Property Tax Search
Home › Comp Plans › Bellingham › Community Design
Bellingham · BEL-CP-2006 · Pages CD-1 to CD-17

Community Design

Chapter 8 establishes community design goals and policies for the City of Bellingham covering general design standards, city center and Fairhaven character, multi-family housing design, urban village planning, parking lot design, residential design, and street design. The chapter aims to ensure new development reinforces community identity, supports pedestrian orientation, and complements the downtown and waterfront as focal points of the community. It provides 76 numbered policy statements guiding design review, streetscape improvements, landscaping requirements, and the development of urban villages throughout the city.

Community Design Economy Environment Social Safety

“Only 2 of 76 Community Design policies (3%) include a concrete, measurable commitment.” Real Record SAY vs DO analysis · Bellingham Comprehensive Plan

About this analysis

Real Record applies the SAY vs DO accountability framework to every chapter of every Washington comprehensive plan we publish. Each policy in the chapter is read individually and scored into one of four buckets:

  • Measurable — the policy names a specific target, deadline, dollar amount, or action that can be verified later.
  • Strong — binding action language (“shall,” “will adopt,” “require”) without a measurable threshold.
  • Aspirational — encouraging or supportive language (“encourage,” “support,” “consider”) with no enforcement.
  • Monitor only — policies that commit to tracking or reporting but not to action.

The accountability score shown in the sidebar is the share of policies in the chapter that landed in the “Measurable” bucket. A score of 0–19 (red) indicates most policies use aspirational language without concrete accountability; 20–49 (orange) is mixed; 50 or higher (green) means the chapter is dominated by measurable commitments.

The underlying text comes from the official adopted comprehensive plan published by the Bellingham planning department. Scoring is performed by Real Record analysts using a structured rubric; the raw policy text and bucket assignments are archived in the Real Record civic data warehouse.

Read the full methodology, sources, and rubric at Real Record · About.

Goals (23 total)
  • CDG-1: Promote improvement in quality of public, residential, commercial and industrial development through high standards
  • CDG-2: Interconnect parks and natural features through integrated network of trails, parks and open spaces
  • CDG-3: Allow for growth and diversity through adaptable standards
  • CDG-4: Successfully integrate mixed use development within four types of urban villages
  • CDG-5: Landmark buildings in city center and Fairhaven continue to be restored and reused
  • CDG-6: Zoning results in construction of innovative housing types in appropriate areas
  • CDG-7: Promote community identity by emphasizing city center's natural assets and human scale
  • CDG-8a: City has created and implemented design review process to ensure city center remains dominant visual area
  • CDG-8b: City Center design review process results in development consistent with downtown remaining dominant visual area
  • CDG-9: New land uses that promote public access to and along Bellingham Bay waterfront are encouraged
  • CDG-10: Retain compact form, pedestrian orientation and unique qualities of Fairhaven
  • CDG-11: Promote use of public spaces such as Fairhaven Village Green as meeting spaces
  • CDG-12: Improve living environment and design characteristics of Bellingham's multi-family housing
  • CDG-13: Increase awareness of what constitutes good multifamily design
  • CDG-14: Multifamily design standards reflect city's commitment to good design and respect for existing neighborhoods
  • CDG-15: Multifamily developments provide pleasant and safe housing with convenient access to community services
  • CDG-16: Builders and developers provided with clear objectives and performance goals for multifamily housing quality
  • CDG-17: Neighborhood and pocket urban villages are compatible with scale and character of surrounding neighborhood
  • CDG-18: Neighborhood and pocket urban villages provide focal point for commercial, civic and recreational activities
  • CDG-19: Neighborhood and pocket urban villages promote reduced automobile dependency and increased pedestrian/transit access
  • CDG-20: Neighborhood and pocket urban villages accessed by pedestrian scale streets
  • CDG-21: Enhance function, safety and appearance of Bellingham's arterial streets
  • CDG-22: Create safe neighborhood street system in network configuration that prevents rapid or high volume traffic
  • CDG-23: City streets encourage pedestrian activity with livelier street edges
Stronger Policy Language (30 policies in this chapter)
  • CDP-12: No increase in the number of billboard signs existing at the date of adoption of this plan should be allowed in the city or in the urban growth areas.
  • CDP-14: Maintain and enhance the city center character, which includes pedestrian oriented storefronts and pedestrian scaled streetscapes, through specific attention to architectural detail.
  • CDP-44: Landscaping and/or screening walls should be required to reduce the visual impact of large parking lots associated with residential and commercial uses.
  • CDP-52: All buildings should front on a public or private street. Building facades should relate to the street and clear pedestrian entries should be provided from the street.
  • CDP-66: Overhead utilities should be placed underground whenever new streets are constructed or new utilities are added to existing streets.
  • CDP-69: A safe school route program should be defined and promoted. The designated routes to schools should be improved where necessary to assure safe passage.
Show all 30 stronger policies
The four examples above are a representative sample. The remaining 26 stronger policies are catalogued in the Real Record civic data warehouse and indexed by policy number against the adopted plan text. See how policies are scored →
Aspirational / Monitoring Language (44 policies in this chapter)
  • CDP-2: Consider establishing building height and bulk rules for all areas of the city as part of defining the "character" of each area.
  • CDP-8: Future extension of lineal commercial development along arterials in areas already developed should be discouraged.
  • CDP-19: Encourage the development of public art features with all new development.
  • CDP-22: Canopies along the fronts of buildings should be encouraged where appropriate to provide rain shelter for pedestrians.
  • CDP-41: Encourage side and rear yard parking by restricting parking in front yards. Require extensive screening in front yard parking areas.
  • CDP-47: Encourage more efficient use of the land through devices such as use of substandard lots of record, flexible building setbacks and lot widths.
  • CDP-57: Energy efficient design should be encouraged in all residential structures.
  • CDP-61: Encourage a modified grid road system for new developments in areas where fairly level topographical conditions exist.
  • CDP-63: Encourage the inclusion of street-side parking, bicycle lanes, setback sidewalks and planting strips on all new and retrofitted secondary arterials.
  • CDP-75: Poster columns or kiosks which permit posting of information regarding upcoming events should be available in civic center, downtown, university or other areas.
Show all 44 aspirational / monitoring policies
The four examples above are a representative sample. The remaining 40 policies in this bucket use language like “encourage,” “support,” “consider,” or “monitor” — phrasing that does not create an enforceable commitment. See how policies are scored →

SAY vs DISCUSS: Did this come up in meetings?

Real Record has not yet indexed any Bellingham briefings tagged to this chapter’s topics. Browse all Bellingham council and planning briefings to see related discussions in context.

View Bellingham Briefings →

SAY vs DO: Where the Money Goes

Departments related to Community Design in Bellingham — what the city actually funds, year over year.

Budget analysis for this chapter is in progress. Real Record has mapped 1 Bellingham department to this chapter, but the FY2006 / FY2025 line-item totals are not yet loaded into our civic data warehouse. In the meantime, browse the city-wide budget comparison on the index page.