1 / 16

Downtown Livability Initiative

Downtown Livability Initiative. Advisory Committee Meeting #3 July 17, 2013 6:30 p.m. Overall Process. Public Scoping (Nov 2012) Land Use Code Audits (June 2013) WE ARE HERE – July 2013 Identification of Range of Alternatives Analysis of Alternatives

zaza
Download Presentation

Downtown Livability Initiative

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Downtown Livability Initiative Advisory Committee Meeting #3 July 17, 2013 6:30 p.m.

  2. Overall Process • Public Scoping (Nov 2012) • Land Use Code Audits (June 2013) • WE ARE HERE – July 2013 • Identification of Range of Alternatives • Analysis of Alternatives • Identification of Preferred Alternatives • Alternatives Refinement and Development of Final Recommendations • Transmittal of Recommendation from Advisory Committee to Council • Review by Planning Commission • City Council Consideration/Adoption Process Continuous Public Engagement

  3. July 9-10 Open Houses/Focus Groups • Focus Group Guide w/ summary info on code audits & specific questions; Full audits available as well • 45 individuals attended • About half new to Livability focus groups/did not attend in March • Comment cards to continue to come in through July 31; report completed thereafter

  4. Downtown Subarea Lake Washington Single Family 100th Ave NE NE 12th St Single Family Main St Single Family I-405

  5. Series of Neighborhoods/Districts

  6. Signature Streets

  7. Ideas Generated from Past Work

  8. Questions: Building Height and Form • Key policy issues: Should building heights and their urban form be modified to better achieve the Downtown vision? • If so, what areas should be analyzed (Core, Mixed-Use District, DT-OLB District, Ashwood, Old Bellevue, Perimeter Areas, others)? And why? • Should iconic roof features be allowed to exceed building height limits? If so, where should this be analyzed? • Should differences between residential and non-residential buildings be addressed? • Should provisions for increased floor plates above certain thresholds be studied? What areas should be analyzed?

  9. Previous Committee Comments Building Height and Form: Summary of 6/19 Discussion • Iconic skyline would be good for Bellevue; different ways to accomplish. • The wedding cake approach is appropriate; Take terrain/topography into consideration relative to the wedding cake. • Examine increased building heights, particularly in the core area (though there are limited properties that would be benefit in DT-01). • DT-OLB could support more height, though avoid creation of a wall from I-405. • Flexibility to look at heights on a site-by-site basis to result in better overall effect. • Consider increasing floor plate sizes for some of the districts. • Equalize the FAR between residential and non-residential. • Density transfer could be used to support affordable housing. • Allow height to create more open space, green spaces, places to play recreate. • Changing architectural form of buildings is easier for residential towers. • If the base density (FAR) is not economically viable, it should not be in the code.

  10. From July 9/10 Focus Groups Building Height and Form: July Focus Groups/Comments • Examine taller heights; a lot of Bellevue buildings feel short and boxy; would allow for more open space • Should not alter “wedding cake” approach too much • Like unusual building designs – adds interest to the skyline • Additional height could be appropriate in Core and DT-OLB • Should be variation built into height system (certain % difference) • Caution in Perimeter Areas, protect adjacent neighborhoods • Be careful about anything that adds to traffic impacts • Iconic roof features are very important • Height and density provisions should favor residential; opposing view is that development type should follow the market • Look at needs of employers regarding floor plates

  11. Questions: Amenity Incentive System • Key policy issue: How should the Amenity Incentive System be updated to meet evolving market conditions and integrate newer thinking about desired Downtown amenities? • What existing amenities do you think provide a high level of public benefit? • Are there new items missing that should be analyzed for potential inclusion? • Should a fee-in-lieu system be considered?

  12. Previous Committee Comments Amenity Incentive System: Summary of 6/19 Discussion • Amenities should enhance livability for Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. • Make Downtown more inviting and friendly to families. • Existing policy direction regarding housing affordability. • More flexibility and needs to make economic sense. • Remove amenities that are not having any effect. • Move some items from amenity list to requirements (e.g. weather protection). • Consider items such as fire station, public parking facility, incentives for iconic building features and green spaces. • Assess the need for a school and get input from BSD.

  13. From July 9/10 Focus Groups Amenity Incentive System: July Focus Groups/Comments • Update system to allow greater flexibility now and evolve over time with changing needs. • Customize amenities by Downtown neighborhood. • Use tiers of amenities; let developers choose from grouping • Consider how affordable housing could be included in system. • Focus on pedestrian experience, including outdoor plazas, green spaces, parks, etc. • More attention to: water features, drop-off areas, green space, entertainment, art, recreation. • A fee-in-lieu system should be one of the options considered.

  14. Questions: Design Guidelines • Key policy issue: How should design guidelines be refined to improve the livability and character of Downtown? • As the design guidelines are reviewed, what elements should receive the most attention? • How can the guidelines ensure quality design, while providing a balance between predictability and flexibility?

  15. From July 9/10 Focus Groups Design Guidelines: July Focus Groups/Comments • Focus on the pedestrian experience when looking at guidelines; including Pedestrian Corridor guidelines • Attention should be given to creating distinct Downtown district/neighborhoods • Guidelines need to provide more clarity throughout – be less subjective • Concern about more above-grade structured parking – urban design implications

  16. Next Steps • Next scheduled Advisory Committee Meeting, Sept. 18 • Ideas for additional stakeholder engagement in September

More Related