Redmond Planning Commission Meeting - September 23, 2026

The Redmond Planning Commission met on September 23, 2026, in a study-session-focused meeting. It approved an amended agenda and the September 9, 2026 meeting summary, heard two public comments, and took up three items: the Tree Code Update, the proposed repeal of outdated Neighborhood Connections Maps, and Transportation Facilities Plan (TFP) Projects. Commissioners Aparna, Coleman, Ganyer, Gong, Woodyer, and Weston were present; Commissioner Van Eyman was absent. Chair Weston announced that Commissioner Copley had resigned due to professional and family obligations and thanked him for his service.

Opening and Routine Approvals

• Roll call was completed; Commissioner Van Eyman was absent and Commissioner Copley's resignation was noted.
• The agenda was amended so that items 6 and 7 were changed from 15-minute briefings to 45-minute study sessions; the amended agenda was approved by voice vote.
• The meeting summary from September 9, 2026, was approved by voice vote.

Public Comments and Testimony

• David Morton spoke on the Tree Code Update and Neighborhood Connections Map. He expressed concern that nearly every discretionary tree finding still rests on a qualified tree professional hired by the applicant, including hazard determinations, tree condition, tree protection zone reductions, and retention feasibility. He noted that third-party review of exceptions is optional, applicant-paid, and chosen by agreement with the applicant, and that hazardous removals do not count against a property's removal allowance, while hazardous trees under 30 inches require no replacement. He asked the commission to recommend independent city verification at these decision points, starting with hazard and retention findings, and to urge City Council to fund a city arborist in the 2027-2028 budget. He also identified drafting conflicts in the tree code, including the exact 30-inch diameter gap in the hazardous tree replacement table and the impervious-surface waiver of the 35% retention requirement. On the map repeal, he asked staff to reconcile policy text still referencing the map slated for repeal and to identify infeasible connections removed from the Transportation Master Plan map.
• David Haynes raised a stormwater concern about a specific parcel, asking the city to consider connecting to the city stormwater drain instead of allowing front-yard infiltration to flow into wetlands. He also argued for removing restrictions on building height to allow for higher-quality, less car-centric housing near Marymoor Village, including rooftop views, and for pedestrian-friendly, resident-friendly, walkable neighborhoods. He said he supported robust housing development but did not want the tree ordinance weaponized.

Tree Code Update - Study Session

• Senior Planner Lauren Anderson presented, joined online by Kim Frappier from Facet. The update primarily revises RZC 21.72. The timeline runs from drafting and research in February-April 2026, through community engagement in May-July, introduction to the Planning Commission and City Council in July, and a Technical Committee recommendation of approval on September 16, 2026. Planning Commission review continues through December, with Council adoption expected January-March 2027 and a delayed effective date of about three months after adoption.
• Key proposed changes include new and updated definitions; adjusted non-development tree removal limits by lot size, including reducing the maximum on lots 30,001 square feet and greater from 8 to 5 and adding a maximum removal number to prevent clear-cutting; replacement requirements scaled by diameter at breast height; a one-to-one replacement requirement for hazardous landmark and heritage trees; and a new tree-credit system for development projects replacing the current 35% significant-tree retention standard. The credit formula uses tree canopy site area multiplied by a credit multiplier based on zoning district and development type. The 35% retention credit is exempted for lots under 3,000 square feet and where development reduces allowable impervious surface below 85% of the zoning maximum.
• The code also adds a hazardous tree declaration process, a fee-in-lieu of $450 per credit, no development permits for 12 months after tree removal and 24 months after landmark tree removal, and changes to enforcement and penalties, including moving fees into a fee schedule. Staff reported current city tree canopy coverage at 37% as of 2023.
• Staff responded to prior Planning Commission questions: conifers are prioritized because they provide year-round ecosystem benefits and are longer-lived; red alders and cottonwoods receive less credit due to infrastructure conflicts; and off-site replacement locations are managed by Public Works, with staff exploring a public GIS layer. Staff recommend against a parcel viewer with automatic tree-credit multipliers and instead favor a calculator using survey-based data. The $450 fee-in-lieu is consistent with regional practice, including Kirkland.
• Commissioners expressed concerns about the code's complexity and readability, noting it is about 97 pages and may be difficult for homeowners and smaller applicants. They also raised questions about enforcement, applicant-hired arborist independence, stronger penalties for contractors and tree companies, the need for a city arborist, the magnitude of tree loss relative to the 40% canopy target, drainage and stormwater impacts from large tree removals, and whether penalty revenue would support tree planting and enforcement. Commissioner Coleman asked whether the city is considering AI-based tools to help the public navigate complex code; Commissioner Aparna cautioned that AI can produce wrong answers and create liability.
• One commissioner asked that language describing tree diameters be changed from less than 30 inches and greater than 30 inches to up to 30 inches and greater than 30 inches so an exactly 30-inch hazardous tree is covered. The comment was added to the issues matrix.
• Next steps: public hearing on October 14, November 4 available as an additional study session, and November 18 scheduled for study session and recommendation. The commission continues compiling an issues matrix.

Neighborhood Connections Map Repeal - Study Session

• Staff introduced a docket item to repeal five outdated neighborhood connection maps in the Neighborhoods Element of the Comprehensive Plan: Bear Creek, Education Hill, North Redmond, Southeast Redmond, and Northeast Rose Hill. Staff stated the connections were consolidated into maps in the Transportation Master Plan adopted February 2026, so the older maps and text references should be removed.
• Chair Weston objected to making this edit through the old Neighborhoods Element, which she said was mostly written between 2004 and 2008 and had not been meaningfully updated. She proposed instead placing replacement maps in the comprehensive plan appendix or combining the repeal with the broader neighborhood planning update. Staff responded that the old element was included in the 2024 Redmond 2050 omnibus adoption as an intentionally old placeholder, that the former appendix H no longer exists after the TMP update, and that options included approving the repeal, recommending denial, or deferring the item.
• Other commissioners agreed that piecemeal edits to an outdated chapter were confusing. Commissioner Aparna suggested the whole Neighborhoods Element should be updated together when the neighborhood planning project is ready. No decision was made. Chair Weston asked staff to determine a path forward and stated she did not see how the October 14 public hearing could be held without published materials. Staff said they would follow up.

TFP Projects Update - Study Session

• Senior Transportation Planner Francesca Liberti presented a docket item to add two new shared-use path projects to the Transportation Facilities Plan:
  • NE 40th Street between 158th Avenue NE and 156th Avenue NE, related to the Eve's Avalon apartments.
  • NE 70th Street between 188th Avenue NE and the Evans Creek Trail, related to the Heidelberg site.
• The projects would provide low-stress bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and are tied to adjacent redevelopment. Because the developers requested transportation impact fee credits for frontage improvements, and Planning and Community Development Director Carol Helland determined the improvements qualify as system improvements and help reduce development costs, the improvements need to be listed in the TFP. An existing TFP project on NE 72nd Street east of 188th Avenue NE would also be modified to include a shared-use path.
• A commissioner asked whether these projects carry prioritization weight in the TFP. Staff answered that they do not; they are included in anticipation of future development and will be built by that development.
• No decision was made. Staff anticipated an October 14 public hearing and an October 28 Planning Commission recommendation.

Key Outcomes

• The amended agenda and September 9, 2026 meeting summary were approved.
• No formal votes were taken on the three substantive items, all of which were study sessions.
• Tree Code Update: issues matrix continues; public hearing October 14; possible additional study session November 4; recommendation scheduled November 18.
• Neighborhood Connections Map repeal: deferred for staff to propose a path forward; the October 14 hearing was called into question and may be moved or continued.
• TFP Projects Update: no decision; October 14 public hearing and October 28 recommendation are the anticipated next steps.