Loading...
Download Otter for your meeting notesLoading...
you. Good evening Council. As Lynn mentioned, our code update tonight is geared towards removing regulatory barriers to housing and that implements one of the council's goals which is Affordable Housing and Sustainable Development. Council has a strategy to optimize housing continuum and an action to explore code policy options to increase affordable imbuing middle income housing as I was talking about these code amendments to implement that. The three major parts of the code update tonight include removing regulatory barriers to the development and multi housing developments removing regulatory barriers to middle housing developments. And then lastly, creating a new housing opportunity called single room occupancy. Now we'll go into detail on each one of these. So the first code amendment is going to remove the maximum density of 43 units the gross acre in our high density residential district. So instead of having density regulate the scale of the development we still have setbacks in the current layout height requirements and lock coverage and landscaping requirements as well that will regulate regulate how large the building is going to be, how far it's going to be from populates and how tall it's going to be. And an example is up on the screen which is the jewel development and lens a little bit more history on this project as providing just to where this discussion came from and what could happen at the maximum density. So a way 
first one up on the screen is the approval criteria, which talks about and we're proposing to strike. The requirement that easements across property lines must be avoided if utilities, so the lot frontage can be obtained from existing means or installation of new means, when I'm not sure this is truly consistent with Senate Bill 458. And it is definitely an additional cost of requiring a development to get utilities from an existing main or actually installing a new mate if there is one nearby. What Senate Bill 458 allows is the utilities can crossover property lines in easements. So this strikeout cleans up the requirement and just specifies that you can't have utilities cross as long as there's easements. The two changes to the final plat requirements. The first one is actually pretty big. So it states that a final plat will not be approved until building permits are issued and what restriping is and framing inspections for each dwelling unit is completed prior to recording the final plat. So what it says today is that you actually have the you have to get your building permits first you have to start framing each unit and then you can record the plat. So they cannot sell off lots until each one is actually under construction and that has been a barrier when it comes for developers trying to get financing or maybe they just want to start one unit but they would like to record the plat get some financing backing and then develop the second and third units or sell those often someone else develops them, but with the framing inspection requirement, they have not been able to do that. And so we are required, we are proposing to eliminate the framing inspection, still requiring the building permit issuance. And then the last change is basically to help with the amendment that we talked about for the utilities is that the applicant must record the record with the county recorder on the approved tracks or easements that we talked about. And it has to include provisions to require maintenance of all the elements in those tracks or easements. Especially when you have utilities going through different properties. We want to make sure that the easements are maintained and that there's maintenance of the utilities and so that will be required to be recorded with the development 
respiration Chief Operations Officer I wanted to provide some high level context of not only this project, but the next one and then Ryan in the eip staff will go into more detail on both projects. The first one, the both these projects are kind of related to council goals around improving our existing multimodal system as well as the the north south east west key routes that are outlining Council goals. main things that I just want to talk about is the only project did go through the council committee building subcommittee at their last meeting. And staff will talk about that those discussions, but you're going to see a little teaser when you see the cost of the budget and the the estimate for the project is coming in higher than was originally busted. budgeted our staff is recommending approval of this along with our community communications with the subcommittee, but I just wanted to provide context for counsel that we will be coming back we've got a work session is scheduled in January of next year to start to talk about this theme of cost overruns, which we've had some preliminary conversations about what how do we want to approach that? How do we want to look at the CIP. How do we look at prioritization? Because this is a trend for a variety of reasons. One cost escalations that occurred since the geo bonding funding packages originally came as well as just the the scope of what we're trying to achieve with the projects and where we want to make sure that we invest the all the infrastructure dollars that we have right now. So I'll be here for any questions, but I'll turn it over to Ryan and Carrie to go over the specifics of this project. Great, thanks. 
Yeah, thank you. I'm Carrie with the engineering and infrastructure planning department and we're here to look at the phase two amendment the only pedestrian and bicycle improvements project, specifically looking for final design and construction support services on that amendment. So a little background on the project location. You can see the project here in that tiny yellow tan circle. And it's a third of a mile pretty short segment, but important segment of a key walking and biking route. In the city. We are touching three other low stress net routes that are part of the low stress walking and biking network in the city. And I've highlighted a few other projects that are currently being prioritized by the transportation Bond Oversight Committee that are long the same key route three. So those are shown in blue and purple. And you'll see other key routes shown in green here on this map and other key route projects with funding highlighted in red. So some background on that project. It comes directly from the 2020 transportation system plan and 2020 general obligation bond. And as part of that those documents outlined for a safe crossing at only in second. So that shown kind of on the east side of this map with the teal dots, as well as protected bike lanes on only at the highway overpass and then a shared use path adjacent to the road from Wall Street to the railroad with the goals of the shared use path the to close the sidewalk gap over the railroad to remove existing barriers to East West bicycle connectivity and to mitigate right turn hook crashes and this was where we had the 2017 Fatality of Jonathan Chase Adams with that right turn hook crash so we're looking to 
do improvements to help prevent that from happening. So some scope we are wrapping up phase one for the Alternatives Analysis and preliminary design services. And then looking to move into Phase Two for final design and construction support. As part of phase one, we conducted two open houses one being an online open house and one being an in person open house. And we developed some options as well that we shared at those open houses. So option one was our in budget transportation improvements, and that just included on st buffered bike lanes, and that kept us in budget. So we didn't look at a shared use path with that option one, option two and three when we started looking at a shared use path, as defined in our improvements it did push us out of our budget for those transportation improvements funding. We briefly considered having a shared use path on both sides of the road and that was greatly over budget. So we scaled back on that and that was due to limited right away. That was pushing that out of budget. So at the open house we heard from around 100 community members at our open houses and we had some concerns about the short segment length of a one sided shared use path. And this being like dropping someone biking into an intersection without a safe crossing at that starting point. We also heard feedback on with the shared use path different users on different modes of transportation, sharing that same space going to different directions and that not being the community's preference for a pedestrian and bike treatment and we also heard feedback on our on st buffered bike lane options, that there was concerns with this being still riding too close to vehicles and not offering substantial protection away from vehicles for cyclist. We've also been coordinating with BNSF at the rail crossing and we heard that we would need additional gates at the shared use path crossing the railroad. If there was two way ridership going both directions and the rail his preference was for keeping bikes moving in one direction on each side of the road. So based off those three options we then looked at and the feedback we got on those as well as our project teams analysis, which we had the same concerns that the community was raising. We looked at a fourth option to best leverage the funding that we have. And so that's being shared here. Now this is looking at a protected bike lane so occur protected bike lane, on each side of the road, and then sidewalk on each side of the road with the goal being to provide every user that moves at different speeds their own set space away from the other users to really add that additional safety and user experience on this road. It was some of the numbers we got for bikers on this road were some of the highest we're seeing and been so it's definitely an already used very popular route for walking and biking. So we want to make it even that much better with this project. And we're still still kind of fine tuning what that looks like in terms of measurements. You'll see some here but these are still draft measurements that we're looking at for the bike lane but we want to make it so the current protected bike lane you can have to weigh side by or not to weigh but side by side ridership and have that ability to still 
pass someone that may be going slower and the bike lane so looking at this fourth option, part of why we're able to do this or looking to do this is because of synergy projects. We do have water line work and sewer line work that needs upgrading on this project. And so just leveraging that funding again, and that's shown here on this map so the limits of the water and sewer work. And then a little bit on funding Russ spoke to this a little earlier but we are anticipating about another million and then bond money for this to get us to this 10 point 4 million that we're estimating for our total project cost and currently, we're around 6 million for funding and so that additional funding for from the geo bond as well as the synergy projects that we'll come back for in the future. And so yeah, the amendment for tonight we're looking for phase two for final design and construction support services of 1,437,547. A bit on the schedule. We're looking to complete final design in 2024 and then move into work on franchise utilities and construction in 2025. Eight questions right.