Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Redmond considers on‑site rebuild or off‑site options for Municipal Operations Campus; county partnership under review
Summary
Public Works Director Aaron Burt told council the Municipal Operations Campus redevelopment is in a validation phase using a progressive design‑build approach; the team is evaluating on‑site rebuild vs. site acquisition, dispersed temporary operations across city sites, and early conversations with King County about a regional partnership.
Public Works Director Aaron Burt and project leads updated the Redmond City Council on progress toward redeveloping the Municipal Operations Campus (MOC). Burt said the city is using a progressive design‑build approach with Concertis as owner’s representative and Miller Hull, Lewis Crutcher and Stantec as design‑build partners and is currently in a validation phase.
Burt said the goal is to redevelop the city’s 9‑acre site and deliver a modern, efficient operations center for the next several decades. The validation work includes three parallel streams: (1) a site acquisition study if the city elects to seek an outside parcel, (2) a dispersed operations plan for temporary facilities (roughly 17 city sites identified) to enable construction on the existing site, and (3) development of the baseline MOC project design for the existing campus.
Site options and partnerships: Burt outlined opportunities they are evaluating — a Cadman/Heidelberg 9‑acre parcel, early discussions with Lake Washington School District about a larger parcel, and preliminary talks with King County about using underused King County Roads property. He emphasized conversations with external parties are at an early stage and no commitments have been made; any acquisition or county partnership would return to council for concurrence.
Costs and tradeoffs: The team said using city‑owned dispersed operational sites can reduce lease costs but would introduce inefficiencies and potential uplift across multiple temporary locations; the project team is assembling cost buckets for dispersed operations and will include those estimates in the validation report to present to council. Burt said the team anticipates an 18–24 month design and permitting phase, then a later contract amendment with an all‑in price for construction.
Next steps: The project team expects to return with a recommended option and a validation report that includes cost estimates for dispersed operations and criteria for site evaluation. Council members asked the team to quantify inefficiencies and bring back environmental and permitting criteria for any new site.
