Bellevue staff seek council guidance on Maidenbower Bay Park phase 2 design and phasing

Bellevue parks staff asked the City Council on May 13 for guidance to move the Maidenbower Bay Park project into design and engineering for phase 2, outlining a conceptual plan that would create a new gateway plaza at Main Street, relocate and consolidate parking off the shoreline, extend a shoreline promenade and defer more costly marina and bay‑connector elements to later phases.

The work follows the council‑adopted Maidenbower Bay Park and Land Use Plan (2010) and phase‑1 construction completed in 2019; staff said phase‑2 design would implement the master plan while responding to contemporary priorities such as the Grand Connection and multimodal access. The city identified roughly $35 million in current Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funding for phase‑2 concept elements; staff estimated three years for design and permitting with construction targeted for about 2028–29.

Parks staff described the proposed scope: a larger, accessible plaza and pedestrian connection at Main Street and Southeast 100th, a stepped but ADA‑accessible route from the plaza down to the promenade that avoids elevator reliance, relocation of shoreline parking into the gateway parcel to reduce parking directly on the lake edge, and a new elevated ‘bay connector’ and canopy walk that would provide an iconic promenade into the water. Staff proposed deferring expensive elements—specifically the marina reconfiguration and the bay connector—into a later phase to manage cost and sequencing.

Public speakers from the Maidenbower Bay neighborhood and the Maidenbower Bay Neighbors Association told the council they supported waterfront access but urged the city to pause and address detailed concerns before progressing to contract. Speakers said the phase‑2 concept removes a significant number of marina parking stalls used by marina tenants, could create additional traffic and parking strain, and might alter neighborhood character. Several speakers asked that the Park Board formally review Berger’s report and that staff respond to written comments the neighborhood provided. Some condo‑building residents said they had not seen story poles or visualizations showing structure heights and requested more detailed answers about staging, construction impacts, lighting and safety.

Council members praised the parks team’s extensive outreach—staff said they had about 13,600 engagement touchpoints over two years—but several asked that the parks department return with more detail before authorizing contract work. Key requests included: clearer parking and transition plans so marina tenants and park patrons have sufficient stalls during construction and after reconfiguration; visual simulations (story poles or massing studies) showing proposed heights and sight‑line impacts to adjacent residences; a financing picture showing gaps and contingency plans beyond the identified $35 million; and continued, targeted engagement with the Maidenbower Bay neighborhood and the Park Board before phase‑2 contracting.

Staff said the proposed phase‑2 scope focuses effort on the gateway parcel and a segment of the shoreline promenade as a near‑term implementable package, while leaving Lake Washington Boulevard improvements, Sunset Terrace work and marina/bay‑connector elements for later phases. Staff also noted the 2010 master plan had envisioned a smaller marina footprint in later phases; resolving marina slip counts and tenant impacts would be part of any future marina redesign.

No contract award or final authorization took place at the May 13 meeting; council members asked staff to incorporate the council’s questions into a follow‑up report and to seek feedback from the two absent council members before the item returns. Staff also said they would pursue grant opportunities and refine their cost estimates for a future phase‑2 authorization.