Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public largely backs Houghton Village plan at Kirkland hearing; council to consider adoption Dec. 9
Summary
At a Nov. 18 public hearing on the Houghton Village development plan, a majority of speakers urged higher heights (up to five stories), reduced parking and more affordable units; others urged sale or lower heights citing feasibility and traffic. Staff said the draft plan would require about 18,000–20,000 sq ft of public open space and could be considered for adoption Dec. 9.
The City of Kirkland held a public hearing Nov. 18 on the Houghton Village development plan, which staff described as a high‑level framework for future redevelopment of the Houghton Village site.
Allison Zike, deputy director of planning and building, summarized the draft plan: staff estimated the framework could accommodate about 145 residential units and nearly 26,000 square feet of commercial or community space; the plan would require future projects to provide approximately 18,000 square feet of public open space (staff set a 10% tolerance for variations) and recommends that parking standards align with state Senate Bill 5184 when that code is implemented (targeted by January 2027).
Public testimony was robust and sharply divided. Supporters — including neighborhood residents, arts organizations and housing advocates — urged council to allow five‑story buildings and to reduce minimum parking requirements to make housing financially feasible and to increase affordable housing content. ‘‘Allowing up to five stories will help add more desperately needed housing,’’ said Scott Denman, a resident who testified in favor.
Other speakers criticized the city’s purchase of the property, questioned the economics and engineering feasibility, and urged the council to sell the site rather than pursue city‑led redevelopment. Opponents warned about traffic congestion and argued the site’s environmental constraints and soil remediation needs had not been resolved by developers who previously declined to build.
Council members discussed the testimony and noted opposing viewpoints across neighborhood stakeholders. Several council members said they favor moving the development plan forward — with continued consideration of parking standards and other refinements — so the city and potential developers have clarity about allowable uses and a pathway to future permits. Staff said revised ordinance text and related materials will be posted for council and public review in advance of the Dec. 9 adoption consideration.
Next steps: The council will consider adoption of a development‑plan ordinance on Dec. 9; staff said the adoption would set review standards and administrative procedures for future permit review but would not compel any property owner to redevelop to the maximum allowed heights.
