2026-10-06 - Committee of the Whole

09:18I should be able

10:16All right. Good evening everyone and

10:18welcome to the Tuesday October 6th

10:21committee the whole for planning and

10:23public works. All council members are in

10:25attendance and we have a busy agenda. So

10:27let's get rolling. First up we have the

10:29adoption of the ordinance to formalize

10:31updates to Redmond Municipal Code titles

10:331 2 3 4 5 6 and nine.

10:39Good evening, council. Uh Chris Stinger,

10:42acting director public works. Joining me

10:44tonight is Rob Kitten, city engineer.

10:47And as discussed, we are here uh to talk

10:50about putting the following item on a

10:52consent agenda. Uh this is the final

10:55phase of the comprehensive review we

10:57undertook to make sure uh municipal code

11:00is current, clear, and aligned with how

11:03the city operates today. Uh earlier this

11:06year, council approved titles 10, 12,

11:0813, and 15. And tonight, we're bringing

11:11forward the remaining updates to titles

11:13one through six and title 9. So at a

11:17high level, these changes are intended

11:18to clarify roles, responsibilities, and

11:21authorities, remove outdated or

11:23inconsistent language, and better align

11:26the code with our current organizational

11:28structure, policies, procedures, and

11:30practices established through our APWA

11:33accreditation effort. So, we've also

11:36completed uh public outreach processes

11:38associated with these updates. We've

11:40received no comments or appeals and the

11:43city clerk and city attorney have

11:44reviewed the proposed ordinances. So

11:47tonight, we're asking for council

11:48direction to proceed. Following that

11:50direction, public works will bring the

11:52seven ordinances forward for adoption on

11:55the October 20th business meeting. And

11:57with that, I'll turn it over to Rob to

12:00fill in any detail.

12:02>> You did steal a lot of my thunder there,

12:04like ripping out pages of my script. So

12:07yes, as Chris had said, this is the

12:10final phase of our comprehensive update

12:12of the municipal code. Uh we came to you

12:14all starting in June of 25 and uh went

12:18through 10, 12, 13, and 15 and and you

12:22approved changes to those in April of

12:2426. Uh those were very complicated

12:27changes as you may recall. There's a lot

12:29of moving parts there. The changes to uh

12:32titles one through six and nine are much

12:34simpler. Uh it's quite a bit of of uh

12:37you kind of cleaning up work and also

12:40making sure that any references that we

12:43created within 10 12 13 and 15 are

12:47correctly called out here.

12:49The so the memo the council memo

12:53includes a uh attachment h which is a

12:57listing of all the changes and also the

12:59rationale. So, I have that table along

13:01if we want to talk about any specific

13:03rationale items. And then I also have

13:06all of the ordinances up uh if we want

13:09to get to that depth. The city clerk and

13:12the city attorney have gone through

13:13these and so they're pretty much ready

13:16for prime time with council.

13:19So,

13:20the going to the some of the specific

13:22changes, what we did is we went through

13:24and we made sure that any definitions

13:27were current. We uh uh corrected

13:30director titles. Uh some of them were

13:32outdated titles, no longer used or just

13:36incorrectly stated where it would say

13:38like uh Department of Public Works

13:40director or something like that. We

13:41would we would clean that up. They were

13:43kind of a wide variety as we went

13:45through code. Then more importantly, we

13:48deleted sections that no longer reflect

13:50current practices. My favorite is the

13:541965

13:56uh section that that funded the current

14:00building. Not not the one that we're

14:01looking to build uh coming up now, but

14:04funded the current one. And so that fund

14:06has been uh def defunct for quite some

14:09time. Uh then we also uh looked at

14:13adding language uh as I'd mentioned uh

14:15for references

14:18other parts of the code. We decided to

14:19take out specific language about

14:22delegates and designates because it was

14:24spread throughout the code in all sorts

14:25of fashions again. So we took those out

14:28and we referenced specific sections

14:30here. And so within title one and title

14:32two we state uh essentially that for

14:35instance for the city engineer the city

14:37engineer

14:39is authorized for these duties or his

14:43their their delegates or designates as

14:46uh as specifically assigned by the

14:49public works director or the mayor. So

14:51we have that language in there.

14:54So those are kind of the key ones. I

14:57like I say, I would be glad to go

14:59through each of the items if you'd like.

15:01Uh but again, what we're asking for is

15:05just uh approval to move on to the

15:07regular council meeting on October 20th.

15:10>> Great. Council members questions. I'll

15:12start with council member Percy.

15:14>> Thank you. There's an item for noxious

15:17wheat. Um there is a section that I

15:21would love to consider adding. Um there

15:24is currently um I'm sorry my browser

15:27just completely closed and all of my

15:29notes went with it. Um but I will speak

15:32from my memory. Um the uh noxious weeds

15:35it references our existing code which

15:37has a section that says owner can remove

15:41noxious weeds. The owner is very unclear

15:43who the owner is, where that noxious

15:45weed is. Um, and I would love to see if

15:48we can add a section there to say um,

15:52anyone from the public who can who

15:55identifies a noxious weed from the list

15:57of noxious weeds that is approved um is

16:01um allowed to remove noxious weeds with

16:04manual effort from the public spaces.

16:06Uh, so not using any um heavy tools or

16:11herbicides just manual action. if you

16:13see something, you can pull it. So that

16:15um brings a sentiment of public

16:17ownership and um the right to um the

16:22right to maintain your public lands. So

16:24I would love to see if that's something

16:26that we can consider safely adding to

16:28the code um because especially because

16:30the current owner section is very

16:32confusing from the existing code and no

16:34a proposal to change that has been uh

16:36shared yet.

16:38>> Thank you. Is there any um concern with

16:41an amendment like that?

16:42>> I don't think so. I think that as long

16:44as they are the the only issue is and we

16:47have this sometimes if depending to the

16:49extent of what folks are doing on public

16:51land, it always is that gray area where

16:55it's one thing to go out and pull a

16:56single weed, but if you're you've

16:58decided that and they may not not

17:01realize that maybe they're not really

17:02doctor's weeds and they go out and pull

17:04out, you know, 400 of them and it turns

17:06out the parks department had just

17:07planted them. So those those sorts of

17:09things. So we'd have to be careful with

17:10the language. Uh but yeah, I can

17:12certainly take that back to our natural

17:13resource folks and kind of talk through

17:15that.

17:15>> Is there council support for an

17:17amendment like that?

17:20>> Thumbs.

17:23>> I have a comment. [laughter]

17:25>> Um okay, we'll come back to that and

17:28move on to the next comment. Uh Council

17:30President Stewart, did you have a

17:31comment on that one?

17:32>> Sure. on that, I would say um I would

17:35love to to find the balance um because I

17:38think dandelions for instance, you know,

17:40might be something that can easily be

17:42recognized and and perhaps, but I do

17:44recognize the concern and would actually

17:46want to hear back from the staff um what

17:48they think of the proposal. So, um I

17:50don't know if I support a full amendment

17:52yet, but I would be interested in seeing

17:53the information come back. And that's

17:55actually related to my uh my own comment

17:58or question here about the um the

18:00amendments in front of us. There are

18:02actually um two categories

18:06of

18:07>> [snorts]

18:07>> uh references in these chapters that um

18:11make me wonder if we should wait to

18:17adopt these updates

18:19um until after the determination is made

18:23on the potential reorg of development

18:25services. Throughout this document,

18:27there are many references to the

18:29director of planning and uh community

18:31development. That that title and that

18:35role may soon change as well as the

18:37technical committee is referred to. Um

18:40and as proposed, if that reorg were to

18:42go through, the technical committee

18:43would no longer um be uh something that

18:47we maintain here at the city. So

18:49overall, I think that most of the uh

18:52edits that are being made in this

18:53package seem like we're headed in the

18:55right direction, but I do wonder about

18:57the timeline and saving ourselves a a

18:59little bit of duplicative work if we

19:02were to delay. Um and in which case, if

19:04we're going to see this again, would

19:05definitely love to see the answer uh

19:07back from staff on the proposal from my

19:09colleague. Thank you.

19:10>> Thank you.

19:11>> So yes, we we did talk about that

19:14internally. So, I talked with Jason

19:15Lynch and Jeff Churchill uh about

19:19whether we should finish this effort up

19:21or not. And we tend to lean towards I I

19:23I I think the sentiment isn't too strong

19:26either way about moving forward

19:27immediately. Now, we're waiting. But, uh

19:30we tend to think that we've already made

19:32all these changes in 10, 12, 13, and 15.

19:35So, we'll have to go through those

19:36anyway if we're if we're adding director

19:38names and changing things like that. And

19:40so the benefit of finishing this up now

19:42is everything through the entire code

19:44would be consistent. And so you could go

19:46through and let's say we add another

19:48director or change a director name, it'd

19:49be consistent without having to remember

19:51to catch pick up these other ones. But

19:54again, the sentiment wasn't super strong

19:56either way.

19:57>> Thank you. Uh I saw uh Council Member

20:01Sony and then Council Member Critzer.

20:04>> Uh thank you. Um actually my question

20:06was exactly same what uh council

20:09president Stewart asked. So I'll ask

20:10another question because there was no

20:13comment that was received during the

20:15public hearing and public um open

20:17comments for this thing. What is the

20:20method or way that we are adopting to

20:23ensure that all related parties or like

20:26people like getting impacted or even our

20:28developers, contractors or the cable

20:31operators like you know to see these

20:32code changes.

20:33>> Yes. uh we've worked with the

20:35communications group. We decided that

20:36for these changes which are you know

20:38fairly administrative in nature uh we

20:41that the let's connect page that was

20:43posted for uh I think we p posted for a

20:46month and a half uh and there were a lot

20:49of lot of uh I think it was downloaded

20:52200 times 254 views so definitely people

20:55came in and looked at it uh and I think

20:58the just the nature of the changes

21:00didn't warrant going to something more

21:02extensive

21:04uh it was These are most of these

21:06changes are not something that would

21:08have a direct impact on people's

21:10everyday lives such as the ones that 10

21:1310 12 13 and 15 definitely did you know

21:15such as sight sewer costs and and storm

21:18water treatment and things like that.

21:22>> Thank you council member Kitzer and then

21:23council vice president Nova Kamina.

21:26>> Thank you. Um and I appreciate the the

21:29notes from my colleagues about potential

21:31changes especially since there's so many

21:32changes on public works director and

21:34there is a lot of discussion about that

21:36about those positions right now. Um I I

21:40would say um on the noxious weeds uh

21:42definitely interested in in the language

21:44proposal um and uh get kind of getting

21:47the the right scoping on that um so that

21:50way we can encourage uh people to remove

21:52noxious weeds but but also uh be super

21:56clear about um uh maintaining uh some of

22:00the things that we want to to be in the

22:02public right away as well. So um but I

22:04really appreciate that. One question I

22:06actually had on the noxious weed section

22:08um is the actual change of uh of going

22:11from going to the the King County list.

22:15Um and I'm just curious how much we

22:18think that will would change the list

22:20from how we the list we currently

22:23maintain.

22:24What I heard from Aaron Mulver, who's

22:27the natural resources manager, is that

22:30uh the county does a much better job of

22:33continually keeping that up and making

22:35sure that it reflects the current

22:36thinking and practice on the noxious

22:38weeds. The city uh

22:41because they are kind of a central

22:42reposi repository of that information.

22:44The county is it he thought it'd be

22:46better to have the city just add on

22:48things that might be more applicable to

22:50the city of Redmond. So that was the

22:52thinking that they they spend more time

22:55and keep it up on a very regular basis.

22:58>> So So should it be more like a King

23:00County noxious weeds list with additions

23:03that are relevant to the city of Redmond

23:05or it would it be comprehensive within

23:07the King County list?

23:09>> Yeah, we would we would adopt the list,

23:11but then the the language allows the

23:13director to add

23:16>> revised as determined by the public

23:17works director. Okay. And a while back,

23:20actually, I think it was during like

23:21maybe my first year on council, we were

23:24discussing specifically around um

23:27noxious weed removal um and some of the

23:31approach to that um in particular um the

23:34allowed practices um and um and

23:38chemicals that that can be used for

23:39that. And I'm wondering um whether there

23:43uh whether it was considered to to add

23:45any additional which I know there's been

23:47some work on that in recent years

23:48whether there's any updates that were

23:50considered um to add in here as well.

23:55>> We can take a look at that with the uh

23:56staff but uh I am cognizant of uh some

24:00some of those BMP's best maintenance

24:03practices have been implemented in some

24:05of the past conversations but we'll take

24:07a look with the group for sure.

24:10Thank you. I have another question, but

24:12I'll wait till the next round.

24:13>> Council me Council Vice President No

24:15Camina.

24:15>> Thank you. Um my my question first

24:18stemmed from the um uh the proposed

24:21language addition from Council Member

24:24Parsy uh about timeline and if that if

24:29that was going to be something um that

24:31we could get done before this went to

24:34consent. However, with the other changes

24:37you're looking at, is this

24:41because there are going to be other

24:42changes that we're already anticipating

24:45and um thank you for bringing up the

24:47point that of the the consistency

24:50looking for are we looking for direction

24:53to go ahead and pass this now as is

24:56knowing that we're going to rather

24:59almost immediately need to start then

25:02the this the next round of adjustments

25:05based on a possible reorg and additional

25:08language.

25:12>> Yeah.

25:13>> And now with the third with um best

25:15practices with what uh removal

25:19mechanisms can be used.

25:20>> Yes. I I think we could probably turn

25:22that language around fairly quickly with

25:24a proposal. But yeah, I get I can't I

25:27won't sit here and tell you that we must

25:28pass this by October 20th. It was just

25:30it it was a natural pro progress and and

25:34we've reached the point where we think

25:35it's we'd make that consistency as I'd

25:37mentioned. But yes, I if it if it got

25:39pushed off a month later or something

25:41like that, I I

25:42>> would it how how would would there be a

25:45change of experience for staff, right?

25:47Like would it be a little bit smoother

25:49if we if we had the um the consistency

25:54now before end of year or you know

25:56within the month or or would it be

25:58easier to The only the only key I think

26:02the only key two key items that uh are I

26:06would call them timesensitive is the the

26:08two uh sections that that talk about

26:12designates and delegates because we

26:14already reference those sections in 10

26:1812 13 right now they're they reference

26:20nothing because they that there's

26:22nothing there for to turn to. So it

26:25would be nice to get those in. And

26:26that's a divi a title one and a title

26:28two change. Uh and then there's a few

26:32others that uh obviously the like the

26:351965 has been there for this long it

26:38could wait another month you know but uh

26:40uh so I think there's just a few that

26:42would be timesensitive.

26:44>> Thank you. Thank you. Um council member

26:47Curtzer do you have one more question

26:48quickly?

26:50>> Yes. I would just say um would love uh

26:53when this item comes back if uh the only

26:56kind of item that I had wanted

26:58clarification on and we don't have to go

27:00over it today would be um what function

27:04with even though we don't have a health

27:05officer now what function within our

27:08team does serve uh what it seems like

27:11the health officer used to do.

27:15>> Thank you. Yes. Like real quickly, the

27:18qu closest thing we could find was King

27:19County and their their board of health

27:23and the that you know what they would do

27:26from a like a septic sanitary sewer

27:28standpoint. So we didn't really find any

27:31real parallel in the city today, but we

27:34can get you a better answer than that.

27:37>> Go ahead.

27:38>> And that and that parallels with a lot

27:39of that APWA work. you know, one of the

27:42trying not to go off topic, but vector

27:45control program. Um, King County is our,

27:48you know, deferral mechanism for that in

27:50lie of the uh public health officer for

27:52Redmond. So, I would see this as the

27:55same, but we'll definitely check it in

27:56there, but I would I would see parallel

27:58courses for the both. [snorts]

28:01>> Councilman Percy, do you have a

28:02follow-up real quick? Quick question.

28:04Um, in the business administration item,

28:07administration and personnel item, I

28:08spotted that we're changing the title of

28:11the technology director to chief

28:13technology officer. I wanted to better

28:15understand if there could be fiscal

28:17implications for that as in with the

28:19title change potentially. There could be

28:21compensation differences that we would

28:22have to consider potentially as part of

28:25um this budget cycle or in the future or

28:27kind of why why the change in title

28:31>> that that is their current title and so

28:36all we did was do it to the current

28:37titles and update that.

28:39>> Great. So it sounds like we're going to

28:40see some things back with this. Um, it

28:43doesn't necessarily sound like we have

28:46uh council, do we have approval for

28:49consent or do we want to see things

28:50back? So, see things back. Thumbs up.

28:54Okay. So, we we'd like to see some

28:56things back before we see this go to

28:58consent.

28:59>> Okay.

28:59>> Great. Thank you.

29:00>> Thank you.

29:01>> Moving right along. Approval of the 2027

29:04tourism grant funding uh lodging tax

29:08advisory committee recommendations.

29:14Okay. And I'm going to get started since

29:16I know we're running a bit. Um, hello

29:19council. Uh, my name is Sari Allen. I'm

29:21the interim planning director. Uh, this

29:24agenda item will be presented by Jackie

29:26Leler, our economic development and

29:28tourism program manager or

29:29administrator. Sorry. The um lodging tax

29:32advisory committee, also known as ELTAC,

29:35met on September 1 to review 20 external

29:38grant applications and three city

29:40applications for 2027 annual funding. Um

29:43Jackie will provide you details um on

29:45the annual uh tourism grant program and

29:482027 funding recommendations. And then

29:50we will be back later tonight um to

29:53share with you more about the city's

29:54overall tourism program. Um, and then I

29:56also wanted to give a shout out to our

29:58Eltech chair. Um, and um, she might want

30:01to add some comments at the end of

30:02Jackie's, but I'll now turn it over to

30:04Jackie.

30:07Thank you and thank you city council for

30:09having me tonight.

30:11Uh, this is our annual tourism grant

30:13program and in accordance with the RCW

30:15requirements, the ELTAC reviewed the

30:172027 grant applications and is providing

30:20their recommendations to the city

30:22council. These grants are funded through

30:25a 1% lodging tax collected from hotels

30:28and short-term rentals in Redmond.

30:31As a priority and requirement under the

30:34state law, lodging tax funds should

30:36support tourism related programs that

30:38have a portion of their audience coming

30:40from more than 50 miles away and are

30:42intended to generate paid overnight

30:44stays.

30:46Additional considerations for applicants

30:48include cultural elements, the ability

30:51to draw large audiences to Redmond, and

30:54the potential economic impact for our

30:56local small businesses.

30:58If helpful, the attachments and content

31:00of your memo include a full scoring

31:03criteria, all grant applications, and

31:06tourism programming frequently asked

31:08questions. During the grant cycle, the

31:11ELTAC voted and recommended $171,500

31:15in tourism matching grants for 19

31:18applicants, external applicants, and an

31:21additional $150,000 for three city-f

31:24funed applications supporting events and

31:27cultural arts programming. Together, the

31:29total funding recommendation is for

31:32$321,500.

31:36A few items of interest for this year's

31:38grant cycle are that four applications

31:40did rec require a recusal by one

31:43committee member who is actively

31:45involved in the event planning or

31:48submitted the application themsel.

31:51We received seven new applicants this

31:53year including four applications for new

31:56events. One of which is a

31:58crossjurisdiction

31:59Washington state marathon with a

32:01starting point in Redmond.

32:04One application for a small folk dance

32:06workshop was not recommended for funding

32:08as they turned in their application past

32:10the deadline.

32:12Staff have communicated with this event

32:14producer and they plan to apply again

32:16next year. As other grants come

32:18available, I will make sure to pass

32:20those on to the applicant as well. We

32:23would like to proceed with adding this

32:25item to the October 20th consent agenda

32:27for your approval. Thank you.

32:30>> Thank you. And I wanted to note and see

32:32if the Eltech chair, um, Council Member

32:34Critzer had anything you'd like to add.

32:37>> Well, thank you so much. Um, I ju I

32:39first just want to say thanks to our

32:40wonderful staff. Um, also, uh, Philly

32:43March, who wasn't at the table as well,

32:45um, who, uh, worked on this. Um, and,

32:48uh, and to the Eltech members, uh, who

32:50spent a great deal of time reviewing all

32:52the different applications. Um it was

32:54really wonderful to kind of to be a part

32:56of of the process and be able to hear

32:59the very thoughtful deliberations

33:01um looking deeply at the data um around

33:04especially projected night stays since

33:06that is uh one of the the key criteria

33:08but also kind of weighing all the

33:10different types of things um that we

33:12want to bring to our city and that will

33:14bring people to our city to want to come

33:16stay here. So, um, just, uh, really want

33:18to express my appreciation. Um, and I'll

33:21note, uh, we did have a before we began

33:23deliberations on how much to, as you

33:25probably saw from the notes, but I'll

33:27just highlight, um, before we begin

33:28deliberations on how much to allocate to

33:30each of the the different grants, um, we

33:33did consider whether uh, we would

33:35include the late grant application. Um

33:37and one thing that uh was noted that um

33:40previously there had been late grant

33:42applications and this year the staff

33:44took extra attention to make sure it was

33:46not only on the website the time the

33:49exact time of day and the deadline but

33:50it was also on the application in red at

33:53the very top. Um and so the the group

33:56did decide that just to be fair

33:58everybody should have to align by the

34:00rules and and so I I do hope uh that

34:02that applicant is able to apply uh in

34:04the future. Um and so um anyway, happy

34:08to answer any questions if people have

34:09about um the allocations as well.

34:12>> Any council member questions? Council

34:13member Parcy and then council member

34:15Sony.

34:16>> Hi. I actually would love to know how

34:19late did they apply and if we include

34:21them if this would potentially burden

34:23the staff because one of the things that

34:26I really liked about them was that they

34:28are very different from the rest of the

34:29applications that we have right now and

34:32that could potentially diversify the

34:34offerings that we provide. And then also

34:36I like that this was a new application

34:39versus many of the ones that we're

34:40already supporting are returning ones.

34:43So in the spirit of previously I think I

34:45heard from um council member Sony and

34:47many others that we want to support new

34:49applications. So from kind of that light

34:52I came in with a perspective of how can

34:54we support this candidate too. So I

34:56would love to hear your thoughts if that

34:57would be a burden for staff to support.

35:00Great. Thank you for the question. This

35:02does come up often when we're not able

35:03to or when they choose not to fund an

35:05event. So, we have sought legal counsel

35:09on this exact question and what we've

35:11been told by two different attorneys is

35:13that if the lodging tax committee

35:16doesn't put it forward for funding, then

35:19the council cannot give funding to an

35:21event that was not recommended. You can

35:24change funding of those that are

35:26recommended and it would have to go back

35:28for comment from the ELAC for 45 days

35:31before you can approve it. They can't

35:33say no, but they just need 45 days for

35:35consideration, but to fund an event that

35:38they chose not to fund is two different

35:41attorneys have said it's not allowed

35:43based on the RCW and I should actually

35:45put that in the FAQs in the future. So,

35:47I apologize. That's my bad. Um, but you

35:51could choose to fund them through a

35:53different source. It just can't be the

35:54lodging tax.

35:58Council member Kitzer,

35:59>> I'll also note it seemed like um

36:01hopefully this event was going to be put

36:03on regardless. It's just whether the

36:05ELTAC would fund it. And I think what we

36:07talked about was just the fairness

36:08because if we gave money to an applicant

36:11who didn't uh abide by the the timeline,

36:14it meant that there would be less money

36:15for those who did abide by the timeline.

36:17So hopefully just encourages them to

36:19come back to this source in the future

36:21and make sure to apply by the deadline.

36:23Thank you for the legal explanation on

36:25that as well and for putting the

36:27deadlines in multiple places. I think

36:28that helps cover us as well. Uh council

36:31member Sony,

36:33>> thank you so much chair. Um I have lot

36:36of questions and I do serve in the elac

36:39board for another city. So you know

36:41that's the reason it's like have some

36:43kind of an experience and a granular

36:44lens to look at. First is this year we

36:49we were expected to have higher

36:52um budget for the next year because of

36:55uh FIFA World Cup and the number of

36:57hotel rooms booked while I'm seeing that

36:592027 and 2028 the budget is decreased

37:03which is little surprise to me. Uh so

37:06that that's indicating that the the

37:09number of rooms booked in 2026 are less

37:13while they should have been higher. So

37:15that is definitely my first question and

37:18maybe if I can ask my follow-up

37:20question.

37:22Sure. Sure. So in terms of the uh total

37:25room nights like you know when I'm

37:27looking into some of these room nights

37:29my question is is this per person per

37:32room night or is it the actual room

37:36booked? Because the numbers that I'm

37:38seeing here they definitely do not look

37:41realistic. I do host events. So I have a

37:44lot of experience in booking room nights

37:46and these things. These numbers are not

37:47looking very realistic to me. So what

37:50method are we adopting to ensure that

37:53the reports that are submitted and the

37:55the the rooms proposed versus room

37:58booked there is an alignment. So is

38:00there a report that is taken from every

38:03hotel where these were booked so that

38:05there is a transparency

38:07or is it like you know based on whatever

38:10was submitted is just accepted.

38:14>> I'm going to start actually with the

38:16first question say that we'll address

38:17that in our report tonight just because

38:19I know we're running short on time but

38:20we'll talk about um where we've been

38:22what we saw from the World Cup and what

38:24we're projecting for future. So if it's

38:26okay with the council, I'll put a pin in

38:27that one and go to the second technical

38:29question. Okay,

38:32great. And so on the second piece of

38:35your question, some of the numbers are

38:37not realistic. That is something that

38:38ELTAC also discusses. That's a big

38:41challenge with this committee is many of

38:43these numbers can't be proven except for

38:45the soccer tournaments can prove their

38:47numbers because they have printouts from

38:48the hotelers. So the large soccer

38:51tournaments are some of the only events

38:52that we host that can prove their

38:54numbers. Uh this is something that

38:57repeatedly comes up. We will be running

38:59some geo fencing data on events that are

39:01large enough to grab data but not all

39:04the events are large enough. So it is

39:05self reported. Um but that does go into

39:09the conversations that are had. So even

39:11though someone may say they bring so

39:12many bed uh heads in beds, it doesn't

39:17necessarily mean that the ELAC is taking

39:18that at face value of what's in the

39:20application. They did discuss that on

39:22many of the events, but you're right,

39:23that's a that's a really big challenge

39:25for the ELTAC at this point in time.

39:28>> I also wanted to add that we are um

39:30continuing to invest in more data

39:32collection. So we both have the Placer,

39:33but we're um seeing your budget and

39:35Heather, we're doing u better on um

39:37collecting more data in general. And so

39:39that will hopefully be something that

39:41will help with that.

39:42>> Thank you. To keep us on time, I'm going

39:44to move us forward since we're going to

39:45be hearing a little more about this

39:46tonight. Um, is anyone objecting to this

39:49going on consent on the 20th?

39:53Great. Thank you. We will see this back

39:55on October 20th. Um, thank you for the

39:59briefing and for hearing more about this

40:01later as well. Appreciate it. Uh, next

40:03up is amending RMC 3.1 development

40:06impact fees and amending contract uh

40:095251 interlocal agreement on collection.

40:14Oh,

40:19sorry.

40:24Wasn't printed on the

40:26>> Oh, my bad. All right. Apologies. We are

40:29up. We are moving on to the updated

40:30planning commission rules of procedure.

40:33Apologies.

40:35Tricky at the top there. [laughter]

40:38Um, all right. So, good afternoon. I'm

40:40going to start talking while staff uh uh

40:42arrives so we can keep things moving.

40:44Uh, I'm here with uh, uh, Cheryl Zanos,

40:47our uh, city clerk, Becky Fry, our

40:49interim long-range planning manager, and

40:51um, Jeff Churchill, our interim um,

40:53development services deputy to introduce

40:56um, some updates to the planning

40:57commission rules and procedures uh,

40:59related to uh, sorry and then related to

41:02updates to the Redmond Municipal Code.

41:04So, the proposal introduced today uh, is

41:07for an ordinance amending RMC4

41:10uh,.43.080

41:11080 and a resolution updating the

41:14planning commission rules of procedure.

41:17The Redmond Planning Commission is

41:19established in the Redmond Mun Municipal

41:21Code um 4.43 and the basics of planning

41:25commission authority and operations are

41:26also contained within that RMC. Um these

41:29are uh these rules are supplemented um

41:32by the rules and procedures adopted

41:34pursuant to that RMC. And um I also

41:37wanted to share and Becky will share

41:39about this a little bit but um or sorry

41:42I'll turning it over to Cheryl to share

41:44this first uh about um the Do you have

41:48that? Okay. Uh turning it over to Cheryl

41:50to uh because this has kind of been a a

41:52twofur where the clerk's office has been

41:54drafting some um standard rules and

41:57procedures which Cheryl will talk about

41:58and then the reason we're here before

42:00you is what Becky will speak to which is

42:01how it's specific to the planning

42:03commission. So Cheryl, I'll turn it over

42:05to you.

42:07Cheryl Alexanth, city clerk.

42:09Boards, commissions, and committees are

42:11made up of qualified, responsible, and

42:12motivated community members. Through

42:14appointed positions, they contribute to

42:16the success of the city and the quality

42:18of life for all residents to provide

42:20consistency in public expectations at

42:22city meetings. A standardized rules of

42:24procedure was developed. Rules of

42:26procedures from other jurisdictions and

42:28best practices were reviewed to create

42:30the stand the standardized framework in

42:33ensuring consistency strengthens how the

42:35community interacts with city

42:36government. We focused on the planning

42:39commission first. The rules of procedure

42:41will be rolled out to each of the city's

42:42other boards, commissions, and

42:44committees for review and adoption.

42:46Each board, commission, and committee is

42:48unique in its purpose, mission, and

42:49role. So, the rules will be adjusted for

42:51each body based on its specific

42:53responsibilities.

42:55I will be working with staff leaison to

42:57develop a timeline that reflects the

42:59amount of work needed for each set of

43:00roles in alignment with their meeting

43:02schedules.

43:08And we'll turn it over to Becky to talk

43:09about how the planning commission rules

43:11and procedures are the only ones that

43:12will come before the council for

43:14ratification due to all the RMC language

43:16I spoke to earlier in the introduction.

43:19So Becky,

43:21>> so the com planning commission took the

43:23standardized rules and procedures and

43:25they are also suggesting edits um and

43:29recommendations related to attendance.

43:32Uh the edits remove the distinction of

43:34excused and unexcused and just really um

43:37focus on if the absences are excessive

43:39or not.

43:41Um, the edits also remove the

43:43requirement that the planning commission

43:44provide a written request to remove a

43:46commissioner due to excessive absences

43:48and instead it just refers to a new

43:50removal process which would be created

43:52in RMC. Um, that leaves the discretion

43:56to the mayor, but it doesn't change the

43:58final removal. It requires a council

44:00vote. Um, if the council adopts the

44:03commission recommendations on changes in

44:05attendance, uh, this will only impact

44:07the rules for the planning commission.

44:09it won't impact any other boards and

44:10commissions rules and procedures. It's

44:12specific to them. Uh staff requested

44:15this item be placed on the October 20th

44:17consent agenda, but we're happy to

44:19answer any questions.

44:22Questions from council, council member

44:24Percy.

44:26>> I have two questions about this. I'll

44:28start with the first one. um at the um

44:31very end of the document where we are

44:34removing um the section that uh the seat

44:38becomes vacant and a successor shall be

44:40appointed. Uh so that section is removed

44:43and also referencing uh the um larger

44:47code and context to this. Um we are

44:50getting rid of all of the areas where

44:52there is an appointment process to be

44:54followed. So, I'm concerned that we

44:56don't have any uh fall back for um

44:59appointing a successor or um uh someone

45:02to replace this candidate. Uh can you

45:05please show me where or how we're um

45:08kind of covering for this um successor

45:11replacement?

45:28Do you have a section you want to point

45:30to? Looks like staff are scrolling.

45:32>> 44380.

45:37And then um

45:41and then

45:44yeah,

45:46>> not all of 4.43 is in the document. So

45:5044350

45:52is appointments and qualifications and

45:53that does speak to how um commissioners

45:56are appointed. So we're not going to

45:58lose that.

46:00>> Yeah. Say there's

46:11>> seems to be some confusion. Are you

46:15>> can you Yeah. Can you clarify what you

46:16said again?

46:17I understood to be the concern that

46:19there's no more appointment language in

46:22080. The appointment language exists in

46:26443 050 and that's not being edited. So

46:29that appointment language will still

46:30exist and when the vacancy is created,

46:32the vacancy will be filled in the manner

46:35prescribed by 050.

46:37>> Yeah,

46:39I'm going to move on and then we'll come

46:41back. Uh Council Member Pro,

46:45>> thank you. Um I was just wondering at a

46:48high level um if these revisions uh you

46:52know given that the planning commission

46:54is one of the commissions that is

46:55mandated by state law how restrictive

46:59these uh revisions are compared to other

47:02municipalities. I mean I'm just I'm just

47:04looking at at that same section

47:064.43.080.

47:08Uh the last section, the members

47:10position shall be considered for vacancy

47:12if uh before the next regular meeting.

47:16Um

47:19oh sorry I the previous sentence when

47:21when a member misses three consecutive

47:23regular business meetings. Um we're

47:24crossing out the uh without being

47:27excused by a majority vote section. Um

47:30and and I think this language is

47:32actually like more restrictive than the

47:34language for council members u via the

47:37RCW. I think as a council member, you

47:40only lose your seat uh if it's three

47:42unexcused business meetings in a row. Um

47:44so that um just prompts my question as

47:47to how restrictive are these measures on

47:50commissioners compared to other

47:51jurisdictions.

47:53>> I guess I'll say this is what the

47:54planning commission asked for. Um they

47:57wanted to remove that distinction

47:58between excused and unexcused and then

48:02wanted to focus on just total number of

48:03absences. So, you're right. It is a um a

48:06different threshold than for council

48:08because the commission only wanted to

48:10focus on absences. Um it's not something

48:13that the council needs to adopt. This

48:16language is not required by the RCW. It

48:19is within their uh ability to suggest

48:22this and to operate that way um if they

48:25want to and the council agrees with it,

48:26but it's it's optional.

48:30>> Thank you. Another questions. Council

48:32member Kitzer and then Council President

48:34Stewart,

48:35>> I did read through the um the matrix uh

48:38of of the planning commission's

48:40discussion, but I am curious if you

48:41could just give us a little bit more of

48:44the background on um uh on the the

48:48interest in in being able to remove this

48:50distinction. Um I I I'll say I I can

48:54understand this issue since I think it

48:56does come up on our commissions. I think

48:57when I was on planning commission, there

48:59was uh maybe a member that that did not

49:02follow these this rule. So, um so I can

49:06see how making sure you have regularly

49:08attending members is very important, but

49:10I'm just curious um in particular around

49:12the like um the absent the excuse

49:15language.

49:18>> I think part part of what it was is that

49:19the plan commission wanted to align

49:21their rules with how they were actually

49:23operating. And the way they're actually

49:25operating is that almost every absence

49:27was excused. Um, and it also is the case

49:31that attendance records are pretty good

49:33and that most commissioners will notify

49:35staff and the planning commission chair

49:36if they're going to be absent. So

49:37attendance hasn't been a a concerning

49:40issue. And since it hasn't been a

49:41concerning issue, they also haven't been

49:43um regularly taking votes on excused

49:45versus unexcused absences because most

49:47most of them have been they've all been

49:50sort of excused by by lack of objection

49:52to to having that absence excused. And

49:55so in in practice, they weren't really

49:57distinguishing between excused and

49:59unexcused and they wanted the rules to

50:01uh reflect how they were operating.

50:05>> Thank you. And I I'll just note it looks

50:07like there was a discussion about events

50:10and about the ability for the planning

50:13commissioners to talk with council. I

50:16don't know if we need a deep dive on

50:17this since we're not actually going to

50:19have um a a decision related to this. Um

50:24but uh but I'd just say I I hope that we

50:29can abide by OPMA but that we don't um

50:32discourage the planning commission from

50:34engaging with council. I I think having

50:36good relationships with our planning

50:38commission, hearing their perspectives

50:40and being able to understand their

50:42decisions, especially since they do such

50:43deep dive work that then comes to

50:45council. I value that as a council

50:48member. Um so help good to get the

50:50clarification. Um, but I I just hope the

50:52outcome of that discussion is not that

50:54we would have less communication between

50:56council and the planning commission.

50:59>> Council President Stewart.

51:01>> Yeah, thank you. And I appreciate um all

51:03of the comments from my colleagues and

51:06uh for time if the chair were to move us

51:08along and say we would have to bring

51:09this back at another touch. Um I think

51:12that it would be helpful to actually see

51:14the distinction between um what is the

51:16the base recommendations that are going

51:18to be made and adapted um through the

51:21clerk's work for all the boards and

51:23commissions and then kind of what were

51:24the the key decisions that the uh

51:27commission did make for themselves. I

51:29think we received a uh recommendation

51:32that was unanimously adopted and I do

51:34want to respect that. Um, and I also

51:38want to just um uh take our time and

51:42make sure that we are

51:45cognizant of our council's interest in

51:48making service accessible too and and to

51:50have that check on that. Um, my question

51:52is actually for the clerk. Thank you so

51:56much. I know um a a subcommittee

51:58subworking group of us on the council

52:00worked with you last year on our most

52:02recent updates um or earlier this year

52:05to the council rules of procedure and I

52:07see some of the through line in that

52:09conversation coming through. I'm

52:10wondering if you could speak um as as it

52:14you spoke about how our boards and

52:15commissions um had really disperate

52:18rules of procedure, but I'm also

52:19wondering if you could talk um to name a

52:22couple of the pain points uh that have

52:24been coming up in those various

52:25commission rules of procedure um and and

52:29um how the the package that we won't

52:32necessarily see because we only have

52:33jurisdiction over this one. um but how

52:36those experiences for commissioners are

52:38going to be improved as a result of this

52:40work.

52:44>> I would say not only for the

52:45commissioners but for the public. So we

52:47would have consistent public comment

52:48rules which would be important is um

52:51then we would also like all the boards

52:54and commissions um rules of procedure

52:56were developed at different times so

52:58they contain completely different um

53:00information. we have had laws change and

53:02things like that and records, things

53:04like that are very important to the city

53:06to be able to abide by state law. So, it

53:09would just have a more consistent um

53:12application and if sometimes boards or

53:14commission members um want to move over

53:16to a different board or commission and

53:18then they would all have very consistent

53:20rules to follow. So, I think it would

53:21help not only the city but also the

53:23public and the boards and commission

53:25members themselves.

53:27>> Thank you so much. and the public

53:28participation section of of this draft.

53:31Is this similar to what would be seen in

53:33the other commissions as well?

53:35>> Yes, it would be.

53:36>> Thank you.

53:37>> Thank you. I'm going to ask council

53:39members, are there other questions that

53:40they would like to follow up with staff

53:42because we are short on time? Um and

53:44then could we potentially see this in

53:46November?

53:48>> So, uh our our request would be I'm not

53:51sure what additional information is

53:53being requested. So kind of the three

53:55options would be adopt as is with the

53:57planning commission edits, adopt the

53:59standard without some of the PC edits

54:01included or three if there are

54:04additional items that are being

54:05requested for edits that would come back

54:07later. I'm not I'd have to check the

54:09council schedule to see when we could

54:10bring this back. Okay. Thank you. Um are

54:12there are there other questions from

54:15council? I'm seeing one head nod and no

54:18head nods. Okay. I'm going to suggest uh

54:21Council Member Parcy if you could email

54:23and meet with Coun um staff to get your

54:26questions answered and then um thumbs

54:29for putting this on new business that

54:31could be pulled if any council member

54:33wants to speak to it or address any

54:36issues. So consent,

54:40sorry, I meant consent.

54:43uh thumbs for putting this on consent

54:45and then you can pull it off of consent

54:47if you have concerns that you would like

54:48to have addressed. Okay, thank you. We

54:52will see this on consent. Um expect some

54:55follow-up questions. Sounds great.

54:57>> Thank you.

54:58>> Thank you. Moving along to amending RMC

55:01development impact fees. Going to

55:04shorten that title.

55:05>> Yep. Here we go.

55:10Uh good afternoon again. Um Glenn Coyle,

55:12a senior planner with the long-range

55:14plan team, is here to uh brief council

55:16members on the proposed transportation

55:18impact fee changes in 2027 to account

55:21for inflation, as well as changes to the

55:24Lake Washington School District's fee

55:25schedule. Uh, as a reminder, council

55:28reviewed and discussed the fire impact

55:30fees on um September 15th at PSHS

55:33committee of the whole and the park

55:35impact fees at the 9:22 um park and

55:38environmental sustainability committee

55:39of meeting of the whole. Um, and we're

55:42proposing that this would come forward

55:44as one full package. Um, but the two

55:47items we're discussing today are the uh

55:50uh transportation and Lake Washington

55:52School District fee schedule. Um, please

55:54note that Brian Buck, a representative

55:56from the Lake Washington School

55:58District, is also um online with us um

56:00to answer any questions about the school

56:02impact fees. So, with that, I'll turn it

56:05over to Glenn to provide some more quick

56:07context.

56:09>> Thank you. Uh good afternoon, council

56:12members. Um I am Glenn Coyle, senior

56:15planner. So impact fees are one-time

56:18charges collected by the city uh from

56:20new commercial and residential

56:22developments to fund fire, park, school,

56:24and transportation facilities needed to

56:27accommodate growth. Impact fees are

56:29authorized in RMC 310. Uh indexing or

56:33updating Redmond's impact fees annually

56:36allows the rates to keep a pace with

56:38inflation to maintain the purchasing

56:40power of these impact fees and to help

56:43provide the capital facilities necessary

56:45to serve growth in Redmond. RMC 310

56:48establishes the indexes and procedures

56:51that the city council may apply annually

56:53to index or update Redmond's impact

56:55fees. The city collects school impact

56:59fees on behalf of the Lake Washington

57:01School District by interlocal agreement.

57:04School impact fees calculated by the

57:06district uh reflect the proportionate

57:08share of the cost of school related

57:10system improvements that are reasonably

57:12related to new development. Um and as

57:15Sephrey noted, we are here today to

57:17discuss two amendments to RMC 310. The

57:20first is to index the transportation fee

57:23schedule for inflation which is an

57:25annual process

57:27for 2027. Uh transportation impact fees

57:30will increase 0.41%

57:34which is calculated as a three-year

57:36average of construction cost indices for

57:39the Lake Washington School District. We

57:42are requesting an amendment to the

57:43interlocal agreement from 2006. Um and

57:47we will also adopt a new school impact

57:49fee schedule to be updated by annually

57:52which is every two years instead of

57:54annually.

57:55The driver of this uh is the school

57:58district's switching to using bedroom

58:00counts to calculate impact fees. The

58:03amended interlocal agreement

58:04acknowledges these changes while also

58:07affirming a new process that the city

58:09will not calculate bedroom counts on

58:12behalf of the district but rather will

58:14require developments developers to

58:17submit an affidavit on bedroom counts to

58:19the city to assess fees.

58:22Uh the agreement also increases the

58:24city's admin fee to align with current

58:26costs as well as well as I'm going to

58:30indemnify in the city against the

58:32accuracy of the affidavits.

58:34Um I would also just like to to renote

58:37that this is two components of four

58:39total updates to RMC 310. Both parks and

58:42fire are proposing updates to their fee

58:45schedules related to updated capital

58:47facilities plans, also known as

58:48functional plans, and are being reviewed

58:51by council in separate processes.

58:54We are coordinating with them so that

58:56council can adopt one omnibus ordinance

58:59in November so that all the fees can go

59:01into effect consistently on January 1st

59:05as is the usual standard. And this is

59:07also why the parks and fire impact fee

59:10schedules are not being indexed for

59:11inflation this year. Um and also note

59:14that um we'd like to come back uh to

59:17committee the whole November 2nd to

59:19review the ordinance. Um and with that I

59:21turn it back to the chair.

59:23>> Thank you. Council questions.

59:27Council member Brocka.

59:32>> Thank you. Um, so I understand that the

59:35school district changed uh to using

59:37bedroom counts for calculating their

59:39impact fees. Uh, and it says that we

59:41have trouble actually verifying this

59:44with developers. I'm just wondering if

59:46you can help me understand why uh in

59:48terms of permitting. We we just don't

59:51get that number um directly as part of

59:54the permit that we are verifying.

59:57>> I I wouldn't necessarily say that

59:59there's a difficulty. It's a new

1:00:01process. the city doesn't necessarily

1:00:03track that and that would um just add a

1:00:05whole new process for the city that

1:00:07normally hasn't been done. Uh this is a

1:00:09pass through. Um so I would defer um to

1:00:12to our school district uh partners and

1:00:15colleagues to maybe um help kind of

1:00:17answer some of that.

1:00:21>> Yeah. Hi, this is Brian Buck with the

1:00:23Lake Washington School District. Yeah,

1:00:25currently we do not have access

1:00:29um uh to bedroom counts. It is something

1:00:33that we will continue to look at. Uh as

1:00:37such, our student generation data for

1:00:39units with two bedrooms or less and one

1:00:42bedroom or less uh is not available. Uh

1:00:47so the district's assuming a $0 fee for

1:00:50these smaller dwelling units. As permit

1:00:53data evolves, we'll continue to revisit

1:00:57um to determine whether it can be

1:00:59accurately

1:01:01um accessed and and student generation

1:01:04rates determined for the smaller units.

1:01:07In the meantime, the district's using a

1:01:10blended student generation rate based on

1:01:13all of the units in each dwelling

1:01:15category.

1:01:19>> Thank you. Um, council member Kurtzer,

1:01:23>> I guess just following up on that, how

1:01:25if if there's a a blended calculation,

1:01:27which I may not be understanding that,

1:01:29um, how it is that we ended up with only

1:01:32a rate above zero in one category. Um,

1:01:36when also there is another category with

1:01:38threebedroom, but also I wouldn't see

1:01:40some in the twobedroom

1:01:43categories.

1:01:47>> Again, I'll defer that to the school

1:01:48district. Yeah, this is Brian Buck again

1:01:51with Lake Washington School District.

1:01:53So, there are several factors that

1:01:55contribute

1:01:57um to um the fees for um both single

1:02:04family uh single family rates and then

1:02:08the apartment/condo

1:02:10rate and the new middle housing rate.

1:02:14Each has a smaller bedroom count uh

1:02:18piece. So when we calculate our our

1:02:22fees, we um

1:02:26we look at student generation rates and

1:02:28then we we run them through our

1:02:30calculation.

1:02:32And so I would say that

1:02:36sorry I would say that um the updated

1:02:40enrollment plan um has a decline each

1:02:44year through 2031. It averages about 1.6

1:02:4867%.

1:02:50In addition, uh so we're only eligible

1:02:53to collect at the high school level. And

1:02:56in addition, we've we removed the high

1:02:58school land costs from the calculation

1:03:01because they were not in play during

1:03:04this um capital facilities plan.

1:03:07uh student generation rates did increase

1:03:11for single family u but they decrease

1:03:14for apartments and condos and um so

1:03:18that's the result of why there's no fee

1:03:20for apartments condos or the new middle

1:03:24housing rate but just only for the

1:03:26single family.

1:03:27>> Thank you for that explanation.

1:03:29>> Thank you. Just noting that we have four

1:03:31minutes left in this meeting and we are

1:03:33seeing this back on November 2nd. Would

1:03:36it be appropriate if council members I

1:03:38know there I'm feeling there's a lot

1:03:39more questions around the table if we

1:03:42could email you our questions and get

1:03:44that on for that November 2nd meeting.

1:03:49Um, yes. I think we just request a

1:03:52deadline so that staff can prepare some

1:03:54responses from that since we're hoping

1:03:56that's the final touch before bringing

1:03:57it on consent order to get the adoption

1:04:00date um by January 1.

1:04:02>> And what um what deadline would you like

1:04:04us to send questions?

1:04:05>> If we have the two weeks, let's say by

1:04:08the end of the 16th, would that work and

1:04:10Brian? Okay. All right, council members,

1:04:13please send your questions uh to staff

1:04:16by end of day on the 16th on this item.

1:04:19>> Um I have a feeling you'll be getting

1:04:20several.

1:04:21>> Great. All right, thanks everyone and

1:04:24apologies for keep trying to keep us on

1:04:26track here. Um next up is the status

1:04:28update on downtown adaptive signal

1:04:30control project.

1:04:47Good evening, council members. Back

1:04:49again, Chris Stinger, acting director of

1:04:51public works. Joining me tonight is to

1:04:54manager Paul Cho and senior engineer

1:04:58Hidemi Su. So, um, I'm going to hand it

1:05:01off to those. But first, tonight's

1:05:03presentation is primarily anformational

1:05:06update on the adaptive signals project

1:05:09and, uh, give you a little preview of

1:05:11what's coming up. But without further

1:05:13ado, I'm going to hand it over to Paul.

1:05:16Good afternoon. I'm Paul Cho. I'm also

1:05:18the city traffic engineer. Um, but we

1:05:21are here to provide a brief summary of

1:05:23the downtown adaptive signal project and

1:05:25to see if you have additional questions

1:05:28to cover in the staff report. Adaptive

1:05:31project information was last brought

1:05:33before council in July of 2024 before

1:05:36the project before the project actually

1:05:38started. Uh, traditional preset timing

1:05:42based on historical data can't keep up

1:05:44with today's fluctuating traffic.

1:05:46Adaptive monitors real time traffic data

1:05:50to make program adjustments as needed.

1:05:53Unpredictable patterns are driven by

1:05:55light rail, hybrid work delivery

1:05:58activities and weather.

1:06:01So adaptive technology was installed

1:06:04along Redmond Way from 160th on the west

1:06:06side and then East Lake Samish Parkway

1:06:09on the east side. In conjunction,

1:06:12multimodal detection was a separate

1:06:14technology that was implemented for

1:06:16consistent bicycle detection, continuous

1:06:19traffic counts, and future features like

1:06:22pedestrian all red extension.

1:06:25After field installation, the project

1:06:27completed a before and after study to

1:06:29evaluate performance. Hidemi is going to

1:06:32walk through these results in more

1:06:34detail.

1:06:39>> Thank you. Uh my name is Hidemi Suru.

1:06:41I'm senior engineer with the traffic

1:06:43safety division, a public works

1:06:44department. Um so I will briefly go over

1:06:46the results of the before and after

1:06:48study. The study showed that the

1:06:50adaptive student signal system is

1:06:52actively adjusting throughout the day,

1:06:53especially during midday and

1:06:55transitional periods leading up to the

1:06:56afternoon rush hour. Um corridor

1:06:59progression and travel times are

1:07:00maintained or improved. the large I'm

1:07:03sorry. In order to optimize corridor

1:07:04progression, there may be some

1:07:06trade-offs at the intersection level,

1:07:07but overall um corridor progression has

1:07:10improved. Um the study also showed that

1:07:13transit performance improved. The

1:07:15largest improvements occurred during the

1:07:16weekday PM period where average delay

1:07:19decreased by approximately 7 seconds per

1:07:21trip for the eastbound direction and

1:07:23nearly 3 seconds per trip for the

1:07:25westbound direction.

1:07:27CO2 emission savings were also

1:07:29calculated based on travel time

1:07:31reductions. Um, planning level estimates

1:07:33showed a total reduction of

1:07:35approximately 2.5 metric tons of

1:07:37emission savings uh per average weekday,

1:07:40which is the environmental equivalent of

1:07:42taking an average vehicle off the road

1:07:44for half a year. The last benefit we

1:07:47would like to highlight is the savings

1:07:49in staff time by reducing the need for

1:07:51manual signal retiming. Sandal timing is

1:07:54complex, labor intensive, and requires

1:07:57hours of field observations. Corridors

1:07:59with conflicting traffic on side street

1:08:02side streets such as Redmond Way could

1:08:03take 3 to six months to manually

1:08:05optimize signal timing. And even then,

1:08:07it would be based on traffic counts

1:08:09taken from a sample day a year ago.

1:08:12Instead, moving forward, staff can focus

1:08:14on fine-tuning the adaptive system by

1:08:16adjusting how the system prioritizes the

1:08:19directions of movements, how fast the

1:08:21system changes to traffic conditions,

1:08:23and what events triggers the changes.

1:08:26Thank you.

1:08:30So again, uh, with the staff report, um,

1:08:34we're wanting to see if you have

1:08:36additional questions that we can

1:08:38address, uh, before we actually present

1:08:40it at a council meeting.

1:08:42>> Thank you. Uh, council members, if you

1:08:45wouldn't mind emailing your additional

1:08:47questions to Director Stinger, um, so we

1:08:50can go ahead and move on to the next

1:08:53item. Um, but we do look forward to

1:08:56hearing this staff report on the 20th. I

1:08:58know we have we're going to probably

1:08:59have a lot of questions for you to be

1:09:00included in that because this is a

1:09:02project that we've all been very excited

1:09:03about and we've heard a lot of community

1:09:05feedback on as well. So

1:09:07>> great. We we're we're looking for the

1:09:08opportunity to uh provide more

1:09:10information um to council and community.

1:09:13>> Thank you. And when would you like us to

1:09:15have those questions to you?

1:09:17>> End of this week.

1:09:18>> Yes, if possible. Uh I think we we have

1:09:20to get everything um kind of finalized.

1:09:22Make sure we get all the packet

1:09:24together.

1:09:25>> Great. End of the week. Please get your

1:09:27questions to Director Stanger to pass on

1:09:29to the team. Thank you. Uh last up is

1:09:33our CIP updates for Q3.

1:09:36>> And while they make the journey up here,

1:09:39uh still sitting here Chris Stinger and

1:09:41coming to the table is principal planner

1:09:43Tess Wilkinson and capital manager Steve

1:09:47Gibbs. So this is a regular opportunity

1:09:50to provide council with a highle look at

1:09:52where we're at on active uh capital

1:09:54projects.

1:09:56uh including overall progress on any

1:09:58items that may be helpful for the

1:10:00committee to be aware of. And we're not

1:10:01going to go through every project in

1:10:04detail, but the intent is to give you an

1:10:06overview of the program and then allow

1:10:08us to focus on specific projects where

1:10:11you have questions uh or would like

1:10:12additional information. So with that,

1:10:14I'll turn it over to Tess.

1:10:18>> Thank you, Chris. Thank you, council,

1:10:19for having us once again. Tess

1:10:21Wilkinson. I am the capital improvements

1:10:24program planner in public works. Um so

1:10:27we're going to go through this fairly

1:10:28quickly tonight because uh this is this

1:10:31was a pretty packed agenda. Um looking

1:10:34at our slides, we have 35 active

1:10:36projects within uh the Q3. We added one

1:10:40new project. It was the 150th Avenue

1:10:43improvements. That project has been

1:10:45initiated uh fairly recently. We

1:10:48currently stand at 60% completion rate.

1:10:51I am hoping to finish the year somewhere

1:10:54between 70 and 80%. If we move on to the

1:10:57next slide, you can see which projects

1:11:00have been completed there on your left

1:11:02hand side. What we are hoping to

1:11:04complete still this year and the three

1:11:07that were originally targeted for

1:11:09completion this year and have needed to

1:11:11slide for one reason or another into

1:11:132027. Our most most recent project that

1:11:17will not make this year's deadline is

1:11:19the Willows Road water mane extension.

1:11:22Um the extensive uh underground utility

1:11:24work just went longer than we

1:11:27anticipated and we are moving into the

1:11:29colder fall and winter season and it is

1:11:32not uh ideal for paving and at least

1:11:36paving is going to stick around the way

1:11:38we would like it to.

1:11:41So here is um a quick slide on the

1:11:43projects that we did complete in uh Q3

1:11:45of 2026. That is the 154th paving and

1:11:49the EV charging phase two. Uh the EV

1:11:53charging project is going to be our

1:11:55featured project for um the general

1:11:58government slide. So we'll be giving you

1:12:00some more information on that one.

1:12:03Moving into our uh programs and programs

1:12:06report. Uh speaking of general

1:12:08government, uh we have completed nearly

1:12:11every active project in this portfolio.

1:12:14So yay for us. Uh the two ongoing ones

1:12:18are the MOC campus redevelopment. This

1:12:20is uh a project I'm sure you're all very

1:12:22aware of and will be continuing for

1:12:24several years to come and a new project

1:12:27started this year, the ADA improvements

1:12:29in the parks restroom, parks restrooms.

1:12:32Um looking forward looking ahead into

1:12:342027.

1:12:36Um we will begin another ADA facilities

1:12:40project and uh based on the outcome of

1:12:43the fire station 11 feasibility report

1:12:46we will probably begin uh initiating the

1:12:49design on that project as well.

1:12:52So as mentioned here is our featured

1:12:54project the EV charging stations phase

1:12:56two.

1:12:58Hello again, council. Steve Gibbs with

1:13:00Capital Projects. Um EV charging phase 2

1:13:04added um 15 dualport chargers into our

1:13:08city parking garage. So now that's able

1:13:10to take on 30 new um vehicles to

1:13:14electric vehicles to charge. The project

1:13:16is is basically physically complete. Um

1:13:20we are um we ordered the the chargers

1:13:24ourselves and so we're responsible for

1:13:26the warranty and when we set up the

1:13:29chargers, two of them are not

1:13:31cooperating and so we're currently doing

1:13:33a warranty repair on those. Um if if

1:13:37you've been in the garage lately, you'll

1:13:38notice that all those stalls are still u

1:13:41empty and so folks are still obeying the

1:13:44signs. Um we we are looking for the

1:13:47mayor's office to come up with a policy

1:13:49uh for um um city workers commuting with

1:13:55electric vehicles be able to use those

1:13:57uh chargers as well. And so you should

1:13:59see those stalls be occupied uh fairly

1:14:01soon. Um

1:14:04and then just a a note the the when we

1:14:07purchased those chargers um it was about

1:14:1045,000 for those uh 15 dual port

1:14:14chargers. So the prices have come down

1:14:16significantly since when we did the

1:14:18first phase uh back during CO. So happy

1:14:21to answer any questions on that one.

1:14:27Okay.

1:14:30>> All right. Moving right on along, this

1:14:32is our parks portfolio.

1:14:35Um we are still working on the reservoir

1:14:38park sports court replacement. That will

1:14:40be our featured project tonight to give

1:14:42you an update on um what is the delay on

1:14:44those. The uh am the Amly RCC landscape

1:14:49repairs, I believe in my um handouts to

1:14:53you that is still marked as being in

1:14:55design. It has moved on into uh

1:14:57construction and is one of our projects

1:14:59we hope to complete by the end of this

1:15:01year.

1:15:03So, looking ahead again into 2027,

1:15:06um we will begin just one new parks

1:15:08project and that is the Idlewood Park

1:15:10restrooms and concession building

1:15:12rebuild.

1:15:14So, moving on, our featured project,

1:15:16Reservoir Park. Again, over to Steve.

1:15:19>> Yeah, one one of my favorite projects.

1:15:21Um this one has been around a while. Um,

1:15:24if you recall, we missed the window to

1:15:27kind of complete that late last summer.

1:15:29Uh, so we had to wait this year. Um, I'm

1:15:32happy to report that we were complete as

1:15:36of yesterday.

1:15:38And so, um, I think what the only thing

1:15:41preventing us from opening up is we're

1:15:42getting a protective pad around the

1:15:44basketball post. I think that should be

1:15:46in tomorrow. So, maybe Friday, get your

1:15:49rackets ready. Um,

1:15:52I I know this was a little painful. Um,

1:15:54I think I I came in January and

1:15:56explained some of the difficulties and

1:15:58and the delays. I think we're still

1:15:59holding true to that extra 300,000 that

1:16:02we asked back then. We will be coming

1:16:05back. I'm I'm hoping to get it in by the

1:16:07end of this year as far as accepting the

1:16:08contract. May may squeeze into January,

1:16:10but um um everything kind of came out as

1:16:14anticipated from January, not from last

1:16:16year, but happy to answer any questions

1:16:19on that one.

1:16:25All right. Um on to to traffic

1:16:28operations here. As noted uh earlier, we

1:16:31did complete the paving on the 154th.

1:16:33Our uh ADA improvements curb rampant

1:16:36project is under construction. We expect

1:16:38to complete that this month. And our uh

1:16:4124th Street paving and utilities project

1:16:44will continue through the winter. We

1:16:46have completed all of our water main

1:16:49work are moving on to sewer now and we

1:16:52anticipate getting our paving completed

1:16:54in the summer. So, this project is on

1:16:57schedule. Uh looking ahead into 2027,

1:17:02um our traffic operations team will be

1:17:05uh coordinating with the city of Seamish

1:17:07and we will begin uh design work on our

1:17:10East Lake Seamish Parkway and 187th

1:17:12intersection improvements.

1:17:14um the their that excellent team that

1:17:17you just heard from will also be working

1:17:19on uh the downtown adaptive signals um

1:17:22an expansion of that as well as an

1:17:25active transportation safety program.

1:17:28This program has received um a safe

1:17:30streets for all grant and they will be

1:17:33putting in some um demonstration uh

1:17:37pedestrian and traffic safety control

1:17:38devices to do a study to see what is

1:17:41most effective so that this program can

1:17:43potentially move forward in the future

1:17:45with more funding and more locations

1:17:47throughout the city.

1:17:50Our featured project in this portfolio

1:17:53is the ADA uh transportation curb ramps

1:17:56project.

1:17:58Okay, on this one, um, we had three

1:18:00different sites. We had the school site,

1:18:03Horseman, Redmond High on 104th, a

1:18:05couple ramps on 111th, uh, just behind

1:18:08the school, and then again on 140th

1:18:11between about 69th and Northeast 80th.

1:18:14U, I'm sure you you're aware that we had

1:18:16some complaints on the school work. Uh,

1:18:19Council Member Sony, um, you asked about

1:18:21the schedule and if we could make it,

1:18:22and apparently we couldn't. Um I would

1:18:25say that the quality of the work is

1:18:26good. Uh the contractor performance was

1:18:30a little uh less than desirable. I think

1:18:32we just they got go going way too late

1:18:35and then kind of went out and uh took

1:18:38out all the ramps at once. That was not

1:18:40the plan. Um and so we basically

1:18:43continuous communication with the school

1:18:45as we worked through that. So um

1:18:48basically a couple of very trying weeks

1:18:50um on on that construction. Um the work

1:18:53looks good. We're out of the school

1:18:55zone. There's only a couple some

1:18:57striping items and a and a I think a

1:18:59median island left. Uh we're going to uh

1:19:02do that in the next couple weeks. The

1:19:04rest of the project should be done in

1:19:06probably by the end of the month uh into

1:19:08a little bit into next month. And and so

1:19:10um we may have to come back and do um

1:19:12some striping work next year. Just

1:19:14depends on how the weather cooperates,

1:19:16but the bulk of the work uh paving ADA

1:19:18ramp should be completed by the end of

1:19:20the year. Um,

1:19:23I think that's all I want to say on that

1:19:25one. [laughter]

1:19:26>> Council member Stewart.

1:19:28>> Yeah, thank you so much. Um, and

1:19:29appreciate the context uh and additional

1:19:31information there on this program

1:19:33overall, the ADA improvements for the

1:19:35curb ramps. Um, I I imagine we're going

1:19:38to see this program uh come back in the

1:19:40next bianium. And one of the things that

1:19:42I um I find difficult about uh since we

1:19:45transitioned kind of programs uh to to

1:19:49being kind of structured in this way is

1:19:51it's difficult for me um you said the

1:19:54three sites just now aloud but I can't

1:19:56see them from from this project sheet or

1:19:59from the information here. So even if

1:20:01they were just like little dots or

1:20:02something like that that were to

1:20:03indicate. The other reason I think that

1:20:05the storytelling behind how much it says

1:20:09here that we uh are spending $2.8

1:20:11million on these ADA improvements. We

1:20:14actually have a council approved master

1:20:15plan for how to uh transition all of

1:20:19these curve ramps over time. And um we

1:20:22we I think that we should pay a little

1:20:23bit more attention as a as a as a city

1:20:26to like are we on track with that? Uh, I

1:20:28recently looked it up so I kind of know

1:20:30the answer to that question, but um, it

1:20:32would be helpful to me as a council

1:20:34member to be able to see a little bit

1:20:36more of the story there and also to be

1:20:38able to have the conversations with my

1:20:39colleagues when it comes to

1:20:40infrastructure funding. Do we want to

1:20:42keep funding this at $2.8 million a

1:20:44bianium or or do we want to go bigger?

1:20:46Um, and having a a little bit more data

1:20:49to show just that 2.8 million is getting

1:20:52us three project sites when we have a

1:20:54lot more to go. So, um, just, uh, a

1:20:57little bit of more storytelling is

1:20:58something I'm interested in in the

1:21:00future. Thank you.

1:21:03>> Those are really good comments and good

1:21:04questions. And, um, helping staff

1:21:07develop and run programs is on one of my

1:21:10core to-do tasks in the upcoming year.

1:21:14This program, um, I know that right now,

1:21:16this project right now is funded at the

1:21:182.8 million. It actually receives

1:21:21bianial funding of only 600,000.

1:21:24So, having a quick uh off-the- cuff

1:21:26conversation with our ToS lead on this

1:21:29program, we are looking to potentially

1:21:31push the start of this out until 2029

1:21:36and take the money from this bianium

1:21:38adding it to the next bianium so that we

1:21:40have 1.2 million and we're able to

1:21:42deliver a lot more. 600,000 does not get

1:21:45us a lot of curb ramps especially when

1:21:47you consider that right now we have an

1:21:49active project which is the overlink

1:21:51accessibilities program which is funded

1:21:53at 1.5 million from Microsoft and that

1:21:56gets us 20 curb ramps as well as

1:21:58sidewalks and that is over double what

1:22:01the current benium funding on this

1:22:03program is. uh we have uh modified our

1:22:07project information sheets creating

1:22:10program information sheets and the

1:22:13intent behind that is to be able to show

1:22:16program progress in upcoming bianiums.

1:22:18This is a work in progress. I am still

1:22:21developing it with staff and trying to

1:22:23figure out the best way to move forward

1:22:24because I hear you on okay what are we

1:22:27getting? What have you done? What is the

1:22:29progress being made? And that is

1:22:30something that I am very passionate

1:22:32about being able to bring to you because

1:22:34if you we want to continue to have

1:22:37programs like this and like potential

1:22:39future programs such as utility pipe

1:22:42replacement programs, we need to be able

1:22:44to show that we are providing and

1:22:47delivering what you expect us to.

1:22:50>> Yeah. I don't I don't think that was a a

1:22:52comment about your delivery. I think

1:22:54it's about us wanting to fund so you can

1:22:56actually meet those.

1:22:57>> Yeah. I want to give you though the data

1:22:58and the confidence in giving us more

1:23:00funding because I will be back asking

1:23:02>> and we want to confidently give you more

1:23:04money.

1:23:05>> Please bring these alternatives for

1:23:06future study. Thank you.

1:23:07>> Absolutely.

1:23:10>> We'll do. Okay. So, moving on to our

1:23:12transportation planning program report.

1:23:15This is a pretty big and active program

1:23:17and we have a lot of uh potential

1:23:20project starts coming up in 2027. The

1:23:23three priority projects uh in

1:23:25transportation planning that will start

1:23:27next year are the Westlake Seamish

1:23:29roundabout and shared use path, the

1:23:32Westlake Seamish multimodal improvements

1:23:34phase 1 and the 156 buffered bike lanes.

1:23:38We would also probably be starting the

1:23:40161st cycle track has that project

1:23:42received um an active alternative

1:23:45transportation grant, something like

1:23:47that. Um I'm terrible on remembering the

1:23:49names of those. So as you can see this

1:23:51project these um pro programs and

1:23:54projects are progressing as expected.

1:23:57The bell red buffered bike lanes is

1:23:59there in yellow. We have completed

1:24:00schedule A of that work. Schedules B and

1:24:03C are um a little bit delayed. We are

1:24:06coordinating with Belleview and the

1:24:08delays are um mainly due to some uh

1:24:11materials

1:24:12>> signal head.

1:24:13>> Yeah. They they have a special signal

1:24:15head they want for that one.

1:24:17>> All right. So, our featured project is a

1:24:19twofer. This is the Northeast 36th

1:24:22Street Bike Facilities and the 148th

1:24:24Shared Use Path. Both of these projects

1:24:27are um 100% grant funded with the Move

1:24:30Ahead Washington grant. Um we will be

1:24:33doing design work concurrently together,

1:24:35but we will be constructing them

1:24:37separately.

1:24:39Yeah, just to add um the um these are to

1:24:43feed the 520 trail and then also get

1:24:46across the 36th Street Bridge to the

1:24:48other side. Um we've had a charter

1:24:51meeting on this. We've selected a

1:24:53consultant. Um and u um we're scheduling

1:24:57a design kickoff, so we're just getting

1:24:59going on this. Um more to come in our

1:25:03next update.

1:25:09All right, our utilities portfolio. Um,

1:25:12the top project on there we talked about

1:25:14earlier. Those that's the water tank

1:25:16repairs done in conjunction with the

1:25:18reservoir park sports court repairs. Um,

1:25:22this is a combined portfolio, as you may

1:25:25remember, with water, storm water, and

1:25:27wastewater utilities. Our featured

1:25:30project tonight is the 95th Street

1:25:32Bridge replacement. May sound weird to

1:25:34have a bridge in utilities, but this

1:25:35project is really driven by a

1:25:38requirement that the Department of Fish

1:25:40and Wildlife put on us from a project we

1:25:42did many years ago and is being funded

1:25:44primarily out of our storm water fund.

1:25:48>> Okay, I'll I'll try and be quick on this

1:25:50one. Um so the the 2010 work um we we

1:25:54needed to do some repairs on the bridge

1:25:56uh on some of the the piles uh

1:25:58supporting the bridge and as a condition

1:25:59of that fish and wildlife would um gave

1:26:03us approval but then they wanted the

1:26:05bridge removed with a more um a span

1:26:09that is more fitting for this stream and

1:26:12is better for the fish. And so we've

1:26:14been um this has been on our our books

1:26:18for a while. Um

1:26:21I think we came back we were here in 23

1:26:25uh June of 23 presented some options and

1:26:29at that time I think council was a

1:26:31little bit surprised by the options we

1:26:33were presenting and at that time we we

1:26:35were uh tasked with going back and doing

1:26:38some additional work. Since that time,

1:26:39we've uh done some critical area

1:26:41studies, uh some stream studies,

1:26:43hydraulic studies. Um looked at

1:26:47potential flooding. Um we did a traffic

1:26:49study. We contacted the emergency

1:26:51emergency responders on if there was any

1:26:54issues if this um bridge was only not a

1:26:57vehicular bridge, but just a bike ped

1:26:59bridge. And so we've completed all that

1:27:01work. Um we've we've kind of um

1:27:06evaluated three alternatives. One would

1:27:08be a vehicular bridge, bike ped bridge

1:27:10together. Uh the second one would be no

1:27:13bridge at all. And then the third one

1:27:15was just a bike ped bridge. I think

1:27:16staff is recommending a bike ped bridge.

1:27:19Um and we'd like to bring this probably

1:27:22to a study session early next year to

1:27:25let let council evaluate some of those

1:27:27options and and have a little more time

1:27:29to to talk about this. I don't think

1:27:31we're going to get all the questions

1:27:32you'd like to ask about on this one. Um

1:27:35but that's really our next steps. and

1:27:36then maybe a approach on outreach and

1:27:39how we would communicate this out. So

1:27:41that's that's what our commitment is

1:27:44study session early next year to discuss

1:27:46this.

1:27:47>> Yes. Thank you. Yes. Um definitely we'll

1:27:49see this back on a study session next

1:27:51year. And council members who don't have

1:27:54the history on this, I highly encourage

1:27:55you to reach out to staff to get that

1:27:57history. This has been going on for

1:27:58quite a long time. Um I I recalled when

1:28:01we were doing agenda setting how long

1:28:03this had been going on and there's a lot

1:28:05of details. So, please do reach out and

1:28:07and get some history on this project

1:28:09because there's a lot to dive in on.

1:28:13>> All right. Is that the end of our

1:28:16presentation?

1:28:18See?

1:28:20[sighs and gasps]

1:28:20>> Yes.

1:28:20>> All right. Thank you, Council President

1:28:23Stewart.

1:28:23>> Yeah. U this is the hot issue that I

1:28:25wanted to discuss and I appreciate that

1:28:27we're going to come back with a study

1:28:28session. My um big request given um the

1:28:31length of time that this project has

1:28:33been going on is um the granicus won't

1:28:36automatically pull for you the latest

1:28:38dates that council discussed this, but

1:28:40it will be very helpful actually for

1:28:42council members to go back and review

1:28:43the prior conversations that were had in

1:28:45this chambers about the project. So to

1:28:47please include those dates in the memo,

1:28:48that'd be very helpful. Thank you.

1:28:49>> June 6, 2023 was the last touch on this

1:28:52one.

1:28:52>> Thank you. All right. Thank you so much.

1:28:56That brings us to the end of our agenda.

1:28:58Thanks everyone for hanging in there and

1:29:00we are ajourned.