Bellevue Parks Board recommends Alternative F for Ashwood Park master plan and endorses official name

The Bellevue Parks and Community Services Board voted to recommend Alternative F as the preferred update to the 1990 Ashwood Park master plan and to forward the official name “Ashwood Park” to the City Council for adoption.

Pam Fairman, capital projects manager for the Parks and Community Services Department, told the board the update covers roughly a 2.5‑acre study area within a 3.5‑acre site downtown and will be transmitted to City Council for direction and environmental review if the council concurs. “We are seeking your Ashwood site master plan and name recommendation this evening that we will then be transmitting to city council,” Fairman said.

Why it matters: Downtown Bellevue has experienced substantial growth since the original plan was adopted in 1990. The recommended Alternative F responds to neighborhood preference for open green space while adding amenities the community requested during outreach, including walking paths, picnic shelters, restrooms, a children’s play area and a formally designed off‑leash area for dogs.

The plan alternatives and public input

City staff said outreach for the master plan included five public meetings, pop‑ups at the King County Library System branch at 10210 NE Tenth Street, mailed invitations to about 6,500 nearby addresses and two follow‑up surveys. In the final survey, staff reported 171 community responses. Fairman summarized preferences: landscape and walking paths ranked highest; respondents generally opposed adding a community center, sports fields or affordable housing on the site.

Two updated alternatives were presented to the board. Alternative F emphasizes a more traditional, rectilinear layout with terrace seating, two picnic shelters, a restroom, a formal play area and an off‑leash dog area of about a quarter acre. Alternative G uses a more curvilinear layout, a larger off‑leash area (about a half acre) and integrates an art‑oriented play zone into the lawn. Staff estimated the park will require roughly 14–21 parking spaces in the park lot; a separate loading zone would support events.

Survey and meeting feedback tended to favor Alternative F: Fairman said about 60 percent of respondents preferred F to G, with 33 percent preferring G; 58 percent selected the smaller off‑leash area while 32 percent selected the larger option. Board members and staff repeatedly noted that while the surveys reflect the responses of engaged neighbors, the results are not a statistically representative citywide poll.

Board discussion and concerns

Board members who spoke said they favored different elements but generally supported F as a balanced option. Elizabeth (Parks and Community Services Board member) said, “I love the name Ashwood Park, and I love, alternative F as well.” Michelle (Board member) summarized: “My heart is with Design G, but my head is with design F.” Paul (Board member) said he “very, very, very strongly support[ed] option F.”

Members raised several design and operational concerns for staff to carry forward, including: - The proximity of the proposed off‑leash dog area to the children’s play area and strategies to reduce conflicts (double‑door entry, clear signage, screening and thoughtful gate placement). - Risk that an undesignated open lawn could continue to be used as informal off‑leash space; staff noted education, ranger visits and temporary off‑leash pilots elsewhere as mitigation tools. - Parking and access coordination with the adjacent King County Library System garage; staff said multiple conversations are underway but any shared‑use arrangement would require library agreement.

Decisions and next steps

After deliberation, the board voted to recommend Alternative F as the preferred update to the 1990 Ashwood Park master plan and to recommend the official park name “Ashwood Park” to the City Council. The board chair called the motion, a motion was made and the board voted in favor; the transcript records the board’s recommendation as approved.

Fairman said the project is funded by the city’s 2022 levy and that council consideration and direction to proceed to environmental review are expected in 2026; construction could begin in late 2027 or 2028 if the council adopts the updated plan and funding remains available.

What’s next: Staff will summarize the board’s discussion, including the concerns and recommendations about off‑leash adjacency, parking and play elements, and include those points in the submittal to City Council for its review and direction on environmental review and permitting.

Ending

The Parks and Community Services Board completed its motions and closed the discussion on Ashwood Park before moving to the meeting’s remaining agenda items.