Decision Pending for HOMA Land Use Code Amendment

The December 10, 2025, meeting of the Bellevue Planning Commission, presided over by Vice Chair Lou, featured a public hearing on the Housing Opportunities in Mixed Use Areas (HOMA) Land Use Code Amendment. The agenda included a review of the 2026 meeting schedule, oral public comments, and staff presentations regarding two primary options for affordable housing requirements: a mandatory program (Option A) and a voluntary incentive program (Option B), alongside specific provisions for downtown Bellevue and suburban mixed-use areas. The commission heard extensive testimony from developers expressing concern over costs and vested projects, and from community advocates and residents supporting the push for affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization. Due to unresolved concerns regarding implementation details, specifically around vesting for pipeline projects, ground-floor commercial requirements, transition area setbacks, and impervious surface limits, the commission did not render a final recommendation at this session and directed staff to conduct further analysis and stakeholder outreach before proceeding.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of the draft 2026 meeting schedule, including a January 2026 session focused on survey results and a session with the Puget Sound Regional Council.
• No other routine agenda items required formal approval as this was the primary focus of the evening.

Public Comments & Testimony

Support for Mandatory Affordable Housing (Option A) and Mixed-Use Development:

• Deborah Deutsch: Expressed strong support for HOMA and Option A, arguing that the policy is essential for providing housing for working families who earn above the poverty level but below the medium income, and who currently struggle to qualify for existing financial support programs.
• Brady Nordstrom (Housing Development Consortium/East Side Affordable Housing Coalition): Urged support for Option A, stating that while feasibility is currently difficult due to market conditions, the requirement is the best option for creating affordable housing across multiple economic cycles and represents one of the "lightest touch" versions of such policies in the region.
• Jessica DeBarros (King County Housing Authority): Strongly supported Option A and the use of upzoning value to create affordable housing, asserting that the trade-offs are reasonable to fulfill the city's comprehensive plan vision and ensure Bellevue remains a diverse city for lower and moderate-income workers.
• Valentina Veneva: Expressed full support for the proposal but voiced a specific concern regarding the lack of a dedicated program to assist small businesses in relocating when properties are developed for housing.
• Ishaan Joe (Imagined Housing): Expressed full support for Option A and the upzoning, highlighting the need to provide housing for essential workers like teachers, nurse aids, and school staff to ensure community vibrancy.
• Daniel Nygard & The Newport Community Coalition: Expressed very strong support for HOMA, specifically the vision for redevelopment of the Newport Hills Shopping Center into a walkable community with housing, retail, and gathering spaces.
• Suzanne Baugh: Expressed strong support for HOMA and the specific density of three to four floors (with potential for five with amenities) at the Newport Hills Shopping Center, explicitly clarifying that the coalition does not support the previously discussed seven to ten-story density.
• Linda Holler: Added her voice in support of the Newport Community Coalition's vision for the redevelopment of the Newport Hills Shopping Center with three to five stories of housing and affordable units.
• Ian Morrison (McKella Hill): Supported the process but argued that the departure criteria for ground-floor commercial uses were still too restrictive, noting that forcing retail into non-viable areas creates a subsidy burden for future renters and suggested that the "mandate" approach is less feasible than incentives for smaller sites.
• Adam Deba (Africans on the East Side): Expressed strong support for Policy A (Option A) as a necessity for immigrant, refugee, and low-income families who are being pushed out due to rising housing costs.
• Sterling Yoon: Expressed full support for Option A, arguing that Bellevue must match other U.S. cities in pushing forward housing requirements to allow young adults who grew up there to remain in the city.
• Heidi Dean: Clarified that her previous comments regarding the Newport Hills Shopping Center were from 2019, noted that the Newport Community Coalition is relatively small and coordinated by the property owner's PR firm, and raised concerns about the timing of HOMA relative to new state housing bills, urging the commission not to recommend moving forward without more data.
• Elizabeth Maupin: Expressed general support for mixed-use projects but raised a concern regarding ground-floor residential accessibility for people with disabilities in the event of power outages where elevators might fail.
• Pam Raider: Expressed strong support for the suggestion to move forward, citing the urgent nature of the housing crisis and the human cost of delayed action.
• Tanya Marice (Newport Community Coalition): Expressed support for the opportunities HOMA presents for housing, retail, and community amenities at the Newport Hills Shopping Center.
• Anonymous Speaker: Urged the commission to approve Option 1, emphasizing that the housing crisis is urgent and people cannot wait years for more deliberation.

Opposition to Specific Provisions, Downtown Application, and Request for Further Review:

• Samir Master: Expressed significant concern regarding the conversion of office parcels (specifically 2233 112th Ave NE) to 100% residential, fearing it would remove critical medical office space needed by patients and employees, and respectfully requested that the concomitant zoning agreement (CZA) for that parcel excluding residential use not be removed.
• Misha Ridardi (Legacy Commercial): Expressed strong opposition to applying HOMA changes to downtown in the current form, characterizing the changes as a new "affordable housing tax" that changes rules mid-game for mid-stream projects without prior outreach to downtown owners, and requested downtown be taken out of HOMA for a separate process.
• Jessica DeBarros (King County Housing Authority): Expressed strong support for Option A but also raised concerns about the flexibility of the exemption program for downtown and the lack of vesting for pipeline projects.
• Kevin Wallace (Wallace Properties): Expressed frustration that the downtown portion of HOMA imposes costs (amenity points) without providing compensating density benefits or upzones, characterizing it as a tax on all projects, and requested the commission delay its recommendation to allow time to discuss specific code tweaks with staff.
• Ann Brashier: Expressed opposition to the baseline five-to-six story density at the Newport Hills Shopping Center, arguing it is too high for a neighborhood not served by transit and conflicting with the Comprehensive Plan's intent for lower density, and requested that the commission take more time to ensure the shopping center remains a shopping center.
• Jesse Clausen: Expressed strong opposition to the mandatory affordability requirement in its current form without a commensurate MFTE "supercharger" to offset costs, arguing it will stall short-term housing production; also criticized the 60% impervious surface limit in Eastgate and the strict pedestrian-oriented use requirements.
• Cindy Ju (Heinz): Expressed strong opposition to applying new affordable housing requirements to the HOMA project in downtown without clear vesting provisions, stating the financial impact could be the "straw that breaks the camel's back" for their investment, and requested a delay for further collaboration.
• James Brothers (Westbrook Properties): Expressed concern that current HOMA draft elements, particularly the 60% impervious surface limit and lack of flexible departures for ground-level commercial, are limiting viable housing production at the Boeing Eastgate (The Woodlands) site.
• Ben Mickel: Expressed support for HOMA generally but emphasized the need to quickly send the LUCA to City Council, praising the staff's progress in addressing feedback.
• Bill Ledham (Urban Renaissance Group): Expressed concern that the current impervious surface limits (60%) in Eastgate are too low for urban development and would hinder the redevelopment of the Cascade Yard project, requesting a significant revision of zone standards.
• Jack McCullough: Expressed strong opposition to applying HOMA to downtown as currently drafted, arguing that unlike other mixed-use areas, downtown received an upzone in 2017 and that the new requirements function as a "tax" without compensating benefits for existing projects, and urged the commission to remove downtown from HOMA or defer the program.
• Jeremy Louis (Stanford Hotels): Expressed concern that the framework creates a tax in downtown without generating benefits for projects like the Silver Cloud, and recommended removing downtown from HOMA as currently framed.
• James Rivard: Expressed concern that imposing additional costs on downtown housing is counterproductive in the current high-cost market, characterizing the changes as a "stick" without a "carrot," and urged a slower approach and more stakeholder outreach.
• Heidi Dean: (See above) Raised concerns about the timing of HOMA relative to state bills and the lack of data on their impacts.
• Ray Osburn: Expressed concern that the current owner of the Newport Hills Shopping Center is primarily motivated by profit, that HOMA does not address business affordability, and that the proposed density would clog local roads and degrade the neighborhood's livability.
• Gary Stutt: Expressed concern that high-density development (5-6 stories) at the Newport Hills Shopping Center would ruin the neighborhood's texture and exacerbate traffic and parking issues on narrow local streets.

Discussion Items

• Staff Presentation (Nick Whipple, Matthew Minard, Robbie Seppler): Presented background on HOMA, the two affordable housing options (Option A: Mandatory with FAR bonus; Option B: Voluntary with FAR/height incentives), and specific updates for downtown (amenity incentives, FAR flexibility, open space reduction). Robbie Seppler detailed nonconforming use provisions based on proportional compliance.
• Commissioner Geppel: Asked for clarification on the 4,000 sq. ft. commercial trigger for affordable housing requirements and sought a comparative analysis of Seattle's nonconforming use provisions.
• Commissioner Kennedy: Raised questions regarding the feasibility analysis for Option B, specifically the FAR bonus calculations, and the impact of different bonuses on small vs. large buildings. Discussed the "tax" characterization of downtown requirements with staff, who clarified they are incentive-based, not taxes. Asked about the interaction between Eastgate development and the Bellevue College master plan.
• Commissioner Valevsis: Expressed a "plus one" for the discussion on ground-level uses and vesting, noting the need to avoid "black walls" while acknowledging the burden of unoccupied retail.
• Commissioner Via Vasis: Expressed a "plus one" for reviewing the transition area setbacks, specifically regarding sunlight access and shadow impacts on residential properties south of new developments.
• Vice Chair Lou: Noted the high volume of comments on both sides of the ground-floor commercial issue and the need to strike the right balance.
• Stakeholder Interaction: Several comments from the public (Jesse Clausen, Kevin Wallace, James Brothers, Jack McCullough) regarding the 60% impervious surface limit and the strictness of pedestrian-oriented use requirements were noted by staff and commissioners as requiring further review.

Key Outcomes

• No Final Recommendation: The commission decided not to make a recommendation to City Council at this time.
• Directives to Staff: Commissioners directed staff to undertake the following specific follow-up actions before the next meeting:
  • Vesting: Provide a specific analysis or draft language for a vesting or opt-in mechanism for projects currently in the development pipeline in downtown and mixed-use areas that are not yet vested, to ensure regulatory certainty.
  • Ground-Level Uses: Review comments on both sides regarding the 20,000 sq. ft. exemption and pedestrian-oriented use requirements to ensure the balance between preventing "ghost streets" and avoiding vacant retail in non-viable areas is correct.
  • Transition Areas: Further analyze the transition area setbacks, including a visual representation or rendering of the proposed step-backs for 80-100 foot buildings, and specifically review sunlight/shadow impacts on residential properties.
  • Nonconforming Uses: Conduct a comparative analysis of Bellevue's proposed nonconforming use provisions against other jurisdictions, specifically Seattle, to ensure the proportionality requirements are reasonable.
  • Impervious Surface: Review the 60% impervious surface limit in Eastgate and surrounding areas to determine if it unduly limits housing production compared to other jurisdictions or if alternative open space mechanisms should be explored.
  • Stakeholder Outreach: Coordinate with specific stakeholder groups (including Kevin Wallace, Jack McCullough, and McKella Hill) to address item-by-item concerns and provide responses to questions raised during testimony.
• Next Steps: The commission will reconvene after staff completes the requested analysis and stakeholder outreach to reconsider a recommendation.