Bellevue considers ‘megahouse’ limits

In a move that could reverberate at Kirkland City Hall, the Bellevue City Council considered Monday whether to proceed with a second round of regulations to limit the impacts of “teardown” development – the replacement of older homes with large new residences that may seem out-of-scale compared to existing neighborhood development.

In a move that could reverberate at Kirkland City Hall, the Bellevue City Council considered Monday whether to proceed with a second round of regulations to limit the impacts of “teardown” development – the replacement of older homes with large new residences that may seem out-of-scale compared to existing neighborhood development.

Meeting after the Reporter’s deadline in study session at Bellevue City Hall, the Council discussed a list of recommendations from staff and the Planning Commission to address concerns about neighborhood redevelopment. Among the recommendations, significant proposals were to:

Apply development standards – protecting adjacent neighbors’ privacy and access to sunlight – to new single-family structures whose total square footage exceeds 50 percent of the building lot square footage;

Establish placement requirements for mechanical equipment installed with new single family home construction;

Increase the tree retention requirement from 15 percent to 30 percent for infill development in single-family residential zones;

And revise noise construction hours for remodels and additions to 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays.

Bellevue initiated its inquiry into redevelopment impacts in early 2007 after a flood of complaints about the impacts of construction, loss of trees and greenscape, loss of sunlight and privacy and disruption of neighborhood character due to teardown and infill activity. Kirkland City Hall has received similar concerns relating to the growth of “megahomes.”

Last December, the Bellevue Council adopted relatively simple Phase One code changes to address neighborhood redevelopment concerns. Phase Two changes that came before the Council on Monday were more complex and potentially more controversial.