Bellevue Planning Commission Study Session on HOMA and Downtown Code Amendments – September 15, 2025

Note: The transcript indicates the meeting took place on September 10, 2025, but the provided date is September 15, 2025. This summary uses the provided date. The meeting was held in hybrid format, with both in-person and virtual attendance. The primary agenda was a study session on the Housing Opportunity in Mixed-Use Areas (HOMA) land use code amendment, including both citywide and downtown provisions. A second study session on the planning commission's role and responsibilities was postponed to September 24, 2025.

Consent Calendar

• Approved the agenda unanimously.
• Approved minutes from July 9 and July 23, 2025.
• No reports from boards or commissions.
• Staff liaison Kate provided updates: The planning commission retreat moved to November 5, 2025; council rescheduled November 11 meeting to November 12 due to Veterans Day.

Public Comments & Testimony

Seventeen people registered to speak, with public comment extended by 20 minutes (total 50 minutes). Key speakers and positions:

• Leslie Geller (Eastgate resident): Objected to Eastgate Plaza area being rezoned to Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMU), arguing it is not on the periphery of higher density districts.
• Deborah Deutsch (Newport Hills resident, Newport Community Coalition): Expressed strong support for redevelopment of Newport Hills Shopping Center, supporting housing and affordable housing.
• Stuart Campbell (longtime Newport Hills resident): Supported redevelopment of Newport Hills Shopping Center, urging approval of HOMA standards for NB zone.
• Sandra Valstar (Newport Hills resident): Expressed strong support for HOMA, urged focus on neighborhood revitalization and transit service improvements.
• Steve Kunkel (Newport Hills resident, 41 years): Supported redevelopment of the shopping center, highlighted housing crisis and need for workforce housing.
• Jody Alberts (Bellevue Chamber's Plush Committee): Supported HOMA's intent but raised concerns about affordability requirements, parking, design standards; requested delaying public hearing to work through issues.
• Rachel Mazer (land use attorney for EGBW 38R owner LLC): Expressed strong support for removing density limits in OLB zone, requested flexibility in impervious surface cap, design standards, and bonus formula.
• Sue Baugh (Lake Heights resident, Newport Community Coalition): Supported HOMA and redevelopment of Newport Hills Shopping Center, no support for 7-10 stories.
• Matt Rowe (architect working with Newport Hills Shopping Center owners): Supported draft standards for NB zone, clarified height limits and FAR ratios, urged endorsement.
• Heidi Dean (Newport Hills resident): Opposed scheduling public hearing without adequate outreach; noted Newport Hills Shopping Center owners allowed deterioration.
• Ben Mickle (downtown Bellevue resident): Supported HOMA goals, urged no drive-throughs in high-density areas, lower parking requirements, and elimination of parking mandates.
• Brady Nordstrom (Housing Development Consortium, East Side Affordable Housing Coalition): Supported Option A (mandatory 10% affordable housing at 80% AMI), argued it is well-calibrated and lightest touch in region.
• Kevin Wallace (developer): Expressed desire to build affordable housing downtown but said current code is too complex and expensive; requested incentives, voluntary approach, and fixing code issues.
• Martin Seelig (55-year Bellevue resident): Encouraged creativity and flexibility for private sector, noted stream restoration opportunities.
• Jack McCullough (land use attorney): Opposed downtown changes due to lack of outreach, $13 in-lieu fee being manufactured, no upzone for downtown; requested grandfathering or excluding downtown from HOMA.
• Valentina Veneva (Crossroads resident): Supported HOMA, urged boldness in limiting surface parking, incentivizing mixed-use, and keeping requirements simple.

Discussion Items

• Staff Presentation (Christina Gallett, Matthew Minard): Overview of HOMA process, outreach (6 public sessions, 20,500 emails, tabling events), and key provisions. Two options for affordable housing: Option A (mandatory 10% at 80% AMI with FAR bonus and fee-in-lieu of $13/sqft for high-density, $10 for low-density) and Option B (voluntary incentive with height and FAR bonuses). Proposed changes to zoning districts: NB, CB, OLB, NMU, Eastgate TOD, Factoria, and new districts (Crossroads high-rise, Kelsey Creek/Lake Hills 7-story). Downtown changes: integrate affordable housing into amenity incentive system, requiring first 25% of points for affordable housing (or fee-in-lieu), reducing open space requirement. Also discussed FAR exemptions for grocery stores, child care, nonprofit businesses, affordable commercial, and open space.

• Commission Deliberation:

  • Commissioner Ferris: Supported Option A, alignment with MFTE, and allowing apartments/townhomes to concentrate affordable units.
  • Commissioner Velavesis: Questioned mandatory vs. incentive, concerned about making projects unviable; supported moving from dwelling units per acre to FAR; cautious about ground-floor retail requirements.
  • Commissioner Keppel: Leaning toward Option A but questioned calibration of affordability requirements; wanted more analysis on proportionality; concerned about transition areas (80-110 ft buildings next to residential) needing stronger buffers.
  • Commissioner Neil Chian: Supported Option A, suggested expanding FAR exemptions to include bike storage, transit-oriented facilities, and senior housing; asked about parking alignment with state law; staff noted separate parking update project.
  • Commissioner Kennedy: Supported more data on economic analysis and nexus study; agreed with transition area concerns; asked about stepback requirements (80 ft) – staff explained structural and economic reasons.
  • Commissioner Liu: Supported Option A but emphasized incentives for affordable commercial space and retaining existing businesses; concerned about fee-in-lieu not producing tangible benefits; suggested option C with different incentives.
  • Commissioner Ferris (second round): Plus-one on exempting small parcels from retail requirements, plus-one on third spaces, requested flexibility on impervious surface limits and design standards, supported deed-in-lieu for affordable housing.
  • Commissioner Velavesis (second round): Opposed stepback at 80 ft due to cost and complexity; suggested incentivizing stacked flats; warned against death by a thousand cuts; urged careful calibration.
  • Commissioner Keppel (second round): If stepback eliminated, asked for lower heights near residential; supported FAR exemptions for active transportation but not senior housing.
  • Commissioner Neil Chian (second round): Plus-one on Ferris’s comments.
  • Commissioner Kennedy (second round): Supported affordable commercial incentives, requested visual examples of transitions, noted affordable housing is income-based.
  • Commissioner Liu (second round): Plus-one on stacked flats, suggested using parking reductions as incentive, asked about enforcement of FAR exemptions.

• Downtown Discussion:

  • Staff explained that the IOC (interim ordinance) expired after about 1.5 years, yielding 5% affordable units. Proposed changes to amenity incentive system: first 25% of points must be affordable housing (or fee-in-lieu at $13/sqft), reducing open space requirement from 75% to 50%. Commissioners raised concerns about vesting, economic impacts, and outreach to downtown property owners. Staff noted outreach to development groups and scheduled meetings.
  • Commissioner Keppel: Asked about vesting feasibility; staff will consult city attorney. Questioned ADF program; staff will review.
  • Commissioner Velavesis: Emphasized trust and regulatory certainty, requested data on actual vs. proposed impacts.
  • Commissioner Neil Chian: Asked for comparative data from other cities, requested more analysis on ratios.
  • Commissioner Kennedy: Asked about expedited permitting as incentive; staff noted existing program for 100% affordable projects.
  • Commissioner Liu: Asked about outreach to downtown residents; staff cited email list and events. Recommended adding dates to outreach summary.
  • Commissioner Ferris: Supported double-dipping on bonuses.
  • Commissioner Keppel (second round): Favored another study session before public hearing.
  • Commissioner Velavesis (second round): Plus-one on Keppel, warned against death by a thousand cuts.
  • Commissioner Neil Chian: Preferred moving forward with public hearing but split presentation; later agreed to another study session after clarification.
  • Commissioner Kennedy: Supported pausing to review data, echoed need for more information.
  • Chair Conlu: Proposed splitting downtown vs. general, but staff clarified that state law requires one public hearing for one LUCA. Commission then decided to hold another study session before scheduling a single public hearing for both parts.

Key Outcomes

• The commission voted to postpone the scheduling of a public hearing to allow for an additional study session. Staff will provide requested information: nexus study, more detailed economic analysis, vesting guidance from city attorney, examples of transition areas, and data on downtown permits and impacts.
• The training session on the planning commission's role was postponed to September 24, 2025.
• The meeting was adjourned after 10:30 PM.