Redmond previews Phase 3 of Redmond 2050 code package covering housing and design standards

Council President Kritzer called the Redmond City Council study session to order on May 13, 2025, and Planning and Community Development Director Carol Helland presented the Planning Commission’s recommendations for the Phase 3 “Redmond 2050” code package covering design standards and housing amendments.

The package aims to implement Redmond 2050 goals, respond to recent state laws and improve clarity and flexibility in zoning and development standards. Helland said staff previously introduced the item on April 1 and gathered further council questions at the April 22 Committee of the Whole meeting.

Ian Lefkort, staff, summarized the housing changes and their purpose. He said the amendments focus on three principal areas: middle housing implementation, legislative compliance and residential adjustments. “The housing amendments help implement the Redmond 2050 comprehensive plan,” Lefkort said. He added that the work is driven by the comprehensive plan’s finding that Redmond needs significantly more housing units by 2050, and that “over 70% of this net new housing is needed for households that earn 50 percent AMI or below.”

Why it matters: staff and the Planning Commission framed the package as a mix of policy and technical edits that seek to increase housing supply and align the municipal code with state requirements while making design rules more outcome‑based and less prescriptive. The housing changes address affordability policy tools used by the city — mandatory inclusionary zoning and the multifamily property tax exemption (MFTE) — and refine how the neighborhood residential payment‑in‑lieu (PIL) is calculated and administered.

Key housing points

- Lefkort said the amendments will not change zoning or the MFTE parameters or targeted areas: “the amendments will not change the zoning for those areas. 2, the amendments will not change the MFTE for those areas, either the parameters or the actual residential targeted area.”

- Staff reported roughly 950 affordable homes have resulted from the city’s combined inclusionary and MFTE programs to date.

- The package shifts focus toward deeper affordability, targeting units affordable at 50% of area median income (AMI) because staff said that bin represents a large share of local need. Staff gave an example: for a three‑person household, 50% AMI is about $71,000 annually; the associated rent limit for a two‑bedroom unit was given as $1,767 per month versus a median gross rent of about $2,700.

- The draft consolidates multiple PIL categories (detached, attached vertically aligned and attached horizontally aligned) into a single neighborhood residential PIL category. Staff said the change is intended to reduce confusion and improve predictability.

- Staff described a three‑year phase‑in for certain fees to give projects already under contract time to adjust, modeled after an earlier phase‑in used for school impact fees.

Legislative compliance and housing conversions

- The code updates incorporate two state legislative changes staff identified by bill number: House Bill 1042, which limits conditions local jurisdictions may place on conversions of nonresidential buildings to residential uses, and House Bill 1998, which requires jurisdictions to allow certain coliving/residential suites in specified areas. Staff said the amendments codify those changes so local regulations comply with state law.

Design standards and universal design

- Planning Commission recommendations recast design rules to focus on outcomes and to offer multiple compliance pathways, including an alternative design compliance (ADC) route that can be used in cultural districts. Staff noted cultural‑district implementation work will come in a subsequent package.

- A new “context‑sensitive design” section pulls related provisions together, adds rules limiting repetition of building forms and addresses how new development should relate to environmental and historic resources.

- The package adds a universal design section and an Appendix 12 checklist for incentives. Council members asked about one deleted checklist item related to elevator size in public assembly buildings; staff said they are comfortable restoring that item because smaller elevators under state consideration are unlikely to be practical in high‑volume public assembly buildings.

- Staff also described incentives for mass timber construction, citing sustainability and resilience benefits and saying local industry groups, including MassTech and AIA Seattle participants, have responded positively.

Council direction and next steps

- Council members pressed staff on accessibility and elevator language. Council Vice President Forsyth advocated restoring the elevator checklist item for assembly/public buildings and Council Member Stewart seconded that direction; a majority of council showed support and staff said they would add the language back into the checklist.

- On PIL phase‑in, staff said the approach is patterned on prior fee phase‑ins and intended to preserve housing development momentum while the market adjusts to new charges.

- Staff recommended updating the issues matrix with public comments received after the packet printing, returning to the Committee of the Whole for a consolidated review (anticipated May 27), bringing the package to the Public Works (PW) committee in June and seeking adoption on consent at the June 17 council meeting, barring further changes.

Discussion vs. decisions

- Discussion: council and staff debated accessibility (elevator capacity in assembly buildings), canopy/awning coverage percentages, infrastructure costs developers raise regarding street and right‑of‑way upgrades, and how AMI is calculated and updated.

- Direction: council directed staff to restore elevator language for public assembly buildings and to update the issues matrix to reflect comments received since packet printing.

- Formal action: none taken at the study session; Planning Commission had recommended approval and staff sought council direction on edits and next steps.

What staff clarified

- Payment‑in‑lieu consolidation is intended to simplify administration and increase predictability for applicants.

- The city plans a three‑year phase‑in for selected fees to accommodate projects that had preexisting contracts.

- HUD AMI figures are used for AMI calculations; staff said the specific AMI table is published annually and that staff will confirm the geographic basis (regional/metropolitan area) in the issues matrix.

Quotes

- “This is the final package of code amendments that is part of Redmond 2050,” said Carol Helland, Planning and Community Development Director.

- “The housing amendments help implement the Redmond 2050 comprehensive plan,” said Ian Lefkort, staff.

- “The amendments will not change the zoning for those areas. ... Third, the amendments will not lead to redevelopment of the King County Housing Authority's affordable senior housing complexes,” Lefkort said, responding to public concerns about impacts to seniors.

Ending

Staff will update the issues matrix, return to the Committee of the Whole for a consolidated discussion later this month and pursue the schedule that would put adoption on consent on June 17 if no substantive changes are requested. Council thanked staff and the Planning Commission for the multi‑year work on Redmond 2050.