Kittitas County commissioners on Wednesday approved updates to county code chapter 10.08 that remove outdated listings and correct inconsistencies in the county speed‑limit tables, and they approved a separate amendment to raise the posted speed on a section of Bullfrog Road from 35 miles per hour to 50 miles per hour.

Josh Frederickson of Kittitas County Public Works told commissioners his office audited entries in chapter 10.08 against the county road log submitted to the County Road Administration Board and found streets that had been annexed or vacated still listed in code and one road listed twice. "We wanted to remove those," Frederickson said, and the proposed amendments correct those duplications and inconsistencies with previously adopted ordinances.

Frederickson also presented an engineering study for the Bullfrog Road segment between Interstate 90 and Tumble Creek (milepost 0 to milepost 0.72). The study used standard local practice and Federal Highway Administration guidance, including the 80th/85th percentile of vehicle speeds. At the data collection point (milepost 0.23) the study found a 50th percentile speed of 44.5 mph and an 85th percentile of about 50.6 mph. Frederickson said there are two horizontal curves with design speeds of approximately 50 mph, lane widths of about 11 feet, and paved shoulders of roughly 3 feet. Crash history for the five‑year period showed one reported crash in the segment. Based on those factors and law enforcement input, Public Works recommended changing the posted speed for that section from 35 to 50 mph.

A public commenter, Pat Killeher, said the project record felt incomplete and that the history of why the speed had been reduced previously should be in the record. "The record is very incomplete," Killeher said, adding that supporting documents were not available to the public until shortly before the hearing. Frederickson responded that the 35‑mph posting dated to a county resolution in the 1990s (cited in staff materials as resolution 93‑14) that reduced the speed limit because of bridge deck conditions; he said that bridge repairs had since been completed and that the bridge condition no longer supported the lower limit.

Commissioners discussed the consistency of speed limits countywide and comparisons to other nearby segments. One commissioner said this particular segment had a prior plan to raise the speed once infrastructure work was completed and described the change as a correction to prior reductions. After discussion the board moved and seconded approval of the updates to chapter 10.08 and the Bullfrog Road speed change; the motions carried on voice votes.

Why it matters: changing posted speeds affects enforcement, design standards, and community safety perceptions and requires engineering justification under state law. Frederickson cited Code of Washington authority (noted in staff materials as 46.61.0.415) that authorizes local jurisdictions to set speed limits and noted that county code keeps separate sections for 35 mph and 50 mph postings.

Clarifying details captured in the hearing record include the Bullfrog Road study location (MP 0–0.72; data at MP 0.23), observed speed distribution (50th percentile 44.5 mph; 85th percentile ~50.6 mph), lane and shoulder dimensions (approximately 11‑foot lanes and 3‑foot paved shoulders), one reported crash in five years, and a prior county resolution cited as 93‑14 that set a 35 mph posting due to bridge deck conditions. The record includes written public comment submitted before the hearing; one person testified orally with concerns about timing and completeness of the posted materials.

The board closed the item after approving the code updates and the Bullfrog Road posting change; staff indicated the ordinance and road log will be updated to maintain consistency with the County Road Administration Board submittals.