Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council continues appeal over proposed concrete retaining wall at 62 Alcatraz Avenue
Summary
The applicant appealed a planning-commission condition requiring stone cladding for a proposed concrete retaining wall; after applicant, staff and neighbors spoke about code consistency and neighborhood disruption, the council continued the appeal to let the applicant work with staff on alternatives.
Staff summarized the planning commission’s conditional approval for a retaining wall at 62 Alcatraz Avenue and explained the commission conditioned the approval on facing the new 4-foot wall with stone to avoid a large monolithic plane of a single material, citing Bellevue municipal code design standards (BMC 20.04.130 and 20.04.140).
The applicant’s representative urged the council to treat the project consistently with other concrete retaining walls on the island and cited construction difficulty and neighborhood disruption if stone cladding were required. “What we'd like to do is put in a retaining wall to replace the rock wall that's fallen down right now,” the applicant said, describing a structural need and citing cost and a multiweek road-closure impact if cladding were imposed.
Neighbors and council members pushed back, emphasizing the island’s stone-wall character and the planning code’s requirement that large retaining-wall surfaces be textured, colored, or faced with compatible materials; a neighbor warned that a three-week cladding operation would severely disrupt traffic on Corinthian Island. Council members debated whether the code compelled cladding, whether textured concrete could meet the code, and whether imposing cladding on a repair case was appropriate.
Rather than immediately overturn the planning commission’s action, the council continued the hearing and directed the applicant to discuss alternatives with staff and return with options that might meet the code while limiting neighborhood disruption. No final vote was taken on the merits; the item will return to council after applicant–staff follow-up.
