that
very
comprehensively
in
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
you
raised
a
very
good
point
about
the
environmental
impacts.
Some
of
the
other
cities
raised
similar
concerns
on
the
stakeholder
call
that
was
conducted
on
Friday
in
terms
of
critical
areas,
water
quality,
tree
retention
and
canopy.
V
C
V
Those
are
raised
by
multiple
jurisdictions
on
the
call
on
Friday
in
terms
of
other
concerns
from
cities,
I
rattled
off
about
a
half
a
dozen
of
those
earlier
I'm,
trying
to
think.
If
I
missed
any
of
the
other
larger
concerns,
can
you
remember
any
of
the
other
ones
that
we've
missed?
You
got
all
the
ones
on
my
list,
okay,
there.
What
I
would
say
is
it
was.
It's
been
interesting
to
me
that
the
issues
have
there's
been
a
really
kind
of
complex
like
a
word
bubble
or
like
a
Venn
diagram
of
the
same.
V
E
V
Then,
to
your
last
two
items
around
next
steps,
and
actually
let
me
hit
the
very
last
one
before
that,
which
is
whether
or
not
there
is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
be
Exempted
or
kind
of
have
have
substantially
checked
the
box
for
this
legislation.
There
is
a
part
and
I
did
mention
it
briefly
in
passing.
There
is
a
part
of
this
legislation
that
talks
about
when
a
city
is
found
to
have
adopted,
regulations
that
are
substantially
similar
to
the
requirements
of
the
ACT
I
know
as
exam.
That's
the
right
phase.
V
I
know
I'll
say
that,
for
example,
the
city
of
Tacoma
recently
had
a
very
robust
conversation
around
how
to
add
far
more
housing
to
their
and
affordable
housing
to
their
planning
program
and
did
decided
to
go
much
bigger
in
some
areas
and
smaller
in
others.
They're
in
that
other
category,
as
well
really
saying,
we
need
a
better
definition
of
what
it
means
to
be
substantially
have
done
something
substantially
similar
because
they
don't
want
to
unravel
the
work
that
they
just
did
in
talking
with
their
neighborhoods
and
talking
with
potential
new
neighbors.
V
They
feel
like
they've,
struck
the
right
balance
and
accomplished
the
same
macro
level
to
borrow
a
phrase
macro
level
objectives
without
having
to
do
the
same
number
of
minimum
units
per
every
single
lot
and
so
I
think.
That's
part
of
what
we
want
to
ask
for
as
a
part
of
this
engagement
is
to
say:
hey,
maybe
it's
not
the
exact
same
number,
completely
city-wide
and
because
we're
already
well
underway
with
the
comprehensive
plan
it's
possible.
There
are,
as
other
council
members
have
pointed
out,
some
inconsistencies
and
some
kind
of
holes
in
this
legislation.
V
You
may
have
already
check
the
box
substantially
Again
by
the
time
this
takes
effect,
or
at
least
by
the
time
some
of
the
sections
take
effect
and
so
getting
some
clarity
around
what
it
would
mean
to
be
able
to
get
the
nod
from
Commerce
to
say
yes,
this
city,
it
did
what
it
needed
to
do
in
order
to
satisfy
the
objectives
here,
even
though
it
didn't
do
it
at
four
five
or
six
units
per
lot.
It
achieved
it
through
other
means.
We
want
more
clarity
on
that
and
I
think
we're.
V
We
would
be
in
good
company
with
other
cities
who
are
saying
the
same
thing,
which
is
we
did
it
our
way,
because
we
know
our
neighborhoods
and
our
community,
but
we're
all
about
the
goals
we're
all
about
trying
to
get
to
the
Future
more
quickly
and
in
a
way
that
makes
sense
for
our
context
and
Aesthetics
and
I.
Think
the
last
point
that
you
raised
around
next
steps.
We
this
legislation
this
year,
because
it
is
a
longer
session-
appears
to
have
some
Runway
ahead
of
it.
V
V
That
means
that,
if
we
get
some
amendments
say
in
the
policy
committee
we
can
raise
similar
concerns
when
it
gets
to
a
fiscal
committee,
means
that
we
can
also
talk
to
members
about
making
amendments
on
the
floor
and
then
most
comprehensively,
if
they're
really
gross
to
become
a
critical
mass
of
cities
who
are
saying,
we
really
need
this
bill
to
be
better.
We
want
this
bill
to
be
better.
We
really
hope
that
we
can
get
the
proponents
of
the
legislation
and
their
colleagues
to
go.
Hey
look.
This
is
not
working
and
its
current
form.
V
If
you
want
my
vote,
I
need
it
to
be
better,
and
so
that's
really
what
we're
hoping
to
accomplish,
and
that
is
a
long
process
at
probably
at
some
point.
One
of
these
two
versions
will
go
away:
they'll,
probably
as
they
often
do,
they
don't
usually
let
both
companions
make
it
all.
The
way
to
the
end
of
session,
they
say:
okay,
it's
going
to
be.
V
This
is
going
to
be
the
vehicle
and
that
one
you
did
a
great
job,
we're
going
to
set
that
one
down,
because
the
calendars
are
just
like
your
calendars
are
tight
for
efficiency.
They'll
do
that,
but
we
want
to
continue
to
make
as
long
as
this
bill's
live.
We
want
to
make
it
achieve
bellevue's
objectives
and
priorities
and
work
for
you,
because
it
will
come
home
at
the
end
of
April
or
when
it
gets.
You
know,
I
wonder
if
it
gets
signed
by
a
governor.
V
T
You
so
first
I
probably
lean
more
towards
Con
on
this
only
because
it
is
taking
away
local
control.
As
I
said
in
the
last
agenda
item,
we
need
more
housing.
I
am
absolutely
committed
to
making
sure
Bellevue
has
the
housing
we
need,
but
We
Know,
Better,
Than
People
in
Olympia,
who
may
not
even
live
in
King
County
or
have
ever
been
to
Bellevue
what
we
need
to
do
to
achieve
the
housing
goals.
So
I
absolutely
joined
the
mayor
and
deputy
mayor
in
looking
for
something
that
would
give
a
safe
harbor
an
exemption.
T
One
idea
might
be
not
the
safe
Safe
Harbor.
It
wasn't
a
safe
harbor
last
of
the
bill
last
year,
but
one
that
is
a
reasonable.
Just
for
those
that
haven't
heard
me
opine
on
this,
the
Safe
Harbor
of
33
units.
You
forgot
the
word
gross
in
the
slide.
It
was
33
units
per
gross
acre,
which
includes
roads.
It
includes
Parks,
it
includes
Wetlands,
it
includes
critical
areas.
It
includes
everything,
not
even
housing
residential
land.
T
It
would
result
in
us
having
to
plan
for
1.5
million
people
in
the
city
of
Bellevue,
the
Safe
Harbor
that
they
offered
last
year.
It
was
it
I
think
it
was
promoted
by
people
who
don't
understand
what
a
gross
acre
is
or
who
can't
do,
math
or
both
so
having
some
sort
of
exemption.
That
is
real,
where
cities
are
planned
for
and
have
zoned
to
meet
their
growth
targets
and
have
an
affordable
housing
plan.
Something
like
that.
T
That
would
be
a
real
exemption
and
I
would
absolutely
support
us
pushing
that,
although
I
lean
Con
on
this,
just
because
of
local
control
I
understand,
there's
a
lot
of
value
for
having
people
try
to
earn
us
to
the
pro
side
so
being
on
other
and
not
having
those
write
us
off
as
oh
they're,
just
a
post,
so
I
I
can
get
behind
coming
in
as
other.
T
Now,
as
to
your
four
issues
or
the
four
directions
you
wanted
to
address,
I
want
to
plan
on
those
and
add
a
couple
of
more
one
number
one
I'm
totally
in
favor
I
think
that
there
is
a
time
and
a
place
for
six
plexus,
plus
Cottages
plus,
but
one
size
fits
all,
is
pretty
difficult.
So
allowing
us
to
put
those
where
needed
is
a
is
much
more
appropriate
approach.
T
T
So
something
like
that.
We
also
need
to
make
sure
that
we
consider
critical
areas.
We
can't
we're
not
going
to
start
putting
high
rises
in
the
Mercer
Slough.
That's
the
largest
wetland
in
King
County,
probably
in
western
Washington,
so,
and
then
also
on
the
frequent
Transit
I.
Think
the
definition
is
a
little
overly
broad
I'd
like
to
see
a
heat
map
that
takes
into
account
the
future
light.
Rail
stops.
I
know
that
Genesee
you,
you
dug
up
one
that
King
County
had
put
together
a
year
ago.
T
I,
don't
know
that
this
has
the
light
rail
stops
in
it
and
I
know
that
we
did
one.
So
if
you
could
provide
that
I
think
that
it
would
be
helpful
for
the
council
to
see
it,
but
it
could
also
be
something
that
we
use
in
our
lobbying
efforts
showing
hey.
Look
if
you
measure
it
this
way.
It's
like
75
of
the
city.
If
you
measure
it,
you
know
a
quarter
mile
or
half
mile
walk
as
a
person
walks.
It's
this
much.
T
You
know
it
just
might
show
the
impacts,
because
I
don't
know
that
they
realize
it
looks,
and
the
frequent
Transit
seems
to
be
four
four
bus
buses
an
hour
during
the
work
day
seems
like
a
little
bit,
not
so
frequent
Transit.
T
So,
where
there's,
where
there's
really
frequency
and
short
headways
and
it's
running,
you
know
almost
24
7.
I
totally
get
it,
but
the
four
buses
an
hour
which
may
go
to
all
different
places.
T
I,
don't
know
that
that
really
is
frequent.
Transit
on
the
parking
I
I
agree
with
some
of
my
colleagues
about
the
concerns.
The
there's
a
couple
of
issues
here.
First
of
all,
we
had
a
study
I
think
a
year
ago,
where
it
showed
that
people
who
are
of
lower
income
own
cars
at
actually
a
higher
rate
than
people
of
a
higher
income.
T
As
far
as
the
number
of
cars
they
need
them
to
get
to
work,
they
need
them
to
get
their
kids
to
where
they
need
to
go,
and
so
I
think,
assuming
that,
just
because
someone
can't
afford
Market
rent
that
they
don't
need
a
place
to
put
their
car
is
really
pretty
discriminatory.
T
It
also
doesn't
consider
street
parking.
There
are
places
in
Bellevue
where
we
have
ample
street
parking
and
there
are
places
in
Bellevue
where
we
have
no
street
parking
so,
and
there
are
some
where
it's
very,
very
limited,
so
I
think
we
need
to
be
able
to
have
more
of
a
say
on
that
and
yes,
developers
can
build
more,
but
it
affects
the
performa
in
the
bottom
line.
So
much
for
the
most
part.
They
won't
so
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
have
more
say,
I
appreciate
the
affordable
housing.
I.
T
Don't
need
to
comment
on
that
to
your
for
two
of
which
I
opined
on
I'd
like
to
add
critical
areas,
impacts
on
infrastructure,
including
the
need
for
funding
from
the
state.
There
are
cities
in
the
St
in
the
state
of
Washington
that
will
be
subject
to
this
that
have
no
sewer
and
they'd
have
to
put
fourplexes
on
Lots
with
no
sewer,
and
they
can't
who
can
afford
to
build
the
sewer
trunk
line
down
there.
They
just
can't
so
or
they
have
no
storm
or
water
and
again
number
seven.
T
We
need
a
reasonable
Safe
Harbor
or
an
exemption,
because
I
think
bellevue's
doing
pretty
much
everything
right.
Although
maybe
not
as
fast
as
we
would
like,
but
we're
doing
a
lot
of
the
right
things
that
this
goal
is
meant
to
get
to,
so
we
don't
need
the
legislature
telling
us
exactly
how
to
achieve
the
goals
because
we
are
bought
in
on
the
goals
already.
So
that's
my
comment.
Thanks.
V
Oh
goodness,
I,
don't
think
so.
I
think
I
think
I
took
really
careful
notes
and
we'll
compare
with
my
colleagues
but
I
think
you
I,
think
everything
you've
covered
was
pretty
straightforward,
honestly
and
we'll
try
to
get
an
updated
map
from
King
County
and
from
Sound
Transit.
That
shows
both.
T
Q
It's
been
a
very
good
conversation
on
this.
It
is
a
complex,
complex
matter.
I
had
a
couple
things
just
to
start
off
with
what
is
the
actual
State
authority
over
cities
donating
we're.
Having
this
thing
of
you
know,
and
you
have
some
somebody
came
and
testified
and
said
you
know,
the
state
can't
tell
us
to
do
anything
and
Zoning
or
whatever,
and
this
this
my
opinion
is
that
this
legislation
will
not
violate
any
or
impose
anything.
That's
not
part
of
the
state
law
and
it's
owning.
Q
Zoning
is
not
just
saying
the
city
has
total
control
of
it.
It's
not
the
way
it
works
and
the
reality
is
we're
doing
a
lot
of
things,
but
we're
not
doing
I
mean
they're
all
within
the
scope
of
things.
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
that's
a
real
concern
in
terms
of
what
the
state's
going
to
say
to
us
and
all
that
I
just
and
it's
difficult.
Yes,
everybody
wants
to
do
it
like
this
and
we're
we're
special
we're
the
only
ones
that
know
how
to
do
this
in
our
neighborhood.
Q
Q
You
know,
chips
on
that
particular
piece
to
fight
it,
because
you
can't
tell
us
what
to
do
I
think
that's
just
a
and
it
really
doesn't
help
Bellevue
in
terms
of
saying
we're
doing
things,
it's
going
to
basically
say:
well,
you
don't
want
to
do
things,
so
you
want
to
hide
behind
this,
so
it's
I
hope
we
can
not
get
bogged
down
in
that
particular
piece,
but
I
thought
it
was
interesting.
Q
The
ones
who
don't
want
it.
You
look
at
them
and
they're,
mostly
small
cities,
who
are
just
now
in
the
last
few
years,
have
had
pressure
and
they're
having
trouble
and
they
don't
want
to
it's
a
change.
It's
like
if
we
were
back
15
years
ago.
Talking
about
this
so
I
think
we're
we're
in
a
good
spot
and
I.
Think
your
the
recommendation
for
other
and
a
number
of
things
that
have
come
up
I
think
are
good
to
see
if
we
can
get
those
into
it.
Q
I
liked
councilman
Robertson's
comments
about
better
and
more
flexible
areas,
and
we
and
the
the
whole
issue
of
when
you
think
about
the
Mercer
slew
and
all
that
the
they're
not
looking
at
this
in
the
a
broader
context
but
and
I
think
it's
it's
important
for
us
to
address
these
issues
and
try
to
make
changes
in
this.
Q
So
I
think
that
we
can
get
this
to
a
point
where
we're
not
having
the
state
tell
us
what
to
do
but
they're
putting
parameters
that
are
rational
and
that
are
should
be
applied
in
the
rest
of
this
of
the
state
and
I
I
have
a
real
difficulty
of
saying:
let's
get
Exempted
from
this
as
if
we're
something
really
special
and
we
know
what
we're
doing
and
leave
us
alone,
but
yeah.
We
want
money
when
you're
ready
when
the
state
wants
to
do
some
things.
Q
I
just
think,
it'll
put
us
in
a
place
where
people
say
well,
it's
Bellevue
playing
this
thing
of
we're
exceptional
again,
we
can
stay
within
it.
We
need
to
work
with
people
in
the
region
and
I
think
the
focus
is
to
make
positive
changes
to
what's
going
on,
I
think
you've
made
a
you
know,
good
strides
on
that
so
and
I
think
some
of
the
things
that
again
councilman
Robertson
added
into
this
to
look
at
and
particularly
again
on
the
topography
and
all
those
things.
Q
It's
a
it's
more
complex,
I
think
than
what
the
the
the
legislation
sets
up
in
a
sense,
but
I
think
we
can
show
both
leadership
and
we
can
do
a
better
job
if
we
work
with
this,
make
changes
and
have
the
the
power
of
the
whole
group
working
together
and
I.
Think
when
it
comes
to
funding,
will
be
in
much
better
State
than
if
we
play
this
game
again.
Q
Well,
you
know,
leave
Bellevue
alone,
so
I
think
we're
we
can
and
you're
helping
really
maneuver
us
into
that,
and
we
do
have
a
great
program,
but
we
know
we're
not
perfect,
and
we
know
we've
got
a
lot
of
things
to
do
as
the
state
can
do
something
that
helps
us
in
making
changes
where
we
don't
have
to
have
battles
that
are
not
necessary.
That
this
is.
This
is
the
way
it's
going.
Q
This
is
this
historically
and
the
way
that
the
consensus
is
we
need
to
do
certain
things
within
the
state
that
helps
us
actually
being
trying
to
go
alone
and
saying
we're
better
and
everybody
else.
We
have
it,
we're
perfect,
don't
leave.
You
know
exempt
us
I,
think
that
is
a
negative
for
Bellevue
in
the
long
run.
Q
So
I
think
this
gives
us
a
lot
of
opportunity
to
work
together,
but
if
we
can
mold
this
a
lot
better
in
the
way
we've
been
working
on
it,
I
think
it
will
come
off
very
well
on
this
and
we're
working
with
all
the
cities.
I
mean
you
know:
we've
been
working
with
before
what
I'm
trying
to
say
the
with
the
home.
Q
You
know
the
homeless
issues
and
we've
been
working
with
the
affordable
housing
issues
with
the
cities
around
us,
and
we
could
have
taken
this
say
well,
just
we'll
just
do
our
own
thing
and
that's
not
the
best
and
so
I
think
we
we
we
learn
more
and
we
do
better
when
we're
working
together.
But
we
are
the
leaders
and
we,
this
will
keep
us
really
focused
on
that,
and
it
may
give
us
a
lot
more
resources
in
the
long
run.
Q
So
I
really
appreciate
the
way
you're
going
to
stay
in
the
other.
Try
to
make
make
make
changes
and
lead
lead
the
cities
to
get
a
better
package.
I.
A
A
Thank
you
so
I
heard
some
pros.
I
heard
some
cons,
I
heard
some
other
I
think
we'll
do
a
motion
for
other
and
I
really
like
what
you
said
that
we
could
come
to
Pro.
If
we
you
know
if
we
saw
some
positive
changes,
because
this
is
a
compelling
legislation,
I
think
we're
all
in
agreement
that
we
need
to
be
moving
forward
in
this
direction.
So,
deputy
mayor,
okay,.
R
I
have
to
listen
to
everybody
to
a
sense.
What
thank
you
I
agree
with
what
Genesee
said.
We
need
to
be
aggressive
on
this.
It's
very
important
subject.
As
you
can
see,
it's
controversial,
the
state
is
divided
right
and
some
are
good.
Some
of
some
questions,
even
we
agree
a
lot
of
questions
to
be
aggressive,
means
to
have
to
give
clear
and
strong
message.
R
We
have
supporters
in
the
state
legislature,
it's
not
unanimous
and
this
even
they
are
unanimous.
They
need
to
listen
to
what
people
have
to
say
and
if
you
tell
them,
if
we
kind
of,
like
you
said,
say
something
that
clear
as
mud,
it
doesn't
help.
We
have
to
be
clear:
okay
have
the
strong.
This
is
what
we
believe.
That's
where
we
are,
that
will
get
the
attention
we
already
have
friends
who
understand
that
they
are
legislators
who
have
said
we
want
to
leave.
E
R
Just
say
just
you
look
at
the
big
pictures,
whatever
this
religious
statue
can
and
should
do,
but
details
like
we're
talking
about
at
this
table.
It's
us
so
I
would
still
support.
No,
not
because
we
don't
want
to
work
with
them,
not
because
we
want
to
be
collaborative
not
because
they
have
no
good
ideas.
Absolutely
no.
They.
R
A
C
I
was
just
getting
back
through
it
again,
I
think
for
utilities.
There's
an
exemption
at
the
moment
in
the
in
the
bill
that
cities
for,
if
who
aren't
able
to
meet
the
utilities
requirements
have
five
years
as
long
along
with
the
plan
of
action.
V
C
And
hey
I
know
we
don't
have
time
to
do
this,
but
I
am
really
curious
about
what
it
would
look
like
in
terms
of
housing,
production.
C
C
You
know
I
I,
guess
what
I
struggle
with
when
it
comes
to
keeping
it
just
local.
If
you
will
is
we've
had
how
many
years
to
do
this,
given
the
population,
growth
and
I
get
you
know
not
wanting
the
state
to
to
regulate.
You
know
at
the
local
level
on
land
use,
but
I,
just
we,
as
we
heard
earlier,
the
Gap
is
widening
in
terms
of
income
and
affordability,
right
and
so
forth,
and
so
I
guess
I
do
think.
There's
some
need
for
the
state
to
take
action
in
this
case.
C
So
I
understand
the
need
to
to
have
the
conversations
I
just
want.
I
would
just
say:
I,
just
really
like
for
us
to
figure
out
how
we
move
forward
in
a
way
that
acknowledges
that
sometimes
we
do
need
the
state
to
to
move
us
along
yeah
thanks.
U
I
too
appreciate
hearing
from
my
colleagues
about
the
nuances
and
some
things
we
need
to
focus
on
and
and
I
would
agree
that
we
want
to
look
at
making
sure
that,
perhaps
in
the
affordability
piece
that
we
in
the
comment
include
a
sentence
about
funding
for
infrastructure,
because
I
I
do
believe
that
over
time,
when
Bellevue
is
seen
as
being
a
good
partner
where
we
are
delivering
on
the
jobs
and
housing
and
looking
at
Equity
that
we're
able
to
get
funding
from
move
forward,
Washington
on
our
transportation
needs
so
that
trans,
so
as
a
as
a
growth
Corridor
as
a
growth
City
that
we
are
actually
getting
infrastructure
funding
to
support
the
work
that
we're
doing,
and
we
would
want
to
continue
to
accentuate
that
that
need
in
order
to
support
the
affordable
housing,
actually
both
housing
and
affordable
housing
that
we
need
to
put
in.
U
And
yet
we've
seen
in
our
housing
needs
assessment
that
we
just
heard
that
the
it's
a
widening
Gap
and
it's
actually
not
getting
better.
It's
just
getting
worse,
and
so,
while
I
appreciate
hearing
from
my
colleagues
about
the
we
can
do
it
ourselves.
U
We
do
see
some
headwinds
when
we
try
to
move
forward
with
some
of
the
policies
that,
as
councilmember
Barksdale
says,
we've
been
talking
about
some
of
them
for
many
many
years.
So
I
would
just
caution
that,
yes,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
bill
is
crafted
in
a
way
that,
from
an
implementation
standpoint,
we
don't
end
up
running
into
issues
so
being
thoughtful
about
critical
areas
and
how
that's
viewed
as
we
look
at
the
buildable
part
of
the
of
the
Lots
absolutely.
U
But
when
we
talk
about
tree
canopy
and
Aesthetics,
I
mean
I
believe
that
the
Architects
are
very,
very
Innovative
and
smart
about
how
they
can
deliver
in
a
way
that
has
the
Aesthetics
and
the
form
that
still
fits
the
character
of
neighborhoods.
We
need
to
and
Empower
them
to
do
that
so
when
I
think
about
grandfathering,
I
would
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
actually
holding
ourselves
accountable
for
building
the
to
the
the
urgency
of
Housing
and
affordable
housing.
U
U
So
I
would
just
caution
about
diluting
the
bill
to
the
point
where
we're
actually
not
moving
forward
with
the
housing,
because
these
are
these
are
potentially
our
our
children,
our
children's
children,
the
the
people
that
are
making
our
lattes,
and
so
you
know,
they're
real
people
and
I
think
that
we
want
to
be
thoughtful
about
how
we
are
as
inclusive
as
possible
as
a
city.
So
thank
you.
A
I
have
nothing
more
to
say,
deputy
mayor.
Thank
you.
F
You
know
really
appreciate
the
conversation,
a
lot
of
good
points
tonight,
I've
vastly
back
and
forth
about
other
or
con
I-
have
to
remember
leaning
more
on
the
con
side
right
now,
rather
than
the
other,
just
because
I
think
I
feel
like
we
need
to
make
a
bigger
statement
and
that
with
other,
it's
somewhat
tepid
that
we're
almost
there.
But
you
know,
maybe
you
can
consider
these
one
or
two
amendments
and
as
councilman
Robertson
just
did
listed
off
at
least
seven
or
eight
that
I
I
just
don't
think
we'll
get
there.
F
F
We
all
and
we've
done
great
work
at
addressing
affordable
housing
and
our
strategy
and
the
middle
housing,
but
just
really
concerned
about
the
impact
of
the
character
of
our
neighborhoods,
the
the
the
the
cost
to
our
infrastructure,
the
overcrowding
of
neighborhood
streets
and
really
a
lot
of
this
comes
to
my
first
question:
where's,
the
data
that
shows
this
is
going
to
have
an
impact.
F
There
is
some
data
by
the
way
some
of
this
has
been
done
in
New
York
and
some
other
cities
had
no
significant
impact
and
especially
had
no
significant
impact
when
it
came
to
the
cost
of
housing
none.
So
what
what
I
really
don't
want
to
see
is
a
four-part
process
where
we
see
demolishing
a
single-family
homes
right
homes
that
could
go
to
families
or
other
people.
You
know
the
almost
some
of
this
organic,
affordable
homes.
F
We
were
talking
about
earlier
cutting
down
all
the
trees
in
the
greenery
on
that
lot,
cementing
over
the
lot
and
then
all
of
a
sudden,
there's
four
Town
Homes
selling
for
a
million
dollars
a
piece
is
that
really
going
to
achieve
our
goals
and
for
those
that
are
concerned
about
make
mansions
popping
up
around
around
town?
Well,
what
about
that?
How
are
we
going
to
feel
about
that?
One
that
starts
jumping
around
the
city
and
believe
me,
there
will
be
a
lot
I
mean
if
you
thought
your
property
was
valuable
before
well.
F
Wait
till
the
developers
start
coming
to
you
and
say:
hey
we're
going
to
put
you
know
a
fourplex
on
her
on
here
or
a
six
Plex.
Now
we're
talking
some
really
big
money
and
that's
going
to
be
hard
to
say
no
to
that
and
I.
You
know:
Mikey
made
a
really
good
point
earlier
about
the
aesthetic
space
we
cannot.
This
is
really
for
I,
think
and
correct
me.
F
If
I'm
wrong,
it
seems
like
this
is
really
a
rubber
stamp
will
have
very
little
that
we
can
do
as
long
as
it
means
some
of
the
requirements
there
and
the
Aesthetics.
We
can't
change
unless
we
change
the
Aesthetics
for
the
entire
neighborhood
or
the
entire
single
family
housing.
So
we
have
very
little
control
here.
So
this
is
what
really
really
concerns
me,
as
well
as
the
the
the
the
local
control
and
I
want
to
work
regionally
and
I.
F
Think
councilmember
Stokes
makes
a
good
point
that
I
want
to
be
a
good
Regional
partner,
but
only
if
it
meets
the
interests
of
the
residents
of
the
city
of
Bellevue
and
I.
Don't
think
that
meets
this
standard
right
now,
so
right,
right
now,
I'm
leaning
towards
Economist,
because
I
really
feel
like
again.
We
need
to
make
a
stronger
statement
here.
They
need
to
know
that
it's
the
fifth
largest
city
in
the
state
they
need
to
come
and
work
with
us
on
some
of
these
real
core
issues
that
we
have
issues
with.
F
F
Those
people
that
have
earned
and
saved
like
myself
for
many
many
years,
because
I
wanted
to
live
in
Bellevue,
but
I
couldn't
afford
to
live
in
Bellevue
until
I
did
everything
I
could
put
myself
in
a
position
where
I
could
finally
get
there
and
then,
when
I
get
there
I'm,
not
sure
I
want
a
six
Plex
right
beside
me.
So
I
think
these
are
things
that
we
need
to
think
about
and
think
about
what
residents
see
their
neighborhood
and
see
their
City
growing.
So
so
those
are
my
comments.
Thank
you.
T
Thank
you.
You
know.
Bellevue
has
grown,
we've
grown
we've
added,
17,
000,
plus
housing
units.
In
the
last
20
years,
we've
added
almost
50
000
people
in
the
last
20
years.
We
are
growing
and
we
are
planning
for
it
and
we
are
delivering
housing
units.
Well,
we
need
to
do
more.
I
acknowledge
and
I
share
a
lot
of
Debbie
Mayer's
concerns.
That
said,
I
think
the
smart
thing
to
do
is
to
weigh
in
as
other
I
would,
as
I've
listened
to
everyone.
T
I've
heard
some
overlap
from
three
at
least
three,
if
not
four
council
members,
which
is
which
would
be
if
we
weigh
in
as
other
to
include
all
of
the
issues
that
the
staff
had
said
as
well
as
to
include
critical
areas,
infrastructure
impacts,
an
exemption
or
a
reasonable
Safe
Harbor
and
state
funding
for
infrastructure
and
affordable
housing.
T
So
if
we,
when
we
do
get
to
the
point
of
the
motion,
if
and
I'm
happy
to
make
it
I,
if
it's
made
as
it's
written
in
the
desk
or
in
the
agenda,
memo
I
would
like
to
add
those
four
items.
As
our
comment
letter,
because
I
think
that
that
more
more
accurately
captures
the
communication
and
the
discussion.
T
Items:
okay!
Well,
if
I
was
going
to
make
the
motion,
I
would
read
what's
in
the
gender
packet
but
then
also
add
and
critical
areas,
infrastructure
impacts,
creation
of
an
exemption
or
reasonable
Safe,
Harbor
and
state
funding
for
infrastructure
and
affordable
housing.
Those
are
the
four
things
I
would
add
to
the
motion
that
I
think
should
be
in
our
comment
letter
because,
as
as
a
couple
of
my
colleagues
up
here,
who
are
much
more
on
the
con
side,
we
have
some
serious
concerns
about
this
agenda
or
about
this
bill.
I.
T
V
My
two
cents
and
I'll-
let
everybody
kick
me
under
the
table
if
I
Stray
I,
think
those
would
be
welcome
additions
to
a
comment
letter.
The
one
clarifying
point
that
I
would
make
is
that
they're,
the
third
issue
around
a
safe
harbor
or
a
reasonable
exemption
is
already
in
the
bill
we
would
be
asking
for
them
to
as
Tacoma
is
to
make
that
much
more
clear
about
what
that
is.
So
it's
not
just
to
make
sure
everybody
understands.
We
would
not,
you
know,
be
showing
up
asking
for
an
exemption
for
Bellevue.
V
It
would
be
just
looking
working
with
that
existing
section
of
the
bill
to
really
help
cities
understand
how
do
I
get
there
right
if
I
want
to
do
it
my
way
and
I
don't
want
to
do
it
exactly
the
way
in
the
bill.
How
do
I
do
that
and
give
me
some
some
better
certainty
about
what
that
looks
like?
Is
that
fair,
so.
T
V
V
Talked
about
earlier
that
we
could,
you
could
add
some
additional
substance
to
what
that
might
look
like.
We
have.
We
are
planning
for
and
have
zoned
for
our
housing
targets
or
our
population
targets,
and
we
have
an
affordable
housing
plan.
You
started
to
enumerate
some
things
that,
if
put
together
substantially,
are
substantially
similar
to
what
they
we
could.
V
We
can
work
to
figure
out
what
that
exactly
looks
like,
but
I
think
that's
what
we're
trying
to
find
out,
which
is
what
is
the
formula
of
components
not
just
procedurally
but
substantively
right
that
are
that
are
equivalent
to
what
the
objectives
of
this
legislation
we're
not
trying
to
get
out
of
the
legislation,
we're
just
trying
to
add
the
components
together
in
a
way
that
does
it
in
in
a
kind
of
customized
format
for
our
city,
which
is
I,
think
what
Tacoma
sorry
to
keep
mentioning
them
is
trying
to
do.
No.
T
I
think
that
that's
exactly
right,
because
we
don't
know
we
may
not
necessarily
meet
it
by
the
four
plexes
everywhere,
but
we
might
meet
it
by
greater
density
around
our
Transit
stops
fourplexes
some
places
Cottage
something
you
know
you
you
get
me.
So
what
was
your
fourth
recommendation?
It
was
critical
areas,
infrastructure
impacts,
sussing
out
the
Safe,
Harbor
or
exemption,
and
fourth
state
funding
for
infrastructure
and
affordable
housing,
because
I've
heard
I
think
I
heard
at
least
five
council
members
talk
about.
We
need
more
money
for
infrastructure.
Q
Oh
yeah,
actually
I
I
appreciate
my
colleague,
councilman
Robertson
and
I
mean
Robins
Robertson,
Robertson
Robertson,
one
of
those
two
both
of
them
no
I
think
this
has.
This
has
been
a
great
conversation
and
the
and
this
issue
of
you
know
Bellevue
doing
alone
or
Bellevue
exemption
or
whatever
I
think
that
that's
I
can
understand
that.
But
I
think
that
by
taking
this
approach,
I
agree
with
all
that
councilman
Robertson
has
said:
I
appreciate
that
and
I
think
and
I
think
there's
some.
Q
Q
We
have
the
ability
to
do
it
in
a
in
a
way
that
does
not
negatively
affect
us
and
these
these
additions
that
help
a
lot
and
I
think
when
we
look
at
the
other
cities,
it
is
interesting
that
I
think
enough
cities
are
going
to
be
working
together
on
this
and
even
the
ones
who
want
to
go
ahead.
Q
Pro
they're
going
to
appreciate
this
and
we'll
work
with
them
and
I
think
it's
going
to
pass
in
one
way
or
the
other
anyhow,
but
I
think
we
can
have
a
greater
impact
by
doing
this
as
we're
talking
about
this
and
adding
these
pieces
in
there
and
and
I
hope
that
it
will
engender
some
other
cities
to
say:
okay,
let's,
let's
work
this
and
be
a
little
more,
have
some
flexibility
and
have
some
some
clear
goals
on
this
that
are
much
more
effective,
I!
Q
Think
it's
going
to
add
a
lot
to
it.
If
we
come
forward
with
this
approach
and
I
appreciate,
you
know,
you're
approaching
this
and
talking
about
this
right
at
the
beginning
and
figuring
this
out,
so
I'm
very
happy
with
our
resolution
on
this.
If
this
is
what
we
do
and
I
think
I
think
we
will
end
up
with
this
and
in
giving
us
something
we
wouldn't
I,
don't
think
really
expected.
We
would
ever
quite
get
something
that
this
powerful
in
the
long
run
that
will
help
us
in
this.
Q
So
I'm
I'm
very
happy
with
coming
to
this
resolution
of
this
and
and
going
forward.
Thank.
A
You
the
one
thing
that
if
we
were
to
adopt
council
member
Robertson's
recommendations,
I
would
like
to
on
that
fourth
bullet
point:
if,
if
the
council
agrees,
State
funding
for
infrastructure
and
affordable
housing,
home
ownership,
affordable
home.
A
And
just
to
be
clear,
you
know,
I
am
all
for
creating
more
affordable
housing
for
people,
it's
very
clear
on
the
spectrum
of
what
we
have
and
what
we
need.
There's
a
huge
hole
but
I
like
to
have
the
flexibility
to
work
with
yours.
You
staff
to
figure
out
how
we
best
do
that
in
Bellevue
and
I
think
that
we
have
we're
a
unique
City.
Every
city
is
different
and
I.
A
Think
Tacoma
is
is
a
leader
and
they
are
also
trying
to
refine
this
legislation
to
work
for
them
too,
because
they've
done
so
much
work.
But
you
know
we
have
so
many
opportu
opportunities
in
Bel
Red
in
Eastgate,
in
Wilburton
and
in
our
neighborhoods
that
we
need
to
be
hitting
it
at
every
every
way
we
can
and
as
soon
as
possible
and
I
and
I
I
have
confidence
that
we're
going
to
do
that.
A
A
R
Okay,
so
I
appreciate
recommendations
and
what
the
councilman
Robertson
mentioned,
and
we
heard
Le
Maya
then
just
add
to
something
and
I
heard:
Deputy
Mia
said
a
number
of
things:
I
mean
I,
can't
even
keep
track.
I
can't
take
notes
fast
enough
and
I've
heard
others
that
Express
opinions
and
I
haven't
really
said
anything
specific
or
too
many
of
them.
You
know
if
I
have
to
I'll,
probably
come
up
with
a
bunch
of
them.
You
know
pros
and
cons
or
amendments
so
on.
We
ever
heard
a
lot
of
things.
R
We're
still
talking
to
the
staff
we're
still
working
on
the
housing
situation,
we're
still
mainly
coming
through.
We
haven't
talked
to
the
public
yet
because
they
haven't
talked
to
it.
They
haven't
listened
to
us.
We
haven't
told
them
what
we
have
in
mind.
All
these
things,
good
I
believe.
However,
you
know
what
we're
doing
today
is
we're
giving
all
that
up
to
say:
okay,
we'll
go
along
with
you
guys,
state
legislature.
If
you
just
tell
us,
things
will
go
along
with
it.
That
is
not
what
we're
here
for
here's.
We
want
to
do
the
best.
R
We
can
right
to
give
us
the
opportunity
to
collaborate.
Work
with
the
state
legislators
work
with
other
cities
work
with
ourselves
with
our
staff.
You
know
we
just
don't
tell
you
I
want
you
to
do
and
we
just
cover.
Maybe
one
percent,
two
percent.
It
doesn't
matter
we're
right
now.
You
know
agree
or
disagree.
We
haven't
even
talked
about.
How
can
we
disagree
or
agree
or
just
listen
to
it
and
then
react
instantaneously?
We
can
spend
all
kind
of
time
talking
about
generally
likes
they've
bought
something
he
will
talk
about
equity
jealous.
R
We
all
have
okay,
so
my
thought
is
that
we
need
to
get
to
the
table
and
talk
to
the
still
escalator,
because
they
are
proposing
something
that
we
they
want
to
support
and
we
are
telling
that
no,
you
cannot
support
it
because
it's
not
complete.
It
doesn't
reflect
all
what
we
want
based
on
our
limited
discussion
just
in
one
one
evening,
one
session
so
to
do
that
is
we
have
to
be
at
the
table
like
you
said
to
be
at
tables
to
tell
them.
R
We
want
to
talk
to
you
because
we
disagree
not
just
that
we
go
along
with
you.
However,
can
we
do
this?
Can
we
do
that?
No
has
to
be
aggressive,
clear
message,
strong
message,
but
doesn't
mean
we
don't
talk
to
you,
no
still
I,
just
looking
at
us,
they
say:
well,
you
you
don't
really
mean
what
you
want.
You
say
yeah
we'll
go
along
with
you.
So
what
else
is
there?
How
do
we
follow
up?
That's
the
point.
R
You
know
we
have
to
really
be
working
together
to
do
that
is
we
have
to
say,
let's
get
together
real,
because
we
disagree.
I
mean
clear
message,
so
I
I
would
propose
if,
if
I
can
be
allowed,
I
will
I
will
move.
I
will
move
if
there's
a
second
to
say
can't
to
say
no
to
the
state
legislature's
Proposal,
with
a
big
big
request
where
you
want
to
work
with
you,
we
want
to
talk
to
you.
We
want
to
discuss.
What's
the
best
way
to
accomplish
your
goal
and
our
goal
and
every
other
cities
go.
A
R
F
My
video
direct
staff
to
weigh
in
as
other
on
House
Bill,
1110
and
Senate
Bill,
5190
and
draft
and
submitted
comment
letter
addressing
the
following
minimum
zoning
requirements
density
near
major
Transit
parking
requirements,
affordability,
critical
areas,
infrastructure
impacts,
clarifying
language
as
it
relates
to
Safe,
Harbor
and
state
funding
for
infrastructure
and
affordable
housing,
including
home
ownership.
F
A
A
C
Right,
thank
you,
mayor,
I,
guess.
Two
things
that
come
to
mind
for
me
is
I.
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if
we
could
frame
the
letter
in
a
way
that
says
we're
supportive
of
the
direction,
even
if
we're
signing
in
as
other
or
I
mean
commenting
as
other
meaning.
C
Because
I
mean
just
kind
of
going
back
to
what
I
mentioned
in
terms
of
acknowledging
the
role
that
the
state
is
planning
to
help
address,
impacts
from
historical
impacts
and
then
the
second
one
is
I,
guess
I'm
curious,
is
there
I
didn't
see
it
but
and
I
know
there's
the
model
and
if,
if
something
is
doesn't
happen,
I
think
it's
within
18
months
and
the
model
kicks
in
right
by
the
Commerce.
C
What
about
in
terms
of
performance
so
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
housing
that's
needed?
Is
there
any
performance,
modern
monitoring
on
a
regular
like
on
an
ongoing
basis,
maybe
annually
or
something
like
that?
Yeah.
T
A
On
hold
on
because
he
may
make
an
amendment
that
he's
he's
thinking
about
it,
but
I
want
to
take
your
first
point
please
and
you're,
suggesting
that
we,
when
we
direct
staff
to
create
a
letter,
if
that's
what
we
end
up
doing
that,
addresses
the
points
that
we
have
in
our
motion.
You're
asking
that
we
can
come
in
with
a
friendly
tone
saying
that
and
I
don't
think
that
that
is
outside,
unless
somebody
is
opposed
to
doing
that.
I
think
that's
just
part
of
the
way
the
letter
is
written.
A
So
is
there
anybody
opposed
to
that.
T
A
V
Think
you,
you
would
word
it
as
being
supportive
of
the
objectives
not
necessarily
of
the
bill,
but
the
policy
objectives
that
motivate
the
conversation
which
are
around
finding
collaborative
I
would
actually
look
at
some
of
our
own
State
Legislative
agenda
language,
which
is
actually
pretty
good.
That
says,
we
want
a
bounce
collaborative
approach
that
Embraces
adding
more
housing,
opportunities,
availability
and
affordability
in
our
city.
I
think
we
can
come
up
with
language
that
doesn't
say
we
support
this
bill
and
we
respectfully
want
a
whole
list.
V
P
A
C
Right
and
the
reason
is
I
think
you
know,
given
that,
given
over
the
years,
the
Gap
has
been
widening,
I,
think
and
given
the
objectives
of
this
bill
like
being
able
to
Monitor
and
then
correct
sooner
rather
than
later,
based
on
the
policy.
So
maybe
some
of
these
elements
trigger
based
on
how
things
are
going
with
implementation.
Well,.
A
I
will
say
that
I
think
that's
a
very
good
idea,
but
I
think
that
our
city
should
be
in
charge
of
our
metrics
and
we
can
submit
them.
I
mean
there's
so
many
opportunities
to
weigh
in
in
the
affordable
housing
committee
and
the
the
AWC,
affordable
housing.
So
I'm
not
sure
that
I
agree
that
we
need
to
include
that
in
this.
But
I
don't
know
if.
Q
Q
And
it's
that's,
there's
some
nuances
on
that.
But
overall
that's
that
will
help
us
yeah.
It's
just
not
you
don't
want
it
to
pop
in
there
and
there's
and
they
start
saying
well
build
you
is
trying
to
you
know,
do
something,
so
it
just
keep
this
clean
bill
and
then
your
comments
and
and
definitely
make
those
I
think
that's
a
good
idea.
Council.
U
V
U
V
A
Okay,
okay,
so
that
is
speaking
to
the
motion.
That's
on.
A
Our
University
I
get
it
I
think
it
should
be
substantively
not
substantially,
but
anyway
we're
wordsmithing.
Here
anybody
have
any
comments
or
questions
on
the
motion
on
the
table.
A
R
B
A
Know
he
can
I
was
saying:
I
would
prefer
sorry,
but
anyway,
let's
go
ahead
and
continue
speaking
to
the
motion
on
the
table,
and
why
don't
you
reiterate
what
it
is,
please
I
think
actually
Deputy
dimaria
the
one
who
made.
F
It
okay
I,
moved
to
direct
staff
to.
A
T
Just
wanted
to
respond
to
a
couple
of
the
ideas
about
the
Safe
Harbor
I
respect
the
ideas
I
would
be
hesitant
to
add
restrictive
language
in
the
letter.
I
think
keeping
it
a
little
bit
more
broad
gives
our
staff
and
our
lobbyists
more
flexibility
in
terms
of
helping
craft
it
and
seeing
what
will
happen.
They
know
what
we're
saying,
I
think
without
adding
restrictive
language
to
the
letter,
so
I
support
the
motion
as
written
and
I
will
vote.
Yes,
thank
you.
U
So,
okay.
Q
Isn't
that
in
the
in
there
anyhow,
currently
Safe
Harbor.
V
One
speaks
to
how
the
department,
being
the
Department
of
Commerce
May,
approve
actions
under
the
section
for
cities
that
have
adopted
permanent
development
regulations
that
are
substantially
similar
to
the
requirements
of
the
ACT.
That's
what
we
want
to
get
some
better
clarification
on
following.
V
That
is
the
second
thing
that
has,
in
last
year's
Bill,
been
referred
to
kind
of
sort
of
as
the
Safe
Harbor,
which
says
any
local
actions
approved
by
the
department,
blah
blah
blah
blah
to
implement
the
requirements
under
section
three
are
exempt
from
appeals
under
this
chapter,
so
those
are
that
they're
kind
of
two
different
components
of
this
part
of
the
bill,
one
that
says
that
the
Department
of
Commerce
can
approve
cities
that
have
taken
actions
that
are
substantially
similar
again.
That's
where
we're
seeking
some
much
greater.
You
know.
V
Look
like
how
do
I
do
it,
how
do
I,
how
do
I
proceed
in
that
direction
and
then,
following
that
is
for
those
that
have
had
those
actions
approved
by
the
Department
of
Commerce,
then
they
are
exempt
from
appeals,
so
they're
they're,
just
right
next
to
each
other,
but
I
think
what
we
want.
A
clarification
of
I'm
not
trying
to
Mr
cotterman.
Is
that
first
section
which
is
around
the
substantially
similar
and
how
do
we?
How
do
we
get
clarification
so.
E
V
M
U
What
I'm
hearing
from
the
council
I
think
yeah?
So
that
would
be
the
amendment
I
would
like
to
make
is
if
Mr
cotterman
you
come
up
with
the
right
words.
There
I
did
have
a
visceral
response
to
the
word
Safe
Harbor
that
could
be
perceived
as
conveying
that
we're
just
safe
from
whatever's
in
this
bill.
Not
our
problem
so.
A
M
V
I
would
I
would
say
and
again
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
turn
all
this
into
a
letter,
but
I
would
say
it
is
around
providing
additional
clarity.
V
Yeah,
we
can
cite
it
section
four
subsection
3B-
to
give
better
guidance
about
what
would
qualify
as
development
regulations
that
are
substantially
similar.
Q
Q
A
Yeah
I
think
the
motion
is
similar
and
I
think
that
we
can
take
the
advice
of
writing
it
that
way
from
the
staff,
okay
and
so
I.
Don't
think
we
need
to.
A
It
and
it's
recommended
by
staff,
so
that's
good,
so
any
other!
Thank
you
for
your
input,
any
other
comments
or
questions
on
the
motion.
That's
on
the
table.
Okay,
so
I
hear
councilmember
lee
a
little
bird
told
me
that
you
have
a
substitute
motion,
you'd
like
to
make.
R
A
R
It's
necessary,
you
know,
I,
would
say
we
would
still
convey
to
the
legislature.
We
would
appreciate,
and
what
they're
working
on
similar
goals
we
want
to
collaborate
with
them
work
with
them
work
through
the
whole
process.
It's
not
a
negative
thing.
It's
a
positive
thing
to
create
better
engagement,
bad
involvement
and
more
effective
housing
policy.