Planning Commission recommends 2026 omnibus land-use code amendments after debate over tree-credit rules

The Bellevue Planning Commission on May 13 voted to recommend the 2026 omnibus land use code amendment to the City Council after a staff presentation and debate over how the city should credit property-line trees.

Code and Policy Director Nick Whipple told the commission the omnibus package is primarily cleanup and state-law compliance with a handful of narrowly scoped policy changes. He said staff moved the SR1 (suburban residential 1) district into a different tree-credit category after seeing redevelopment projects that required unusually large tree plantings or high fees in lieu — in one case triggering fees "upwards of $150,000," Whipple said. The package also restores conditional-use-permit language requiring consistency with the comprehensive plan and updates residential lot-splitting rules to align with recent guidance from the Department of Commerce.

"This is really the category of change that's around scrivener's errors, some clarifications," Whipple said. He added the lot-splitting update follows Commerce guidance that prevents using the ministerial lot-split mechanism more than once on the same parcel; resulting lots may still be subdivided later through conventional short-plat processes.

The most contested subject during commissioner discussion was how to credit "property-line trees" — trees whose trunks or root systems sit on or across lot lines. Whipple said staff proposed treating a tree whose trunk falls on a property line as a property-line tree and giving it a 0.5 credit per lot to provide some incentive to retain shared trees. He said the code had previously been silent on the matter and that giving no credit had removed an incentive to keep trees.

Commissioner Hamishan Dinchan countered that giving full credit could result in "too many credits for too few trees" and might reduce the overall number of trees. "I am against this amendment," Dinchan said, arguing that generous credits for shared roots could let parcels meet thresholds without planting trees on their own lots.

Commissioner Valavezas moved an amendment to change the definition of a property-line tree from a trunk-based test to one based on an "inner root system," arguing it would better protect shared organisms where canopy and roots cross lot lines. Staff and several commissioners pushed back on implementation questions: Whipple said he was "not familiar with the term" as an industry-standard, called for alignment with arborist practice, and warned about administrative complexity. After discussion the amendment failed on a vote.

Several public speakers addressed the hearing. Jesse Clausen, speaking for McCullough Hill, urged the commission to forward the package to council and supported code language added for the East Main transit-oriented district. A resident from an SR1 neighborhood said homeowners valued mature trees and wildlife habitat — including bald eagle and blue heron sightings — and asked the commission to keep SR1 protections until the city could analyze neighborhood functions as potential wildlife refuge.

The commission unanimously (by voice vote) carried the main motion to recommend the omnibus package to the City Council; Chair Han Lu said staff would bring the recommendation to council in June with a possible council action in July. The package includes cleanup edits, state-law updates, SR1 tree-credit recalibration, a residential fee-in-lieu option for East Main comparable to commercial developments, restored conditional-use-permit criteria, and Commerce-aligned changes to lot-splitting rules.

The commission rejected the amendment to credit trees on the basis of an inner-root definition but asked staff during discussion to consider neighborhood-specific protections (for example, conversations with the Kelsey Creek neighborhood) and to ensure thresholds do not unintentionally prevent EV-charging infrastructure by triggering full tree-code compliance on minor parking reconfigurations.

The planning commission approved the April 8 minutes and adjourned the meeting.