The Bellevue City Council voted decisively on a significant revision of residential zoning on Tuesday night, aiming to allow a broader array of housing types within lower-density neighborhoods across the city.
This decision comes in direct response to housing mandates put forth by the state legislature, a situation reflected in similar recent actions by other cities, including Seattle.
The final vote marks the culmination of a lengthy process where an initially ambitious proposal aimed at enhancing housing accessibility in Bellevue, the Eastside’s largest jobs center, was considerably scaled back.
While the ultimate proposal was framed as a compromise, it only surpasses state minimum requirements in select areas, which still leaves considerable opportunities for denser housing near transit and key amenities largely unutilized.
Bellevue Mayor Lynne Robinson remarked on the complexity of community feedback, stating that it was evenly split between those advocating for more aggressive zoning changes and those calling for more limitations.
“I didn’t get everything the way I wanted it particularly, but it is a good balance,” Robinson acknowledged during the council meeting.
Earlier this year, Bellevue introduced a draft middle housing code that was among the most aggressive in the region, exceeding state-mandated minimums.
The state guidelines require cities to allow a minimum of four housing units on citywide lots and six units within a quarter-mile radius of light rail and RapidRide bus stations.
Bellevue’s original proposal even contemplated allowing up to nine units within a half mile of those transit points, as well as around regional and county growth centers.
However, after receiving input and recommendations from the Bellevue Planning Commission in April, proposed allowances for additional density near frequent bus routes were removed, limiting the density cap around light rail and RapidRide stops to six units, aligning it with other regional growth centers.
The decision to lessen the proposal’s scope raises questions about whether further reductions by the Bellevue Council were imminent.
During a four-hour work session prior to the vote, internal divisions emerged sharply among council members.
Councilmembers Dave Hamilton, Vishal Bhargava, and Deputy Mayor Mo Malakutian supported maintaining the Planning Commission’s more generous recommendations, whereas Conrad Lee, Jared Nieuwenhuis, and Mayor Lynne Robinson leaned towards adopting more conservative adjustments.
Bhargava, newly appointed to the council, had initially endorsed the Planning Commission’s recommendations but later indicated a willingness to reassess certain aspects.
Claire Sumadiwirya, also a recently appointed council member, became a pivotal vote, siding with the more conservative bloc and agreeing to limit the areas eligible for sixplexes to just a quarter-mile from transit stations, which aligns with state requirements.
Her vote played a significant role in lowering the proposed height limit from 38 feet to 32 feet, or up to 35 feet with a pitched roof—one of the few flexible provisions that had been on the table.
Additionally, this conservative coalition voted to tighten allowances specifically aimed at promoting cottage housing, adjusting height maximums down to 24 feet and restricting unit size to 1,500 square feet, a consideration that may drive developers to think of alternative housing approaches.
Sumadiwirya’s election to the council marked a notable shift in policy perspective, following Janice Zahn’s transition to the State House after her selection for the 41st Legislative District.
While Zahn had generally been a supporter of pro-housing measures, Sumadiwirya showed initial hesitance in her candidacy, emphasizing the importance of grounding growth in community support and processes.
This shift in council dynamics appears to have substantially influenced the recent decisions surrounding Bellevue’s housing policy.
During the debates, Mayor Robinson stressed the need for scaling back the sixplexes further from a half-mile to a quarter-mile, claiming this approach would enhance housing affordability by enabling developers to build two subsidized affordable units if they opted to reach the six-unit maximum.
However, Deputy Mayor Malakutian countered that this reasoning lacked viability and would likely deter the actual production of six units in many locations.
“Based on all of the conversation that we heard on the Planning Commission, the developer[s] right now believe that there won’t be any six units production if 33% of that is going to be at 80% of [area median income],” Malakutian stated.
“My concern is we are going to lose density near transit, near light rail, if we don’t go to six stories.”
Sumadiwirya explained her reasons for opposing more extensive flexibility on building heights, framing her perspective with language often associated with anti-development sentiments.
“I think when a building that is middle housing that’s really out of place — it’s dramatically higher than other units — affects the whole cohesiveness of our neighborhood,” Sumadiwirya argued.
“Also our neighbors, they invest a lot of time building their home.
So I think that making a neighborhood more cohesive protects the value and then also the look of [and], I think, the unity of the neighborhood.”
Throughout these discussions, Malakutian distinguished himself as a defender of maintaining some of the more progressive elements of the proposed changes, despite being consistently outvoted.
“The cost is high.
There is not that much supply of housing,” he lamented.
“For essential workers, teachers, firefighters, nurses, and local business employees, they can’t buy anything here in Bellevue.
And this is not just a kind of abstract economic issue.
This is about people’s families, the future of our city.”
With five of the seven Bellevue council members, including the mayor, seeking re-election this year, the influence of the upcoming elections loomed over the discussions regarding the middle housing code.
As the unanimous final vote was cast, various council members recognized the possible unintended outcomes of the revised zoning, signaling a commitment to reassess these changes within a few years.
“I would put in there that if we see some instances that are negatively impacting neighborhoods that could be replicated as a model to other neighborhoods, that we take action immediately on that,” Nieuwenhuis proposed.
He emphasized the need for prompt intervention should any adverse repercussions materialize, warning of potential spillover effects to other neighborhoods like Lake Hills, Bridle Trails, or Crossroads.
Despite being vocal in opposition to state density mandates earlier this year, Nieuwenhuis ultimately hailed the final result, framing Bellevue’s lower-density neighborhoods as entities that should be safeguarded rather than centers for densification.
“I think that we’re coming very close in terms of what is best for Bellevue,” said Nieuwenhuis.
“It’s not perfect at all, but I think we took some really important votes last time in terms of scaling the setbacks to match lot sizes and limiting the six-unit maximum to within a quarter mile of major transit.
I think that could avoid some excessive sprawl.”
In contrast, Hamilton, who aligned with Malakutian in supporting parts of the Planning Commission’s recommendations, suggested that the city had conducted its due diligence in creating the middle housing land use code.
He felt it was time to allow housing development to proceed without further impediment.
“From my point of view, the middle housing land use code is done,” Hamilton stated.
“Middle housing was studied as part of the Comp Plan update, as mentioned earlier, part of our final environmental impact statement.”
Hamilton reiterated that the city’s infrastructure systems could accommodate a level of development that far exceeds expectations.
This week’s final vote appears to have settled, at least for the present moment, one of Bellevue’s most polarizing housing discussions.
However, it sets the stage for what will likely be another contentious discourse regarding how to facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized commercial properties within Bellevue’s existing mixed-use zones.
image source from：theurbanist
