Showing posts sorted by relevance for query land use. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query land use. Sort by date Show all posts

Wednesday, April 8, 2020

Carol Helland Appointed City Of Redmond's New Director Of Planning And Community Development

Carol HellandRedmond, WA – At last night’s meeting, Redmond City Council approved Mayor Angela Birney's appointment of Carol Helland as the new Director of Planning and Community Development. Carol previously served as deputy planning director and began serving as interim planning director after Erika Vandenbrande announced her retirement in January this year.
“In her time with the City, Carol has shown she has the experience, knowledge, and dedication to positively lead Redmond’s Planning and Community Development Department,” said Mayor Angela Birney. “She has provided effective guidance, advice, and counsel to the Mayor, City Council, and staff on community development and land use, and we look forward to her continued contributions to the Redmond community.”
Before joining the City of Redmond in 2019 as the deputy planning director, Carol served the City of Bellevue as its Land Use Director. She has over 30 years of land use, planning, environmental, governmental affairs, and legal experience in local government and as a practicing attorney. As an attorney, she focused her practice on land use and environmental law, and during the 1990s, she served on the City of Redmond Planning Commission. Carol and her family have lived in the City of Redmond since 1989 and feel a deep connection to the people and places that make Redmond a wonderful place to live.
“I am humbled by the opportunity to lead the dedicated and talented Planning and Community Development staff as their Director. “I am also excited to join the City’s executive team in service to the community where my husband and I have raised our children and lived for more than 30 years.”

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Updated: Kempin Creek, Part II - the misuse of science in classifying city streams, Part II

2005 Stream Map
City of Redmond Stream Classification Definitions


Updated Opinion, 3/14/09: A couple of weeks ago I gave testimony to the Planning Commission and staff during a Public Hearing. The Hearing was a final step in the public process of approving the revised "Stream Map". The Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) requires cities in Washington map out their "critical areas" (streams, wetlands, flood plains, geological hazards, and aquifer recharge zones).

The Stream map is a city guideline to help developers, landowners, citizens, and "qualified consultants" rank our streams according to their value and function. Value is mostly defined by the presence or absence of fish species. A Class I "Shorelines of the State" streams (Sammamish River, Bear & Evans Creek) have the highest value owing to their size and presence of Federally endangered Chinook and other salmon. Class II streams, like Kempen Creek in NE Redmond provide habitat for "salmonid" ( salmon, steelhead, bull trout) and fish. Class III streams as in Perrigo Creek of Hartman Wetlands, have no fish nor potential for fish. Streams are buffered from land use development according to their classification (and usually size) with Class III getting the least amount of buffer

So what does all this have to do with Kempin Creek - the subject of an earlier post? Kempin Creek is unusual because it crosses county-city jurisdictions. In the county, qualified fish and wildlife biology consultants determined during a land use proposal that Kempin Creek harbored salmonid fish and should have buffers equal in size to Redmond's Class II stream rating. However, during the CAO Stream map revisions, city staff downgraded Kempin Creek to Class III when it flowed downstream from the county into Redmond.

But then something weird happens. Several hundred feet further downstream this Class III segment of Kempin Creek is classified a Class II stream again! Question. How can salmonid fish swim up Kempin Creek from Bear Creek, then swim to where they are not supposed to be (the Class III segment) only to re-enter fish bearing waters of Kempin Creek of King County?!

Below is a chart of Kempin Creek's city classification from it's source in King County downstream to Bear Creek.

Creek- County Class22222- City Class333333333333- Class22222 Class1111Bear Creek
upstream in county (fish-2)...... at Redmond border (no fish-3)- then (fish-2 again) further downstream to Bear Creek class 1111 (fish-1).


Note the Class 3 segment containing no fish, yet salomonid are upstream.! How does the the city's best science explain that!

The map is a guideline and I wouldn't make a big deal of this were it not for the city's misuse of "Best Available Science" (BAS). According to the Critical Area Ordinance, "Best Available Science" (BAS) is to be used during land use projects when classifying streams and other critical areas. City stream classification changes are triggered when a "qualified consultant" is hired by a developer for a project. In this case, the developer was CAMWEST. The BAS for Kempin Creek proved the developer's consultant misclassified the creek. A King County qualified biologist proved salmonid were present upstream in the King County segment. Thus, by best science, salmonid have to be present downstream -- all the way to Bear Creek. But for some bureaucratic reason the city's lesser "Washington Trout" mapping data pre-empted the Best Available Science provided by the county. Most importantly, re-classification of the stream mapping guide is is etched by land-use development triggers, not by cartography. As a result, the city presents an embarrassing, illogical mapping of Kempin Creek and a flagrant disregard for Best Available Science.

Some good news: Wise Planning Commissioners recommended that hydrology surrounding Redmond Creeks near the county be monitored. Another Planning Commissioner (KP) recommended stream temperatures be monitored as a city indicator of water quality and fish health.

Fishing Tip: if you're looking for a good fishing hole might try the city's Class III "no fish" segment of Kempin Creek. Your won't find staff fishing there! But, check with WDFW first to see if Kempin is fishable.

Redmond Code: 20D.140.20.-010 - Redmond's Class III streams connected to tributaries are streams without fish and without any potential to support fish or salmonids. They connect to downstream salmonid-bearing Class II and Class I streams. While these streams don’t contain fish themselves, they can be critical “headwater streams,” providing cold, clean water to the salmon-bearing streams into which they flow, further downstream.
Kempin Creek - the stream with a split personality, Part 1

CC: R. Odle, Planning Director, C. Beam, Environmental planner, PlanningCommission@redmond.gov

Sunday, December 2, 2007

Some new Public Notice improvements!


"Citizen participation in the planning process --a horrifying
prospect to some administrators -- has proved to be the most effective way to avoid mistakes (and unintended consequences)." -
SUBURBAN NATION by Duany, Zyberk & Speck

Just prior to Councilman Resha's departure from council, his Planning and Public Works Committee with citizen input recommended public notice improvements to council and staff. Below are improvements staff made in response to citizen effort. Special thanks for staff's addition of Notice into our city website; and appreciation to councilmen Cole and Marchione for this information! Noteworthy items are highlighted in green. Do you have have any comments?

THE NEW PUBLIC NOTICE IMPROVEMENTS:

A. Sending Notice of Application to residents (renters) as well as owners
B. Re-send Notice of Application when process type changes
C. Create a process flow chart to include in Notice of Application
D. Improve legibility of vicinity maps
E. Encourage (not require) neighborhood meetings for Short Plats (until RCDG can be updated to require)
F. Improve legibility of site plans
G. Provide the tree preservation plan with the Notice of Application
H. Place tree preservation plans, site plans, vicinity maps and flow charts on Internet together with Notice of Application
I. Provide web links on mailed/posted notices to direct readers to the legal notices web page
J. Clarify comments due date to reflect acceptance of comments until decision or hearing date
K. Clarify in notices that e-mail is an acceptable form of comment
L. Increase comment period for Notice of Application to 21 days

Department of Planning and
Community Development
Ph: 425-556-2438
Fx: 425-556-2400

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Examples of PAST Public Notice deficiencies: 1) Perrigo Heights: White and Yellow Notice signs not placed on northern boundary 150 feet, vicinity/site maps unclear, Party of Record list absent for community meetings, mailing list incomplete. 2) Shaughnessey Heights: tree preservation map confusion, incomplete notice to all parties of record. 3) Tyler Creek: Citizens appealed the wrong permit owing to incoherent and confusing legalize on notice, tree preservation map not readily available, incomplete commenting owing to short comment period, not all citizens received notice. 4) Tent City 4: Citizens misunderstood commenting protocol so could not participate in the process.

Deterrents to a fully informed public and project review still exist. For example: 1) more reliable accounting of Parties of Record by staff. 2) when you see the large, white sign on a proposed project it usually means you are "too late" to appeal the plat. This sign needs to go up earlier...and on.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LINKS:

Current listing of new land use notices:

http://www.ci.redmond.wa.us/cityservices/legalnotices.asp Citywide Legal notices

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overview of Land use classifications

Overview of Review (permit)Classifications, Public Notice requirements, Decision-maker, Appeal body, Quasi-Judicial (q-j) restrictions... http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/redmond.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Notice requirements for each Review:

Detailed breakdown of each of the seven reviews, with examples of permits; and identification of Quasi-judicial (q-j) whereby the public input to city council is restricted.

Type 1 Reviews (permits) "plumbing" (eg. hot water heater), "tree removal", "temporary use" (Tent City), "clearing and grading", signs, street use, "electrical & building permits" (retaining walls) http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3030.html

Type II Reviews: "short plat" subdivision http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3035.html

Type III Reviews: q-j (public input restricted) "preliminary plat" subdivision (>9 lots); "shoreline variance" http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3040.html

Type IV Reviews q-j (public input restricted) "planned residential development" (PRD) - usually combined with subdivision. http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3045.html

Type V Reviews q j (public input restricted) "sensitive area exception" (e.g. steep slope sewer); annexation http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3050.html

Type VI Reviews "development guide" amendment; http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3055.html

Type VII Reviews "historic landmark" http://mrsc.org/mc/redmondcdg/cdg20F3060.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public notice signage and Critical area reporting requirements:

http://www.ci.redmond.wa.us/insidecityhall/permitting/devapps.asp#CriticalArea

The above Land Use link describes the yellow public notice sign and the large, white notice sign w/PRD information seen on proposed developments. SCROLL DOWN. Critical Area Ordinance reporting requirements are also listed. If you were to pull a project file that had wetlands and streams you should be able to find 5 documents required of developers to account for buffer averaging and other buffer mitigation calculations. If not, contact Cathy Beam, planner.

Friday, November 9, 2007

1/19/07, Land-use Appellant - "Wanted, Dead or Alive"


When Walt, my father-in-law from northern California, first heard about my land use appeals at Mosaic Meadows (NE 116th) and Avondale Crest ( NE 104th) he yelled, he wouldn't be caught dead driving around town with me! When he heard I was taking pictures of Evans Creek industrial land in SE Redmond, he warned I may as well be walking around with "Wanted, Dead or Alive" stenciled on my forehead!

Walt is the classic good 'ole boy generational landowner. He's lived on his homestead all 82 years of his life, operating construction equipment and raising Rambouillet. Lately, Walt's been draining small wetlands on his land with a neighbor's backhoe. His father, Porter, owned hundreds of acres off land in California and founded the Blue Goose fruit co-op. Walt doesn't want any "do-gooders" messing around with people's property.

So, why did I choose "to meddle" with the used-car salesman and landowner of a 5-acre parcel, Mosaic Meadows? After all, it's his 5th Amendment constitutional right: "nor shall private property be taken for the public use without just compensation." Land rights are sacred in America!

I, too, love the land and consider it sacred. My 2nd cousin, Ramsey, is the largest chrysanthemum grower in the country www.yoder.com . I own rental property. I don't hang a rifle in my pick-up or listen to Rush 24/7, but I will challenge the actions of land owners and city development planners when laws protecting sensitive areas could be violated. Sensitive areas are finite. Land has no "voice". I am an advocate for land.

The Critical Area ordinance HERE, was passed by the State of Washington and City of Redmond in 2005 to protect the sensitive areas of streams, wetlands, steep slopes, priority habitat and species, wellhead aquifers, flood zones). Some land owners driven by greed push for below standard buffers. Corrupt or mismanaged jurisdictions may look the other way. In Redmond, it's mostly a matter of mistakes being made.

My appeal of the "Mosaic Meadows" plat was triggered by a "Notice of Application". 13 lots are crammed between two wetlands, a stream, steep slopes a few Landmark trees, a pond, with no place for conventional storm water treatment. The stream ultimately drained into Bear Creek. I found a wet vault on a steep grade too close to a quality wetland. The developer will be especially careful now.

During the Appeal Hearing, the deck is heavily stacked against the appellant, as follows:

1) "The burden of proof" is on the appellant. This burden is close to insurmountable! The developer doesn't have to prove a thing. City Staff actually speaks for the developer during the Hearing and defends his project. Staff, usually Judd Black jblack@redmond.gov, 'attacks' your claims when defending their "standards".

2) Expert witnesses cost $1K - 3K. Scientific articles and studies hold less weight than Redmond's planners and their studies. The Hearing Examiner usually weighs staff standards over a citizen expert witness.

4) Redmond's Hearing Examiner, Mr. Crandall, is contracted and paid by the city for services rendered. It is no wonder our 80 year-old Examiner hasn't once awarded a full decision FOR the appellant in all the years records have been kept by the present Clerk @ "The Office of the Hearing Examiner", City Hall.

5) The Public Notice and Review process is so difficult to read & understand that it's not uncommon for citizens to miss an important Hearing or even appeal the wrong permit!

6) Best chances for winning an appeal may occur at the Council level, but by then most citizens have worn out by the prolonged process.

A successful appellant needs lots of time & persistence, enjoy science & researching project files, ordinances, and the Redmond Community Development Guide http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/redmond.html, & motivate neighbors. The real win comes during preparation for the appeal when mistakes are uncovered. No one's perfect.

With hard work, one WILL make a positive impact on a project. Besides, keeping staff on their toes, you are sure to find key elements of the Review needing some attention. Safety, welfare, and quality of life improvements can be achieved.

"Doing good" IS good.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* *For an excellent example of modern day Public Notice is City of Kirkland's permit site: www.kirklandpermits.net/ - Bellevue, Issaquah, Duvall, Seattle and on - all utilize on-line permitting.

A good 'ole boy planning commissioner proclaimed: "nobody ever reads our public notices anyway...." so why change or improve our notice policies? 2006

Troubling events requiring further investigations



From Jon Spangler, Dept. of Natural Resources

BOB YODER -
Thank you for taking the time to e-mail us (and for hiking the Hartman park wetland). The City has been visually monitoring the wetland for the last several years. The dry conditions you experienced are not unusual for this time of year given the current weather patterns. The Natural Resources Division has had some preliminary consultant investigation done on the wetland in recent years and there are options to adjust local drainage patterns if conditions do deteriorate. For now we plan to continue our visual observations. Jon Spangler, Stormwater, C.O.R.
Tuesday July 3, 2007
- ----------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your concerns and suggestions regarding the Hartman Park wetlands. In the future, we will actively monitor these wetlands for implementation of appropriate management practices to ensure their health. We will also work cooperatively with the Natural Resources Division on this situation. Please contact me if you have any further concerns or suggestions.

Dave Tuchek, Assistant Manager City of Redmond Park Operations,
MOCPK425-556-2318Fax 425-556-2373
dtuchek@redmond.gov
Monday July 9, 2007 -

Monday, October 16, 2017

King County Council to Decide on Ballot Measure to Address Opioid Epidemic



Council to Decide on Ballot Measure to Address Opioid Epidemic


You may have seen press reports about a new King County proposal to have a public vote on drug safe consumption or safe injection sites – called “CHELs” for “Community Health Engagement Locations.”  I support the proposal being placed on the ballot for public vote, so that voters will have a full range of options for consideration, in the face of an unprecedented and tragic epidemic of opioid overdoses. If this proposal appears on the ballot in February, 2018, voters will have an opportunity to fully and finally answer the question whether these CHEL sites should be tested as a possible way to connect drug users to treatment and save lives.

This new proposal responds to Initiative 27 (I-27), a measure sent to the King County Council in July, which will ask voters whether safe consumption sites should be banned.  The new proposal, introduced Monday, asks whether a limited number of safe consumption sites should be allowed as a pilot.  A few key points about the new proposal:

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Shaughnessy Heights subdivision trees are removed -- neighbors adjusting

Territorial views of downtown Redmond and wood piles remain.  A 15' tree buffer between
the orange fence and the black fence-line will eventually buffer the neighborhoods.

UPDATED  7/5 7:04 pm:  Two hundred twenty-nine significant trees and most of the dust, is now cleared from the 15.1 acre Shaughnessy Heights subdivision project on Ed Hill.   It didn't take long.  About 4 days of tree clearing and a few more to grade the steep slopes and prep a minor stream drainage.  Neighbors say the multiple, large wood debris piles will be chewed up on site and scattered by the end of the week.

Despite the tree waste, over 51% of the significant trees will be saved according to land use tree preservation  map.  The preserved land remains home to a significant stream and trees large enough to house large cavity-dwelling animals like Pileated Woodpeckers, raccoons, and 'possum'.  The developer could install Pileated Woodpecker educational signage as an amenity if he wants to. 

The project is  a 42-lot, 64 housing unit "planned residential development" land use that was earlier appealed by residents and decided and approved by Redmond city councilmembers in a "quasi-judicial role."  (All area cities except Bothell and Redmond make land use appeal decisions through the county Superior Court.)  Construction is planned for Spring, 2013 by Element Residential of Bothell.  The homes and duplexes will be set close together and more affordable similar to North Redmond and older Education Hill neighborhood standards.

Immediate neighbors had some obvious concerns.  On the 20th, "Bambi" was seen straying uphill through back yards towards the Nike - Perrigo greenbelt.  A hawk's nest toppled down.  Some neighbors think they will hear more SR520 highway noise with the trees down.  They want the promised 15' tree buffer installed ASAP, but the developer has to wait for irrigation water before planting.  In the meantime, traffic is stalled on 171st Ave NE while the city runs a 14 inch water pipe to the project.  On the 25th, residents found door-knob notices their water would be shut off from 9-3 pm -- only to come home after work to a dirty "five-flush toilet."

But the dust has settled...

On-lookers visiting the 169th Ave cul-de-sac were amazed by territorial views towards the city.  Some of the neighbors can even expect incredible views of Mt. Rainier from their 2nd-story decks.  An 8-foot fence will delineate the project, but neighborhood connector trails are planned through and around the development.  The developer saved two cedar trees and a deciduous by the emergency  service entry on 169th. 

Steve Fischer, city planner, assured a few nearby residents that "developer violations (like any unlawful staging of construction equipment or delayed tree buffer plantings)  are typically handled with a "red tag" stop work order. Since time is money...this is a very good way to get someone's attention," wrote Mr Fischer. 

Report and Photo by Yoder

Friday, January 18, 2008

Planning Commission hears the new mayor


One of the Planning Commission's most important jobs is to be "a hearing body" for the City Council on land use issues.

But, rather than the public, they heard from Mayor John Marchione. "Mayor John" made a visit to the Planning Commission this week (1/16) to introduce himself and bring them his top three priorities:

1) "Budgeting for Priorities" - John and council's new program is a plan to prioritize and measure for the best uses of city funding BEFORE money gets spent. Public input up front is a key component.

2) "Customer Service" training -- to promote safety and courtesy -- will take precedence over "efficiency" e.g. better to be safe, than efficient.

3) "Achieving greater predictability of our Permitting System" for the betterment of the whole community --- to help speed the process and improve results.


To improve the permitting system John plans to re-write our outdated "Community Development Guide". It's not readable or workable as it stands now.

This Guide governs Public Notice and Reviews (7) of land use permits ranging from felling hazardous neighborhood trees to plating major land use development projects and annexation. Last year, it was used to guide the city on Tent City permits....and not very well at that.

When a commissioner asked Mayor John which issues the people were most interested in, John smiled: "traffic, traffic, and growth" and not all in that order. He said the electorate understood the relevance of Redmond's two urban centers in offering a variety of housing choices for all generations. Plus, land east towards the Cascades is "saved" from sprawl.

On regional issues John said neighboring cities were frustrated with Redmond in the past because our council and mayor were fractured and couldn't decide amongst ourselves. So we were easily dismissed by Bellevue, Kirkland and others.

The Planning Commission welcomes public comments by email at planningcommission@redmond.gov or during their 7pm Wednesday night meetings in City Hall. They are citizen volunteers and receive no remuneration.

Thursday, June 22, 2017

UPDATED: "Design Review Board" brings color to Redmond's Town Square District

Rendering of the Twin Towers showing the blue and green color scheme, brick material and roof line chosen by the Design Review Board.

This massive structure will be right across the street from Hancock's Bakery.

Opinion:  For years now, residents have complained about the dull earth tones, "box-like" construction, and absence of brick materials in our new Downtown 6-story buildings. Council often joked of their fatigue with the "browns and mustards" - Councilmembers Hank Myers and Kim Allen in particular. But nothing was done. 

Last week I went to the Design Review Board (DRB) meeting where "Color Options" were reviewed for the 9-story twin tower building proposed at the old post office site...in the Town Square District.  The Town Square District is envisioned as high density, 6-8 story buildings, including office, entertainment, retail and residential use.  The towers are a signature building setting the stage for the design of future development in the District. Thus, what comes out from this Design Review will impact "look and feel" of the entire Town Square District for years to come.  

I was the only citizen that showed up for the twin-tower meeting and was given a wonderful opportunity to comment on color before the Board made their decision.  After looking at color schemes presented by the developer, Board and staff I recommended teal (blue) over red.  During our nine months of grey weather the blue will remind us of our sunny blue sky days of summer. The red scheme was eclectic and rich with too much pop.  

The Board decided to go with blue and a small amount of green at the street level. Oscar said blue was more sophisticated and red shouts.  Chair David Scott Mead -- very influential -- jokingly said he'd see the red from his house, summarizing the review with a blue-green "Go Seahawks!" cheer. Yey!  Watch the video.  Next step:  Oscar, the diminutive, likable project manager will meet with city staff to fine tune the color scheme.  He made it known he doesn't like "Northwest Moss" green wanting color with little more punch.  Yey again!  

The Board proceedings were very interesting. I'm grateful to the developer's architect for thanking me for my input. She made me feel I made a difference. I admire this developer and his commitment to form and aesthetics.   

I'm very unhappy with the city's severe lack of transparency with this body.  Though several times Councilmember Stilin advised the public to look into the DRB, it was only by luck that I learned the public can comment.  Without public comment the "look and feel" of our Downtown buildings are left up to just 7 citizens and a powerful staff - many not living in our city. "Design damage" is already done to the downtown core, though opportunity remains to get it right -- with public input -- during the Town Square District build-out and development of Marymoor Village.   

The Board meets on the first and third Thursday's of the month at 7PM, City Hall.  DRB approval is required before the land use permit is issued so your comments can significantly influence project outcomes.  To learn what's on the DRB agenda click this link and go to "Agendas Summaries" for 2017.  They don't make it easy! 

Bob Yoder

http://www.redmond.gov/Government/BoardsCommissions/DesignReviewBoard

Read More for:  a YouTube of the DRB deliberating, Twin Tower design elements and a comment from city staff. >>


Sunday, October 30, 2011

Recent AWR modifications on Evans Creek shoreline, violating city code

2010 - after

2007 - before














Both photos show the bridge built by All Wood Recycling (AWR) crossing Evans Creek.  The right photo taken in 2010, shows unpermitted modifications and development.  The mitigated shoreline of Evans Creek is visible on the left side of each photo.  (Click to enlarge) Yes, that's the shoreline.

The City is currently reviewing All Wood Recycling (AWR) on 8504 192nd Ave NE for three land use applications to correct code violations.  The city photos in the slide show are dated from 2006 - 2010.
The violations are, but not limited to: 
  • partial demolition of existing buildings, vegetation removal along Evans Creek, extensive paving impervious surfaces), storage of hazardous materials, the construction of a stormwater vault, retaining wall, and truck scale.  
Work noted above (click slide show for captions) has been completed without permits. AWR is proposing to install a sanitary sewer line and connect it to city sewer; and to relocate the fuel line.  City Planner Kelsey Johnson writes: 
At this point in time (10/30/11), the associated land use applications are under review. Therefore, no corrective actions have taken place.  The city photographs of the site are public records on file in the Permit Center.
Work completed by All Wood Recycling does not meet code therefore, remediation activities will need to occur once the permits are approved and issued." 
Sources:   Kelsey Johnson, LEED AP BD+C Assistant Planner City of Redmond Planning and Community Development MS: 2SPL 15670 NE 85th Street PO Box 97010 Redmond, WA 98073-9710 425.556.2409.

AWR is located on top of a Priority One Wellhead Protection Zone that supplies our drinking water.

By Bob Yoder 

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Theno's Dairy












Hundreds and hundreds of kids and families have sat on this cow eating their ice cream.

Notice the incongruency of the two buildings.

Brian Lutz, the Redmond author of The Sledgehammer Version 2. blog recently posted an interesting story about Redmond's locally famous and historic Theno's Dairy. I asked Brian for additional information on the family business that is known for it's yummy ice cream and sherbet and fresh milk. I wasn't sure if the new huge Meta Church, Washington Cathedral owned the land or not.

Brian said "from what I've read, [the church] has pedged to allow Theno's to continue to operate for as long as the Bloor family wishes to do so."

In 2005, Washington Cathedral tried to get the site rezoned for commercial use with the possibility of putting in a strip mall shopping development that would have included a new Theno’s on the corner. An informative Seattle Times article on proposed land use can be found here.

I followed the land use Master Plan Application and Annexation proposals and vaguely remember the Planning Commission deciding against the 5 acre (or was it 10 acres?) development. Most decided a strip mall would be incompatible with the surrounding agricultural land. An influencial neighborhood north of Washington Cathedral held several meetings (I attended one) to organize against the church's plans. Their primary complaint was traffic and congestion at the 124th Street & RED-WOOD intersection. I remember the then Mayor Rosemary Ives suggesting that a small "Farmers Market" would be more appropriate. Environmentalists had concern about impacts to the health of a Class 2 stream.

If anyone has more current information about the status of "our" historic and cultural landmark please comment. Probably, the best source of information is from the children who woolf down the ice cream!

Customer reviews of Theno's Dairy (and their location.)

Brian Lutz is author of The Sledgehammer V 2.0

Photos of Washington Cathedral Grand Opening with Mayor John Marchione. (Photos are available for purchase online)

Friday, April 18, 2008

Appealing CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT, et al, sheds light on the stringent environmental SEPA process

OPINION:  Environmental appeals of CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT, INC. and other developer land use projects prove environmental SEPA appeals are a circular and unfruitful process. (SEPA is an acronym for "State Environmental Protection Act").

ATTENTION:  This report and opinion is dated and can be misleading  B.Y.  5/8/12  Read More >>

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Commissioner Tom Hinman Leads Council Session On "Sustainability"

UPDATED (8/12):  At the Redmond City Council Derby Days booth our representatives weren't just handing out ice-cold  "Otter Pops" !   Councilmembers also listened to comments from passing citizens..

According to a Council report, one citizen wanted to learn more about the Planning Commission and how to connect to them.

Presto!   Wouldn't you know it?   Council invited the Planning Commission to their study session meeting last night - to address the value and need for "Sustainability" in Redmond.  Commission Chair Tom Hinman masterfully lead the thought provoking conversation.   Do you care to listen in?

Tom's 4+ minute talk begins right at the start of the meeting.  The entire council joins in.   This is one of the most revealing  Council meetings (video) I've seen.

Definition of "Sustainability": "to satisfy the needs of today without compromising the future's ability to meet its needs." The three components of sustainability are: environmental, economic, and social dimensions. Ref. United Nations.

Reported By Bob Yoder
Commission Photo on City Website - Tom Hinman (purple shirt)

Rough notes on the meeting  (read more)

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

City Council approves the Shoreline Master Plan Update after 10 years of study.

UPDATED, 9/15:  The Shoreline Master Program consists of policies and standards that regulate land uses and development located approximately 200 feet within Bear Creek, Evans Creek, Lake Sammamish, and the Sammamish River, and includes some of these waterbodies’ associated wetlands and floodplains.   An update to the old Master Plan has been in the works for over 10 years.   At tonight's meeting, Council reviewed final edits by the State Department of Ecology and approved the D.O.E. edits.  The Update was approved on 9/15, 5-1 with Mr. Cole dissenting.  Kim Allen was absent.  

The Principal Planner Cathy Beam received rave reviews by the Council for her long and hard work completing the Shoreline Master Plan Update.   Mr. Carson spoke highly of the significant public involvment generated by this Update.   Councilmember Allen, a Hearing Examiner in Kitsap County, thought Redmond's Update was one of the best she's seen.  Most of my personal field work and input was directed towards preserving and maintaining the high intensity Evans Creek industrial riparian buffer. It is at best only 50 feet.

Some of the changes made by Washington State Department of Ecology can be found within the following paragraphs:  
  • “In any High Intensity/Multi-Use location within a buffer where the land is actively being used as part of a legitimate business operation, such land including either structures or active operational areas, established prior January 1, 2008  may continue to operate. New structures, pavement, and other improvements are permitted within this area so long as incremental environemtal benefits is provided and no net loss of shoreline ecological functions is demonstrate
  • The Washington Department of Ecology added this paragraph:   “Use the City’s established permit tracking program to periodically evaluate the effectiveness of the Shoreline Master Program update for achieving no net loss of shoreline ecological functions with respect to shoreline permitting and exemptions. Prepare an evaluation report every seven years when the SMP is required to be updated under RCW 90.58.080(4).”
View the entire list of changes made by the Washington State Department of Ecology here.
 
Redmond Shorelines are dynamic and changing.   Bear Creek is being relocated right now to make way for SR520.  The city plans to relocate Evans Creek north and away from the Industrial District within the near future. (5-10 years).   Evans Creek is salmon bearing.  With this in mind, the city and citizens will have to be attentive to incremental land use on the Evans buffer.

Wednesday, May 1, 2019

UPDATED: Hearing Examiner Approves Emerald Heights Project

According to a City planner, the decision will be appealed in the Superior Court
        In a 104 page document, the Redmond Hearing Examiner (a land-use attorney) described his decision to approve Emerald Heights construction of a 54-unit Assisted Living building and a 42-unit Independent Living building. According to the Examiner, these new buildings are intended to allow conversion of the existing 40-unit assisted living building into private, single occupancy skilled nursing suites.

The campus currently has 333 independent living units, 40 assisted living units, 16 memory care units, and 61 skilled nursing units for a total of 450 residential units.  The campus features a main  multi-purpose auditorium, fitness building, pool, communal courtyard, woodland walking trails, and gardening opportunities. There's an existing public transit stop on 176th Avenue NE near the campus entrance.

BACKGROUND

Abby Road HOA residents living next to the Emerald Heights' 38-acre parcel appealed the SEPA, and challenged the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Entitlement. The volume of public record was an astounding 8,000 pages creating significant expenses and review time.  Retired city councilmember John Stilin and his wife led the way.

Besides zoning, the following issues Stilin et al appealed were:

1) Severe aesthetic impacts from converting the "greenbelt buffer" forested area where the assisted building is proposed. They argued the assisted living building was inappropriate in height, bulk, scale, architecture, and siting;
2) Loss of privacy and view for those residences that are nearest, and all passerby/neighborhood views were permanently altered;
3) Serious lighting impacts from the height of the building; No guarantee the building would be fully screened by proposed plantings;
4) Significant loss of native vegetation and trees reducing stormwater drainage and impacting aesthetics.  Local wildlife would be impacted to the detriment of the residents and visitors who enjoy the wildlife.
5) Potential for improper disposal of hazardous materials; Emission of noxious and hazardous odors and vapor from the institutional kitchen.
And the list goes on....

Redmond Hearing Examiner Contact Information:  Phone: 425.556.2191.  Email: cdxanthos@redmond.gov.  City Clerk's Office.

Source:  Redmond Hearing Examiner
              Findings, Conclusions, Decisions
              Abby Road HOA,et all Appeal (LAND-2018-00920) of DNS (SEPA-2018-00640)
              LAND-2018-00586 --Conditional Use Permit/land-2018-00617 --Site Plan Entitlement.
Redmond City Council meetings.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

UPDATED OPINION: Citizen claims actions by AWR industry are not environmentally insignificant


AWR Storm water pond  connects to Evans Creek. (2006)

My following public comment was submitted to the City, to protest approval of an environmental land use action on Redmond's polluting AWR industry

Public comments for or against this action (SEPA determination) are due to the city by 2/6/2012.  Send your Comment to city planner Kelsey Johnson  kjohnson@redmond.gov

 Dear City of Redmond,

I disagree with your determination that "All Wood Recycling" (AWR) proposal (L110009) is non-significant to our environment as referenced to the State Environmental Policy Act.   And, I ask you not  approve this environmental action favoring AWR  
Evans Creek banks enclosed
by impervious concrete
 paving. (click to enlarge)
This industrial proposal is environmentally significant owing to the location of AWR over our city aquifer. City staff publicly warned Council late last year that contaminates are leaking into the Redmond aquifer and threatening our valuable drinking water resource. AWR "recycles" hazardous waste-concrete, chemically treated wood products and other toxic materials, including sewage which remains un-piped and unconnected to the City.  Heavy machinery and trucks drip hydrolic fluids into the soils.  In some places the water aquifer is less than 6 feet from the surface so it's a short journey for their waste and toxins to enter our water supply.

Most of the ground surfaces in AWR are impervious owing to compacting of soils by vehicular use, clogged or removed stormwater pond systems, and paved roadway and work areas. Thus, most AWR stormwater is untreated, toxic and washes into Evans Creek, stressed creek banks (photo), underground streams and adjacent commercial sites.  AWR proposes one vault and one stormwater pond to treat the entire industrial site. At least two vaults are needed - one on both sides of the creek.

Evans Creek runs through AWR property, shown here 
 Evans Creek is a "Class One" stream of highest value and runs through the site. It's regulated by the Department of Ecology and the City as a "Shoreline of the State."  In 2008, Mayor Marchione proclaimed riparian corridors as" habitat of local importance."

Stormwater run-off carries untreated pollutants (photo) from AWR into the creek, harming Federally protected Chinook salmon and destroying their habitat. Sub-surface, underground streams connecting to Evans and Bear Creek were recognized by the Planning Commission during their Critical Areas Ordinance Update several years ago. Underground streams connecting to contaminated Evans Creek storm flows could spread toxins further into our aquifer before they can be treated by downstream facilities.

Toxic run-off can't percolate
 through impervious surfaces
and runs off untreated.  Heavy
equipment drips hydrolic fluids.
The City will incur certain liabilities should significant trending to aquifer contamination be traced to this AWR site and it's vicinity. Approving this "Determination of Non Significance" (DNS) is setting a precedent for further neglect in the SE Redmond industrial complex, besides AWR. By approving this DNS, the C.O.R. is placing itself at risk to lawsuit and most significantly, potential loss of a highly valuable and important municipal natural resource - potable water. 
Read More>>

Thursday, January 26, 2012

'Sustainable Redmond' Files Petition with Superior Court on Group Health Clear-cut Decision

Group Health 28-acre site to be clear-cut
January 25, 2012

Sustainable Redmond Files Land Use Petition

Redmond, WA – On January 24, Citizens and Neighbors for a Sustainable Redmond filed a land use petition in King County Superior Court, seeking review of the City of Redmond’s decision to approve Group Health’s request to clear cut a 28-acre urban forest within the Overlake neighborhood so as to facilitate the development of a master planned mixed use development. This includes 65 landmark trees, estimated to be 150 to 250 years old, and 985 significant trees, up to 150 years old. Sustainable Redmond was joined in the appeal by Friends at Overlake Village, Villa Marina Condominium Association, and Rosemarie Ives, former mayor of Redmond, 1992-2007. In support of the appeal are the Eastside Audubon Society, Sherwood Forest Community Club (a nearby Bellevue neighborhood), and Techies for Trees (workers in the Overlake neighborhood).

Members from Sustainable Redmond, along with many local citizens and several groups, had urged the Council to reconsider the Group Health Overlake Village development agreement at public hearings in November and December. On December 13, the City Council approved, 6 to 1, the Group Health Overlake Village Master Plan and Development Agreement, with councilmember Allen dissenting.

While Sustainable Redmond supports transit-oriented development, Read More >>

Saturday, December 8, 2012

King County Council adopt strategic climate action plan

King County aims to reduce greenhouse emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050


The Metropolitan King County Council gave its unanimous approval today to King County’s 2012 Strategic Climate Action Plan (SCAP). The SCAP is the County’s blueprint summarizing its leadership in addressing climate change, outlining the county’s most critical goals and priority actions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and preparing for the impacts of climate change.

“The climate crisis is already showing up in increasing flooding, ocean acidification, and rising sea levels, as well as decreasing mountain snowpack over time,” said Councilmember Larry Phillips, chair of the Council’s Transportation, Economy and Environment Committee. “The SCAP continues King County’s forward-thinking leadership on climate change by identifying actions King County is taking to address climate change in county services and operations. It sets goals and measurable targets for King County to reach in our progress on the climate.”  Read More >>

Sunday, November 11, 2007

UPDATED: Almost EVERYONE WINS! - Redevelopment of the Keller Farm, 9/3/07

UPDATED on 4/18/13.   It's my understanding the wetland bank program has been delayed for 5 years.  I don't know the details, but you could contact the city council ombudsman at council@redmond.gov for an explanation. 

OPINION:  My friend and neighbor, Richard Morris, wrote a "guest" blog a few months ago about new developments at historic Keller Farm near Avondale and Union Hill road. Recently, the planning commission has been holding public meetings on the project. The commission graciously left their meeting open for "comment". If you have something to say for the record, you may still comment (as of 8/5/07) to the planningcommission@redmond.gov

If ever there was a WIN-WIN land-use & re-zone project in Redmond THIS is it!
Below is an assessment of community needs that will be satisfied by the Aegis Living - Keller Farm development.
  1. Mr. Keller, owner of historic Keller Dairy Farm and now pumpkin farm has agreed to sell his land to a developer, but the low density residential zoning and Critical Area characteristics impeded progress and land values.
  2. The City classified much of Keller's land as protected, "critical areas" -- 1) recharge zone for maintaining our well water supply, 2) and hazardous flood zone, 3) riparian and fish & wildlife Protection Area; and wetland making re-zoning and development difficult.
  3. Aegis Living retirement company sought a premium location to attract and service their retirement clientele and obtain a location close to their corporate headquarters.
  4. The long-time landowners with grandfathered 25 foot buffers on Evans Creek want to increase the value of their land so that SE Redmond can be redeveloped. Evans Creek is a salmon bearing, straight channel with little or no riparian habitat or buffers.
  5. Perrigo Creek is taking on higher concentrations of stormwater run-off from new developments (Perrigo Heights, 180 Ave, and SR 520) presenting negative impacts to priority Bear Creek habitat.
  6. Environmentalists (Muckelshoot Indian Tribe, WaterTenders, community activists) want to protect priority open space, habitat, and species.
  7. Redmond Historical Society and residents want to preserve our heritage and our view corridors.
  8. Congested traffic needs to be mitigated on Avondale Road during redevelopment of the corridor.
  9. 5000 senior citizens 65 years and older live within a 3 mile radius of Keller Farm and will need retirement accommodations and care.
  10. Affordable housing is scarce for residents and workers in Redmond.
  11. Wetland mitigation banks are needed in Redmond to facilitate growth.
How the above needs will be satisfied (in sequence):
  1. The residential and agricultural zoning of Keller Farm will be amended to "Bear Creek District" allowing Mr. Keller to sell his 126 acre farm for a good return to Aegis Health Care (8.8 acres) and a "wetland bank" entrepreneur ((117 acres).
  2. A "wetland bank" is created in partnership with the the city and Aegis. The bank allows the city to protect their valuable recharge wellhead protection zone, protected riparian habitat and species, priority flood zone & wetlands. Susan Wilkins stated our 1998 FEMA Flood Map was dated. Kim Richardson had concerns about pesticides.
  3. Aegis Living, website here, will build a state-of-art retirement complex next to their corporate headquarters. Assisted living with focus on memory care will be provided. Alzheimer's is expected to grow by 10-fold by 2050. 1 in 5 citizens will be over 65 by 2030, according to Brain Poge of Aegis.
  4. An easement is created in the wetland bank to allow for re-routing & meandering of Evans Creek away from SE Redmond businesses. Riparian habitat will be restored and creekside resident land value will increase stimulating redevelopment of SE Redmond.
  5. Perrigo Creek currently runs underground 1000 feet in a pipe along Avondale. It will be "daylighted" to a swale (grassed ditch), the stream water -- oxygenated, filtered and re-routed away from Avondale wastewater before draining into Bear Creek - improving stormwater treatment and Bear Creek water quality.
  6. The wetland bank will be used mostly for wetlands paved over by roads, high schools, and trails and will not replace on-site mitigation. Victor Woodlasnd, wetland banker partner, has a 10 year commitment to restore banked units. Within 20-years the wetland bank will be endowed in perpetuity to the Cascade Land Conservancy. The wetland bank will be restored with trees and shrubs native to wetlands. Man-made ditches will be removed. Trails should be pervious (Dick Schaetzel) and secondary to the flow of the creeks (Ed Schein). Bear Creek is a channel. Off channel rearing of fish is superior and more likely after restoration. (Bill Shields).
  7. Aegis Living residents do most of their driving during off-peak hours so they are a good business for busy Avondale Road.
  8. 10% of the units will be set aside for affordable housing for workers and possibly residents.
What appears to be "unfinished business" or issues of concern are, as follows:
  • "Avondale Green Homeowners Association" is not opposed but they want a 2nd exit onto Avondale and a U-turn for safety.
  • a small triangular neighborhood next to Aegis is unhappy with the Aegis Road going next to their neighborhood.
  • Susan Wilkins duly noted concerns about our dated 1998 FEMA Flood map. Staffers agreed that mapping work needed to be done. Susan presented photos of the proposed Aegis tennis courts in the 1998 flood plain.
  • Jill Richardson had duly noted concerns about pesticides.
The wetland bank is highly regulated, but the City of Redmond has final say via permitting and the debit side of banking. The Dept. of Ecology and Army Corps of Engineers are next in line. The EPA has some jurisdiction, as well. City Environmental planner, Cathy Beam, and Planner Jeff Churchill worked hard on this project and did a great job.

Project review and rezone are almost finalized. The Department of Ecology will consider a Public Hearing - by request only.

** The photograph above is of cow pasture along Bear Creek. It may be Keller Farm. This photo is on the front cover of Redmond Historical Society's new soft-cover titled "Redmond Reflections - from settlers to software", written by Naomi Hardy. To order write redmondhistory@hotmail.com.
Redmond City Technical Report of the Aegis project is HERE

FACTOIDS - a 225 acre wetland in Duval was the first wetland banking site in WA. Washington State Dept. of Transportation (WSDOT) owns 5 wetland banks. Two banks are in Skagit county and one in Eastern Washington. >> wetland banks are booming across the country but are limited in Washington State by stronger regulations.
Planning commission's final recommendations to Council of 9/28/07: http://www.redmond.gov/insidecityhall/citycouncil/CurrentAgenda.asp

Thursday, June 4, 2015

Nokomis Club vs. City of Redmond, One Redmond, and NBE

 

Nokomis Club of Redmond needs to raise approximately $25-$50,000 in order to pay for legal fees and representation as they appeal the decision to deny the historic significance of the Nokomis building in Redmond. The hearing appealing the City of Redmond’s “Decision of Non-Significance” is scheduled for July 9th and 10th.
A separate appeal has been filed regarding the EPA’s classification of the building.
If you are interested in helping with their fight, please consider donating funds via PayPal on the Nokomis Club website or through their Crowdrise site (both listed below).

NokomisCoC
The challenge of declaring the Nokomis Building of Redmond as a historically significant building is raising its head as another “us vs. them” struggle between the citizens of Redmond and the City.  Read More >>