• Can the City produce the specific citation it's relying on and explain why access-point security (as used elsewhere in the region) isn't sufficient here? Reservoirs just like this one, a few miles away, gave the neighborhood a park instead of a fence once they were buried. We're not asking Bellevue to do something new — we're asking it to do what's already worked close by.

• Will the City evaluate access-point-only security as an alternative to fencing? You picked this site and told us, in writing, that it was to preserve our open space. A fence around the reservoir doesn't preserve open space — it replaces open space with a locked utility yard.

• Has the City assessed the potential property-value impact of a fenced, visible utility structure on the roughly two dozen homes immediately surrounding this site? If not, will the City commission or review an independent analysis before finalizing the design? This isn't an abstract number to us — it's our home equity. A fenced industrial-looking site next door is a cost the City would be imposing on this neighborhood without ever putting it on the City's own books.

• Can the City provide a side-by-side cost and lifecycle comparison between full perimeter fencing and access-point-only security (locked, alarmed hatches and vents), so the neighborhood can see whether cost rather than security is driving this design choice?

• What is the firm date by which the fencing concept will be finalized, and will the City commit to sharing the revised concept with the neighborhood for comment before it's locked into permitted construction documents?

• Will the City commit in writing to an access-point-only security design, or provide a written explanation of why that approach used elsewhere in the region isn't viable here?

This....

Or this.....?

Your choice. Email council@bellevuewa.gov