City Council - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. We have some feedback. All right, I think we fixed it. Great. Uh, welcome to the committee of the whole planning and public works for Tuesday, April 7th, 2026, commencing at 4:31 p.m. All council members are in attendance. We'll go ahead and kick it off since we have a busy agenda with the final contract approval for Lakeside Industries, Inc. and acceptance of construction for the Westlake Seamish Parkway Pavement Preservation Project.

Yes. Good afternoon, council. Uh Brandon Beller, acting deputy public works director for mobility and infrastructure. I'm pleased to bring this project uh for approval and final acceptance um for the Westlake Seamish Parkway pavement preservation project extending from Mary Moore to Liry. Uh in this contract with Lakeside Industries had a base bid amount of $1,217,250 plus or minus change orders and bid items and the final contract amount was $995,650. Uh we're really pleased with the work the uh project was able to deliver and I think that community members are already experiencing the benefits of smoother pavement and less traffic uh stress. So um pending your questions uh this is to accept the project.

Thank you. And this is an item for consent on April 21st. Do we have any questions? Council me council vice president Nova Kamina. Thank you. Um great to see you Brandon. Thank you for for bringing this forward for us to um put on consent. I had just a quick question on the agenda memo. Um it mentions use of federal highway grant requires 13.5% funding participation by Redmond. Um and just asking for a little bit more clarification on that as u I didn't see how that that worked out in the two attachments. Thank you for that question, council member. and we we can follow up offline with the exact breakdown for that cost analysis. Great. Thank you,

Council Member Parcy. Um is this um area part of a bigger initiative for improving our road maintenance? If so, um are you using a pavement condition index to evaluate to prioritize this project over others? Um because I didn't see I saw a map of some being marked red, some yellow, and other colors. This one wasn't on that map. So, if you could elaborate, that would be great.

Yeah, thank you for that question. Great to see interest in how we conduct a condition assessment of the uh road network. Uh networkwide, we're at a PCI of uh roughly 67. The transportation master plan indicates a target of PCI of 70 for the total network. And we do use that uh condition assessment data to prioritize corridor projects. The other consideration is daytime trips and and uh traffic density in the corridor as well as other utility work that we can array so that we just cut the road once and deliver it all. So subsequent projects will be evaluated on that basis where we're looking at not just pavement but also what utility work underground that we can do. Um does that answer your question? So was this not evaluated on the PCI metric or kind of was it part of additional ones and future ones will be evaluated more based on that metric? Is did I understand it correctly?

No, this this project was uh evaluated and selected for its particularly terrible uh PCI in this corridor and and high daily usage. Thank you. And what was the PCI or did you I'll follow up offline. I'll get you the exact uh before and after so so you can see that and also we can break out what the uh impact to the total network was as a result of this segment. Yep. Thank you. All right. Seeing no more and oh one more question uh council member Sony.

Uh so it says that there is no maintenance and operations cost expected. Is that um is that is this cost very negligible that it need not to be added here or will there be no uh crack ceiling or any other work that may be required in the next 5 years that's not added?

Uh that that's a great question council member. When we restore a section of pavement to um effectively 100 uh after a project like this it does begin to deteriorate as soon as we install it. And so we evaluate on an ongoing basis any crack seal or kind of spot maintenance work we need to do in terms of potholes or retro reflectivity. So the pavement markings or thermoplastics things like that. And we we account for that in our operations and maintenance baseline budget. So there will be ongoing maintenance but to a lesser degree and priority because it's new.

Thank you. Okay. Seeing no more questions. Uh, are we good to move this to consent on April 21st? Seeing a majority of thumbs, this will come back on April 21st. Thank you. Our next item is another final contract approval with SEI Infrastructure LLC in the amount of 1,267,396 and acceptance of construction for the sidewalk repair project from 40th Street um Bel Red to 156th. Thank you for that introduction, Brandon Buer again and uh again looking for consent on 421 at the business meeting. This this project uh replaced approximately 2,000 linear feet of sidewalk that was severely damaged from uh tree root growth and replaced 13 non-compliant curb ramps with ADA compliant curb ramps. The project met all objectives and this one we were right well just about on budget. Um, there are also in your packets some uh photographs of the completed work.

Any questions on this? Council member Percy. Um, I want I have two questions. Um, would you be able to elaborate how the tree roots were kind of addressed? Um, and the second question is, um, I did a little bit of site visit. there's kind of nearby still some pavement that looks in contrast very bad. So that means you guys did a fantastic job. Um and I was curious if there was any tree removal associated with this project too.

I off top my head I I don't know but I will follow up with you for sure on exactly what the analysis was for the the tree roots. In in general terms, uh what we see is that the wrong tree was in the wrong soil in the these types of uh sidewalk projects where the roots are causing the the pavement segments to upheave and create hazards for for pedestrians. Um in the event that the trees are removed, um that that of course goes through a routinized process, no pun intended, and uh and we look to replace uh with the the right tree in the in the right soil. But I'll I'll get the exact breakdown and follow up with you offline.

Council member Pria. Thank you, Deputy Director. And this is right by where I live, so I I I I take this path every day. Um my my question is about the the curb ramps, the ADA accessible curb ramps. Are is that um are curb ramps interchangeable with curb cuts? And have we heard any um constituent inquiries as to the width of these curb ramps? I just had a meeting with a constituent um about this. Um so wondering if you could provide more information with regards to that.

Yeah, great question. Apologies for not having this ready, but we'll follow up offline. Uh we we do get uh Q alert requests um from uh community members around curb cuts in particular areas. oftentimes are at the end of a culde-sac like up near the uh the power line trail and uh in some cases we're able to use our concrete crew to do those curb cuts. In terms of the exact dimensions between that and an ADA compliant curb ramp, um I'm not the expert so I'll talk to them and and we'll get that information to you.

Any other questions on this item? Okay, seeing none, uh, this is looking for a placement on consent on April 21st. Uh, are we good with April 21st? We are. So, we will see you on April 21st with this item. Thank you so much. Next up, we have the adoption of ordinances to formalize updates to Redmond Code, municipal code titles 10, 12, 13, and 15. Hello. Good afternoon. I'm Rob Kittinden. I'm the Redmond city engineer. I think I've met many of you, but I know there's a few council members here tonight. Um the item before you today is for the final approval of four ordinances uh amending the Redmond Municipal Code titles 10, 12, 13, and 15. And I think I win the prize for the largest packet of information for you all. I'm sure you've all read it completely. I've had too many times. So, uh the the ordinance is uh we've included along with the rationale tables uh come from discussions we had with council last year. We met on titles 10 and 12 in June of 25 and then we met with had a u presentation to council in October of 25 for 13 and 15 and since then we've gone through public comment period. We've gone through the sea uh threshold determination and the sea comment period and that all wrapped up in early February. And since that time, we've been working with both the city attorney and the city clerk to finalize these ordinances. So at the intent was just to let you know that they're coming

through for council approval on the 21st, but realizing there are some new council members. I could try to answer a few brief questions today or uh probably be more productive if you would give us comments via email and we could follow it up if necessary. Fantastic. Thank you. Um, council members, what questions do we have for the meeting today? And if we do have more, I'm happy to um have us send questions to staff and figure out what the pacing looks like then. So, what questions do we have for now? Council Vice President Nova Kamina.

Thank you. Um, no questions at this time. I'm happy to email them, but I did want to take a moment just to acknowledge the amount of work and uh, community feedback that went into this. the drafts went out that the comments. We've got the the matrices in in our attachments to take a look at that and just um thanking you for just the amount of work that that staff put into this. Yeah, thank you. Yes, there was a lot of folks involved and I appreciate all the utility and transportation staff for all the work they did on this. Truly a team effort on this one. Definitely. Council President Stewart.

Yeah, thank you so much. I did get a couple phone calls from new council members on this one um and was able to to point them toward the meetings that we have previously had and the touches we previously had on this. Just as a reminder for any of the general public who might be, you know, watching us and considering putting this on consent on the 21st, the zoning code um got a lot of care and attention and maintenance through the Redmond 2050 planning process. your department is going through an accreditation process that is part of the inspiration for this maintenance overhaul. This is like one of the largest uh sweeping amount of maintenance that we've done to the RMC, the Redmond Municipal Code in a really long time. And I think that framing is really important for the conversation. Um with this package, we are we are doing several things. We are updating how we navigate franchise agreements, but we're also, you know, regulating how you take your horserawn carriage down 148th. I mean, so there there is really just some um some stuff that needs to be caught up and that's what we're doing with this package. So, I do know that it's a lot of material um maybe for each of the uh newer council members or for council as a whole. One objective might be to just make sure that we understand um if there what are the major substantive efforts um and changes for each of these titles. I mentioned franchises. That's one that there's a lot of new work going on in this space, but if there are other substantive updates to how we do business in the city of Redmond, that might be something that um our new colleagues are curious about. Thanks.

Good, council member Sony. So definitely we have uh questions and we are going to submit it like you know we'll send it to you so that we can uh get them answered but uh because this item is for the consent agenda on 21st so how are we going to get an approval from all council members or are we planning to give an So I'm going to take a straw poll to see um if folks have a lot of questions or a few questions and decide from that response. Thank you. Yeah, if

I could um just follow up on council member Stewart's comment there. So, as you're going through the rationale tables for those the the new council members, uh we've arranged it so that the very first part of it there are the public comments that we received and and also from uh fish and wildlife or outside agencies and then we have a list at the very top of what we felt was the substantive ones to look at. So if you're if you're kind of triaging your review, that's the first ones. And then a lot of the other ones are pretty straightforward administrative ones that are just really about how we operate or administer certain items of the code. So that that would give you some guidance there.

Okay. I'm not seeing any more hands, but I would like to um council member Parcy, do you want to go ahead and ask? Yeah. Um, I would generally if we have the time to talk about this today, I do want to doubleclick on the goals for this project. Um, because I think the questions that can come from the council could be better informed by kind of having more details on the goals. Um, so if we have a few more minutes, I would love to understand um kind of beyond the goals for accreditation. Um, is the goal to be compliant? Is the goal to receive funding? is the goal to change statistics for injury rates based on kind of traffic patterns. um what data are we looking at and what data are we going to continue to monitor um if um this policy goes into effect to make sure that if things change in a direction that we don't want to see what touch points do we have to reflect on those so I would love to have a little bit of conversation and I know this is a lot but I would love to have some of that information or have conversation around the goal so we can better um ask questions

okay yeah uh so certainly the the APWA accreditation effort was a large portion of that. Uh what we found as we went through the uh municipal code uh a lot of it was written in the uh 50s. We had some sections clear back to the 20s. Uh and so a large part of the effort was to just bring it up to date. Uh for instance uh we added we had uh chapter uh title 13 was water and sewers and there was a time in the 50s where the uh sewer and storm water could be combined and we no longer allow that. So we created a whole another section for storm water and reflected what our current practices are within those chapters. So there was a there's quite a bit of that and I would say that was you know the majority beyond the APW accreditation. The other item was we needed to clear clarify kind of the roles and responsibilities of who's doing what and there was uh there's quite a bit in the chapters kind of vary. Sometimes the public works director is the is the primary uh person makes his decision maker and then sometimes the city engineer. And so we went through those and and looked at that. And we we'll also uh we're going to do a follow-up just within uh the department and uh with working with other departments to uh list out those designated delegates. So that's really clear. So I would say those are the main topics. Uh as far as uh revisiting, I think that uh the key will be that as we see changes to the zoning code or our administrative practices, then we'll we will make a practice of looping back and rechecking these. In fact, uh I'll soon be uh bringing forward in the next 6 months or so chapters 1 through 7 and nine, some other ones that we're we're also looking

at right now. So, we're going to try to make it a more of a on a rotational basis to make sure it's being updated. Percy, go ahead. One more quick question. Have you reviewed this document with all the departments including police and um fire? Um I saw a number of occasions where for example police vehicles were exempted but not fire. So I just wanted to make sure that we have a clear understanding of what departments have reviewed this already.

Yes. So I would say uh public works and planning department staff reviewed it the most. There was a lot of review there. Um uh the police are reviewed uh the title 10 which is primarily the area they're they're involved in and police had a I I mean fire I say had a periphery involvement in title 10.

Council member Critzer. Thank you uh for the work on this. Um and I I think I I've asked a lot of questions along the way. One uh question that has come up since I think the last touch on this um was some of the feedback from DFW. I just had one question on um uh 13 on title 13. uh if you just a clarification um specifically on their suggestion around 6 PPDQ um just so that I understand what it is that that we're doing is that is is the response essentially that we are going to adopt uh the manual as well as those practices but but in a different space than this these particular code updates.

Yes. So we'll be looking that looking towards that in the next year or so and and uh adopting that manual and we didn't want to get out ahead and kind of make our own assumptions on certain things. We we are going to adopt that and then we'll be adopting that uh 6 PPD as well.

So and you don't think there's like a value to also in integrating it into these code updates? There was enough moving pieces that we thought that it'd be best not to try to do that now uh with this because uh there's the storm water technical manual was just recently updated for us to match the current ecology manual and we it there's a process to go through to go through yet another update to to rather than just straight adoption of the manual.

Okay, thank you. Okay, still seeing a lot of questions and we are at time for this item. So, for folks who are going to Can I see a show of hand of folks that have questions that they're going to send in? Okay. Um, so I will ask um my colleagues, I'm not sure we're going to be ready for consent. Um, is there a committee that might have room is another committee chair willing to make room for another touch point after a week or two for this? I'm gonna go with council member Proria. Uh

I have not had my agenda setting meeting that is a week from today. Um but my meetings generally um committee meetings generally run a little bit shorter than um than the average committee meeting. So I think I could probably budget around 10 minutes for this. Okay, great. Yeah, Council Member Curtzer, I I don't uh I don't have space on my committee. Um but uh but I I would suggest we could also as an alternative uh potentially just put it on new business and if time we could just do that.

Yep. I was just going to say that. So um Counciloman Proer, your meeting is the 21st. So why don't we see a touch point on the 21st and then have it on new business that if we need to um postpone it, we can do that. Does that work for everybody? Great. We will do our best. Thanks. And then how uh what by what date would you like folks to submit their questions? Uh within you know the ne by the next Tuesday if possible. So let's say this Friday. Okay. Thank you.

Fantastic. All right. Thank you so much everyone for the flexibility on that and we will move on to item four. This is the award of construction contract to Dickinson Company for the old firehouse teen center demolition project and increase the total funding for the project. Welcome back.

Good afternoon, council. again, uh, Brandon Buer, acting deputy, uh, public works, and, uh, pleased to bring the, uh, the contract award here to to Dixon for the amount of $388,895 for the demolition of the old Firehouse Teen Center. Um the the cost increase here of H 100,000 is due to the additional abatement work that the contractor will need to do with the hazardous materials inside of that current facility. Uh Dixon, our experts in the space, have done projects with the city before, locally owned and operated out of Tacoma. Um and uh meet meet all of our requirements from an environmental uh perspective with the with the abatement work. Um so that that cost increase is just generally related to the uh original estimate. I would say that we we do have data just to put council at ease around our engineering estimates are uh typically within uh plus or minus 10% of the original engineering estimate to the actual bid amount. So this is a space that we are typically doing pretty well in. Uh this one just required some additional sensitivity around the abatement work.

Thank you. Yeah, I was kind of surprised to see that because you're usually really really tight on that. So, any questions on this one? Council President Stewart and then Council Vice President Nova Camina.

Yeah, it's not a comment and it's mostly a comment um for my colleagues. Um Deputy Director, thanks for the explanation. Um very much understand that, you know, sometimes this happens and this abatement is really important. Additionally, um there are some of us on council who have a a memory of um these large capital projects having multiple cost increases. So, we are just getting started with the OFH process. It's going to be really important the project management model that we choose once we have a direction um so that we can control for risks and plan for risk and our appetite for that. This is $100,000. It's not going to break the city, but it is a more than 20% difference on this particular piece. Um and it is something that is in our purview uh to make sure that we are managing um as we get going on this project. So um I know this is a sensitive project in community and just um want to also give a shout out to the park staff who helped us have a wonderful celebration last weekend. I do support moving this to consent. Thank you.

Thank you council vice president Noea Kamina.

Thank you. Um, Brennan, I I understand what for the abatement this was uh something that we knew though going in. We we knew that there was going to be a abatement was going to be a concern in that. Um, so I'm I'm trying to better understand. We knew that this was going to be an issue going in. They gave us the quote and we're still over 20%. I searching for the best way to respond to that. If there are particular details, um we can follow up with uh email correspondents on exactly what items um drove that $100,000 uh difference in terms of abatement, whether it was asbestous or rodent or whatever else. Uh but we can get that breakdown to you.

Thank you. And I'm I'm good having it pretty high level. I don't need to get into the details. It's just having a better understanding of, you know, we knew that this was going to be an issue or we we got in and didn't realize like how much of an issue it was, you know, just to to have a better understanding again because we knew going into this, hey, this is going to be an issue. So, high level is fine. I don't I don't need to know about the rodents. Council member Percy and then Council Member Critzer.

Um, I would also be interested in receiving that information. So if you want to share it with the whole council. Um and my question is about um historical artifacts that are found. Last meeting we had with director Hamilton um she mentioned that there is a process for if a historical artifact is found during the demolition process. So I wanted to understand better if there is a section in the bid document that specifically calls out and um specifies a requirement for the um demolition group to do this work. Yeah, we'll we'll we'll follow up on that and uh definitely appreciate those comments and uh the parks director I remember the um whatever the briefing on on that just regarding particularly a concern I think around items and walls and so we we'll go back and and double click on that with the contractor too and and see what methods are available to us as they conduct the demolition uh to be able to to slice those things out if possible. Would you be able to share the bit material and kind of follow up with us on that so we can kind of verify?

Most certainly. Thank you so much. Thank you. Um, so just in terms of of clarification on this with the contingency as well as the amount that is the overage uh of what we're budgeting here versus what we see as the Dixon Company's um proposal is the difference here just to to clarify is is is really in case we to give us that that buffer um because we don't know what we'll find as we get in there.

Uh that that's that's correct and there's there's two parts of it. First was just the receipt of the lowest uh bid amount being higher than estimated and then the additional contingency that we're carrying is exactly in that event because uh with the amount of abatement that needs to happen on that building that increases the risk aperture and so we want that additional contingency in the case that there are unforeseen issues and the but just to be clear because sometimes contingency with some of the contractors then gets like integrated into where they're aiming towards that the the goal is still that That contingency is only if we actually have contingencies that come out. That's correct. So, we may still end up under budget. We're just adjusting the budget up. That's correct.

Okay, I'm good with that. Thank you. Okay, Council Member Proria. Sorry, this is just for my understanding. Um but the the bid amount is uh around $389,000 and we have um in uh our line item budget uh both a construction cost of $435,000 and uh the design after preliminary design of $44,000. Um, so that that differential of about $100,000 between that 389,000 and 479,000 uh about the sum of those two. Where does that come from? That differential of about 90,000.

I it's it's formulaic in terms of the contingency and in the follow-up package that I'll provide to council, we'll we'll have that that breakdown. Yeah, great questions everyone. my questions have been asked, so appreciate that. Um, I'm hearing a lot of questions and a lot of followup that we're going to receive. So, looking for um if folks want to see this on consent or we could also put this on new business on the 21st as well. So, consent. Great. Perfect. So, we will look forward for that information and see this on consent on the 21st. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh, next up is approval of ordinance executing the Olympic Pipeline franchise agreement.

Yes, good afternoon again. Uh, this this item is on a renewed um franchise agreement with Olympic pipeline. Just a a bit of backstory and I have Patty Criddle here uh with me, our engineering supervisor in the rightway management group within public works who has spearheaded this effort uh up until this point. And we're part of our accreditation process as you know is to go through a lot of these uh franchise utility agreements and make sure that the terms and conditions for the city are providing the proper insurance risk exposure things of this nature uh and also the time basis. This was one that up until the the item in front of you was on a year-to-year basis. And so there's additional administrative cost and churn uh that that really is just not optimal. And the last time that we had a longstanding agreement was 2006. So, uh, since then, 20 years, we've been on a year-to-year basis, and this will extend the agreement timeline to a 10-year period. Um, happy to answer your questions at this time.

Any questions on this one? Council President Stewart,

thank you so much. Uh, first of all, I really appreciate the materials in this, uh, part of the packet. Really, um, saw a lot of our previous feedback on franchise agreements integrated into here. So, I just want to call that out. Thank you. Thank you so much. Um, two questions on this one. It looks like we are uh doubling the fees and strengthening the insurance requirements. I just want to make sure that both that and the uh timing of the ex of the 10-year term of course match up with what we're about to pass in in um I think title 12 or whatever it is that we were just discussing earlier today. But could you also tell us a little bit about um doubling of the fees and why that is the right calculation? Obviously, it's been a long time since we evaluated that fee, but would love to hear more.

Right. So, the fee originally was $12,000 and it increases by the CPI every year. And so, it's continually gone up and so we're just stabilizing it at this point to the 23,000 and then increasing it by the CPI also every year. Great. Thank you so much. Really appreciate your work on this. Thank you,

Council Member Percy. I have a lot of question on this item. Um, one of the things that I came across was that um, this um, company has had a number of leaks around the area and some of them have been incredibly expensive. They there have been fines up to 3.8 million, but the umbrella that we have right now is 5 million. Um I would like to better understand given the very recent um leak events that we've had um do we feel confident that this number would um match the potential risk that the city can incur? So we worked with River Oaks Communications Company and they um helped us negotiate this contract and um they have established that that is the adequate amount for the 5 million.

Um I would um would it be possible for you guys to kind of follow up offline and share kind of more details of what has been considered and what has not been considered as a part of that? We also um Director Bert's online. Director Bert. Yeah. Yeah. Good afternoon, council members. Actually, we have uh Bob and Tom Duchan who have been our uh lawyers on this issue online. I'd like to have them address this.

Council, this is Bob Duchan. I'm vice president of River Oaks Communications Corporation. I hope everyone can hear me. In addition to the insurance provisions that are in this franchise, there are very strong indemnification provisions that are also included. So that if the company Olympic Pipeline um has a spill, they're responsible for the the remediation cost. And they also have to indemnify the city. Which means that if someone files suit against the city and the accident was not due to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the city, then Olympic Pipeline, which is a very large entity, which is part of BP, would need to step up, Olympic Wood, and hold the city harmless. In other words, make make the city whole for any ex extra expenses uh or fees or fines or penalties. And that's all in addition to the $5 million umbrella.

Thank you, Mr. Duchan. Council member Percy, do you have more question? Um so if in this case the city will not be liable for the for the potential damages um but the company potentially has gone bankrupt or other concerns have occurred uh do we have a backup plan?

Mr. Duchan would you also like to address that please?

Sure. Um, Olympic Pipeline Company, um, is a very large entity that holds franchises throughout the Puget Sound area. Um, in this world, we all know that companies can unexpectedly go bankrupt. um we are relying on the strength of of the franchisee in this case and again we cannot give you assurances that they will not go bankrupt. Um unfortunately that's a risk that you take whenever you enter into a a contract a franchise or another sort of agreement uh with any other entity. Um, what I would say is that this company has been in business in the city for over two decades. Uh, there has not been, to my knowledge, an occurrence along the lines you were mentioning. And based on past history, which is over 20 years, uh we would think that that they'll be able to step up to the plate going forward just as they would have had something occurred in the last 20 years.

Thank you, Mr.

If I This is This is Tom Duchan, president of River Oaks Communications Corporation. Um, listening to council members questions here would be my suggestion is is Bob has shared the $5 million is not a cap. The insurance the insurance is such as that the city could look to the insurance carrier and then look to Olympic beyond that. Uh my suggestion would be why don't we and again I don't know what Olympic you know what they would or what we're going to get in back in terms of response. Why don't we look at uh talking with Olympic to see if they'd be willing to to raise that $5 million number and if so that's great. And if not, then we could bring that information back to uh the city and then a a decision can be made as far as how you know how you'd all like to go from there. Does that sound as like a a good workable path forward?

Thank you, Mr. Duchian. Council member Percy,

I am not quite satisfied just by upping the number for our insurance limits. I also compare the price with um the contracts with um signed with neighboring cities. Um they signed the contracts prior to some of the leak incidents that were really large. And I think given the recent events post previous neighboring contracts, I would like to reconsider um the actual number for how much the the yearly cost and also inflation adjustments as well. And that's what council member that's what we would be doing is is seeing about upping that number. And um and I believe that that go

if I could also add there are other there are other provisions for insurance. There's commercial general liability of $und00 million in coverage. Um, and there's pollution legal liability assuming that that's available in the marketplace of $50 million and both those numbers are in the contract already in the franchise.

Thank you, Mr. Both Mr. Duchans. Um, council members, I would pose the question to the body of do we want to have River Oaks return to uh, Olympic and try to negotiate a bit more of a of a umbrella or um, I'm also see interested in seeing who is okay with this potentially going to consent. So, first question, uh, do we want to have River Oaks take another shot at this? Council President Stewart,

yeah, I have a comment that maybe um, it sounds like this could go back to back to staff having heard the discussion here today and whether or not it needs follow-up conversation with us or they need to go connect with the Duchian. Um, I I would I would entrust the staff with uh working through a a next step for us if this doesn't go forward to consent. Council member ProAre, uh, I I agree with uh, Council President. Also, I did have a separate question. Should I wait? Um, one second. Yes. Thank you, Council Member Sony. Yeah, I've had the same question like council member Praa because we do have more questions. Y

so either we can all send it uh in an email and once we are doing the reneg negotiations I believe those questions can be answered or we can ask here you know whatever we want okay looking like we have many more questions around the table I would suggest that we have the same Friday deadline um let's say Saturday so that everybody can actually have time to do this off work hours um Saturday deadline for sending in our questions for this and then we'll look to staff at next steps for this one. Does that work for you all? It does. Okay. Uh, Council Member Curts, do you have one last question on this or can you email it in?

Yeah, I I just say I Yeah, if there are outstanding questions, I do think it's important for us to get this right. Appreciate Council Member Pary's questions. Um, if I would just say I'm interested to know what the other council members questions are, if there's a minute for them to ask them on the record, but also we'll see them in the matrix. So, yeah, I will I will suggest we see this in the matrix and then if if this is not a pressing issue, we see this again at the next public works committee of the whole. So, we'll see this again next month. That work? It works. Great. Thank you. Thank you.

Keeping us moving along. Uh we are now on to the 2025 legislated conformance business improvement and fences zoning code amendments. All right. Good afternoon, council members. I'm Saraphy Allen, deputy director of planning and community development, and I'm joined here today by um Jeff Churchill, our planning manager, uh long-range planning manager, Lauren Alpert, and Kim Deetsz. And uh Lauren is going to be briefing the committee on the three packages of amendments uh to the Redmond zoning code. And today we are seeking questions and discussion topics ahead of the study session, which is scheduled for April 28th. And if there are no questions or discuss discussion topics, staff asked that this be placed on the consent agenda for May 19th. So with that, I'll turn it over to Lauren.

Thank you, Saraphy. Thank you, council members. Uh good afternoon. Um so this code package has three categories. Um oh, also my name is Lauren Alpert. Some of you are are new faces. It's nice to see some familiar faces as well. Um so this code package has three categories. our 2025 legislative conformance package, a business code improvement package, and a section on fences and retaining walls. Um, so the 2025 legislative conformance package ensures that the Redmond zoning code is consistent with our new with new state laws from 2025 that affect our local uh development regulations. Um, so some of the topics in this category include subdivision regulations, uh, zoning for child care centers, parking, permitting timelines, and building conversions. It also includes some miscellaneous cleanup items from Redmond 2050. Uh, the business code improvement package is based on our economic development team's work with businesses and updating our business regulations and our zoning code to make sure it works for businesses and for the city. Um so some of those include ensuring commercial floor area is provided to mixeduse development by removing the opportunity for deviation um in our adopted code. Um requiring the placement of business open open signs where pedestrian access to businesses are impacted by construction so people know that the business is still open. Um it's not impacted by sidewalk closures. um simplifying and clarifying clarifying opportunities for food truck and pop-up retail courts for publicly accessible enhanced amenity spaces also known as PS and updating our definitions of allowed businesses business uses based on interactions with businesses. Um so the and the fence and retaining wall updates are intended to also add clarity and consistency or fence and retaining wall uh requirements. Uh the planning commission did recommend approval of these changes at its March

11th meeting. Um and the commission's recommendations and the draft ordinances were included in your packet. Um and we're just seeking council questions and discussions at this time for in preparation for an April 28th study session. And if there are no questions, we'd ask the item to be placed on our May 19th consent agenda or to clarify questions that can't be addressed quickly here. Mhm. What questions do we have council? Council President Stewart,

thank you so much team for bringing this back. I am looking forward to a study session. So that's how I prepared for my day. So um I'll I'll go ahead and share a few things. Um and generally I I hope that the council will consider this an exercise in understanding the interaction between our own code which we just built and and state law. I think it's helpful to understand uh where state legislation has advanced our vision or started to hold us back. And there are is probably a mixed bag in here in this package, but I do think it's helpful for us to understand that it makes us better communicators when we head back to Olympia um for for the next round. So, an example of that could be I I'm interested in learning more about the the subdivision piece and the child care zoning. These are pieces that we already were doing a pretty good job. I'd like to understand the interaction between that and the new state law. I'd also like to understand the commercial how the commercial space requirements in these mixeduse developments will interact with the 2026 legislation that just adopted was adopted. So to the extent that we know yet um it would be helpful to know. And then um on permitting timeline conformance, I'd like to discuss where we think we might measure that. Um, I do see that the housing dashboard is a potential opportunity um and and a place that we've already created a placeholder, but if there's another idea out there, I' I'd be curious to know. And then lastly, I'll just mention the fencing. Um, I am interested in talking more about this, what will be allowed and where. I am thinking in my mind of two fences that have in the last couple of years been installed by the county and I would love to make sure that fences like that aren't able to be installed in Redmond. We're we're dealing with one um over um in the Marymore Village neighborhood and then

one in the Overlake neighborhood that is related to uh a safety and security issue on that side of town. And the code states, you know, that the administrator would be um the one to make a determination around uh safety and security requirements. Since we are going to have all types of housing continue to come to Redmond and we are going to have different kinds of safety needs, I'm interested in uh what what fencing may be permitted um along the way as we we build out uh permanent supportive housing, shelters, and the like. Thank you.

Thank you. Other questions? Council member Critzer. I'd note that I'm interested in a lot of questions that that Council President Stewart just raised, I'll just add to that uh instead of doubling up and say um I'm interested in the study session and digging in specifically on the updates around food trucks and um pop-up retail courts um and being able to discuss more about about that um and uh what we what we'd be changing to and any limitations that we would still um have in this in this case. So, I think just being able to dig in on that a little bit would be great. And then I'd also say on the um fences and retaining walls. interested to be able to hear about engagement with um homeowners and specifically whether any of the changes we've made like how we've thought about the impacts potentially to um homeowners and and folks that that own various uh areas that that have these across our cities. Uh because sometimes we make these types of changes and then all of a sudden uh we hear from a lot of homeowners that are required to align with with new changes. Um and just estimating kind of how big of an impact that might make um uh for for the average uh land owner in addition to the larger more um kind of multif family building or other types of establishments.

Thank you council member Sony and then council member procria.

Thank you so much. Um uh I I have few questions that I would like to have some clarity and they are specifically because we have a June 30th deadline. Now how we going to handle the applications from now until June 30th that comes uh they will be like kind of an an in-flight applications. So will they be uh they need to adhere to these ordinances or you know what will happen from now till then? The second thing is about um I know we are trying to um have the mold child care options but there are always some peak covers and this may be creating some disruption. So in terms of like there is uh a use that allows them but in terms of an an operations perspective how are we going to align our um you know policies to help with that traffic. Then third is like in terms of a specifically with the fences and these things. U it's it's basically the questions comes majority of the times on the sloped hills like when there's an uphill and downhill like you know what would be an appropriate height for those fences. I've heard these from like neighbors several times. So you know we are we are trying to talk about some of these things but we can go into a little bit deeper details and trying to clarify some of these questions as well. This will be really helpful. So those were kind of a things that I I may want to see it in um during the study sessions.

Council member Proria, thank you so much for putting this together and for the incredibly quick turnaround after the end of our ledge session. Uh I would love to see um touching on the on the first bullet point on the business code improvements. um the uh the amendments to our code, you know, ensuring commercial floor area is provided in mixeduse developments. I think this is adhering to um SP 626. I would love to see um kind of an analysis on how this will affect our housing goals that we've set forth in Redmond 2050 um and whether there's anything we need to be worried about. Um with that respect, thank you.

Thank you. I think we gave you a lot for our study session. Um, council members, if you have more questions, please get those in u by, let's say, Saturday so that the team can prepare for the study session. Um, most of my questions were already asked, so if you have any you want to respond to now, otherwise we will see you on the 28th. Thank you.

Thank you so much. All right, moving right along. We have anformational item which is the 172nd Avenue Northeast Corridor corridor improvements and I'm assuming that is Director Bert online. Yes, that is uh hello from Denver. Uh the 172nd Avenue uh or gate project was a project that the city started about three years ago and what it was was removing a barrier across the northern boundary of the city at uh 172nd and northeast 24th street. The barrier had been in place uh 15 to 17 years uh that prevented north south traffic along that corridor. the project had been identified in various city uh transportation master plans as that area continued to grow and develop that eventually that gate would be removed. When we started the project back in 2023, we did uh encounter um opposition from homeowners north of the city boundary uh in the county area. Um they came, they spoke to council um and brought up their opposition. Public works ended up having several uh meetings uh with those individuals and a proposal was put forward where we would install various traffic calming measures in that corridor north of the city boundary in order to um better control and slow down traffic once that gate came out. Uh as we went forward to execute that plan, the city was sued by uh a homeowners group north of the uh city county boundary, we took that to the superior court. That lawsuit was

thrown out and so the city is now progressing uh with this project. So we're operating basically in two phases here. Phase one is uh we are in placing all the traffic calming measures in that corridor before we open up any uh or I should say open up that corridor to any traffic. So what that entails is basically a uh small traffic circle at 172nd and northeast 24th and then another small traffic circle up on northeast 26th and 172nd. Additionally, there will be um channelization on 172nd north of the city boundary and then also two traffic um what we call traffic h comps, not speed bumps. Further, uh we're working to put lighting in on that corridor to highlight where those traffic calming measures are. And once all those uh components are put in place, we will then open up uh the the corridor for further traffic. So, we wanted to bring this back to council because it it was a bit of a contentious issue a couple years ago. We've worked through the uh the legal process, the permitting process with the county, and we have begun construction uh on this project right now. We anticipate our construction being done probably sometime in May, but we'll probably end up opening up that traffic um in that corridor after school gets out in June. Once the corridor is opened up, uh we will be working with our partners uh in the police department uh to do some focus um speed checks in that area. We'll also be doing traffic counts and um some speed counts in that area to ensure that traffic moving through that corridor is at the uh the appropriate speed uh moving forward. Happy to answer any questions uh council may have about this project.

Thank you so much, Director Bert. And this came to us through conversations that are community conversations. So it asked for the briefing for the public as well as for new council members. Um council, any questions on this? Council member Kitser,

thank you for for the update on this. Um a couple questions. One is in the um flyer that you attached, it talked about how at 172nd and and 124th there will be both a traffic circle and a street light. Can you clarify how that would that will work? No. Um, and I don't have that in front of me, but there is no street light at that uh intersection. I believe what that was referencing was the potential for a street light in that area, but that was over um to the west on another route that leads into that area. Okay. It does say that in that flyer, so it would be great to get clarification on that.

Okay. Yeah, I'll double check on that, especially as we we talk with residents. And I guess so my second question is, can you share more about beyond these flyers, what type of outreach is being done to community uh members that that have had concerns about this just to be able to answer any additional questions on this?

Sure. We sent out uh two mailings on this and then actually uh during the time that where we've been in litigation. Um I've continued to receive numerous emails from individuals in and around that area asking about the status of the project and it was uh I'd say about 99% of the correspondents I received were from individuals asking when we were going to open it up. Um so there's a strong ground swell of individuals looking to get that corridor opened. Um, additionally, uh, staff on site, uh, as people have come up and have asked questions, we have handouts, QR codes, uh, directing people to the website for further information. And we've also done some small canvasing in and around that area, letting people know that the project's moving forward.

Can I ask one one final question? Um, so or more a clarification because I think this was something that came up when this first came up from folks is so just to be clear the in order to construct these traffic circles the existing gate would have to be removed but the actual kind of barrier that will the only time that cars will be able to actually go through will be after all those things are constructed. Is that correct? Fact, there's been an automatic gate uh a metal gate in place that uh allowed uh fire and police to ingress and egress from that area. That gate has been removed. Um we have a temporary barrier in place that is preventing vehicles from moving uh through that area until we have construction complete.

Great. Thank you. Thank you. Other questions? Council member Proria.

Thank you, Director Bert, for the update. Um, and as you as you noted, um, I I I had I remember having a long conversation with a constituent last year on their doorstep, uh, who was concerned about, uh, the removal of this gate. And you mentioned that we are going to be continuing to monitor traffic um, after after traffic is allowed to go through. Uh, what possible contingency plans do we have if traffic is more than we expect um, even after the traffic coming features are put in? Uh the contingency is essentially we we'll have to manage traffic as much as we can within the corridor. It's going to take a bit of time for that corridor and that area to mature in terms of the development of the traffic patterns in and around that area. Uh I I would probably say it'll probably be about 6 months to a year before we have a really good idea and enough data to understand how people are beginning to use this corridor. We'll continue with the traffic monitoring and uh with traffic counts and speed checks and if in fact uh we need to put in additional channelization um u materials or conditions uh and towards uh to manage speed in that corridor. We we'll attempt to look at that.

Awesome. Thank you. Thank you so much. Uh given the time I'm going to go ahead and wrap this part of the conversation. Thank you for the update, Director Bert, and the information on construction and the fact that this is opening after the school year is over, I think is important information for everyone to also hear. So, we will look for continued updates on the project and appreciate you. Thanks. You bet. Thank you.

So, the last item on our agenda is a read only because we are going to have a staff report on April 21st. So, if you have any projects in this CIP that you want to hear and update um during that staff report on the 21st, I'm going to suggest you go ahead and email which projects you would want them to report out in that staff report to Director Bert and he can get that to his team um in preparation for our staff report. Sound good? Great. That brings us to the end of our agenda, our very full agenda. Thank you all for your thoughtful questions. This meeting is adjourned.