Kirkland planning commission reviews draft rules to implement Senate Bill 5184, flags ADA and bike‑parking issues
Loading...
Summary
Planning commissioners reviewed staff proposals to implement Senate Bill 5184, including an early‑action ordinance that would remove parking minimums in much of the 85th Street station area and allow certain commercial expansions without extra parking. Commissioners urged protections for ADA access, neighborhood spillover management and robust bicycle‑parking standards.
The Kirkland Planning Commission spent a study session reviewing staff proposals to implement Senate Bill 5184, the 2025 state law that limits the on‑site parking cities may require for many commercial and residential uses.
Senior planner Martha Rubart told commissioners the city must comply with SB 5184 by January 2027 and described a two‑phase approach: an early‑action ordinance to make minimum changes now and a later zoning code cleanup. Rubart said the early action could remove minimums within the 85th Street station area and add two local provisions: allowing commercial space expansions without requiring additional parking and eliminating parking requirements in part or all of the station area. “This is the first set of requirements, limiting the on‑site parking that cities may require for commercial and residential uses,” Rubart said.
Why it matters: the changes would reshape how new development is designed and paid for in transit‑oriented areas, potentially lowering housing development costs while shifting demand for curb space, loading zones and accessible parking to the city and neighboring streets.
During the discussion commissioners generally supported moving quickly to meet the state deadline but raised several cautions. Commissioner Julia Nolan pressed staff to ensure mobility‑impaired residents still have reliable access: “I want to encourage as much as possible to make sure that at least needs for people who might have mobility issues are addressed,” she said, warning that simply reducing minimum stalls could leave people without nearby accessible parking.
Vice Chair Aaron Jacobson said he favored maintaining ADA protections tied to housing units rather than the number of provided stalls: “Figure out a way to basically maintain the same amount of ADA parking that’s being required,” he said, adding that commercial uses in zones with weaker transit should be treated differently from residential uses.
Commissioners also debated the geographic scope of a station‑area exemption. Some members supported removing minimums across the whole 85th Street station area to simplify administration; others preferred keeping SB 5184 minimums in the Urban Flex district or retaining commercial requirements citywide to avoid spillover parking in adjacent neighborhoods. Several commissioners noted the city will need active curb management, residential permit parking or other tools to address overflow.
On accessory dwelling units (ADUs), staff highlighted an implementation edge case: SB 5184 exempts residential units under 1,200 square feet, but an ADU formed by converting an existing floor could exceed that threshold by a single square foot depending on measurement, creating uncertainty about whether parking would be required. Rubart said staff’s recommendation is to exempt ADUs from minimum‑parking compliance in phase 1 to avoid that complexity; a staff member noted ADUs above 1,200 square feet appear rare, “probably one or two a year,” according to staff recollection.
Commissioners considered bicycle‑parking impacts as well. Rubart warned that the city’s current bike‑parking formulas are tied to vehicle parking requirements, so reducing vehicle minimums would unintentionally reduce bike‑parking unless the rules are adjusted. Staff recommended applying station‑area bike ratios citywide as an interim measure and asked for feedback on short‑term (visitor) versus long‑term (resident) bike parking design and the potential future need for e‑bike charging infrastructure.
On commercial expansions, staff proposed draft code language that would not require extra off‑street parking for: (1) changes of use to commercial where SB 5184 already applies; (2) interior expansions within the existing building envelope such as mezzanines; and (3) a one‑time per‑property expansion up to 3,000 square feet or 10% of gross floor area, whichever is greater. Commissioners sought clarity on how loading and delivery functions would be handled and urged the city to require or design for adequate loading zones and curb‑space for pickups and deliveries.
Staff recommended preparing public‑hearing materials that illustrate two options — (A) remove parking minimums across station‑area districts except Urban Flex, or (B) retain SB 5184 minimums in some districts — and use public feedback to refine the approach. A staff member said that option (A) would be simpler to administer and asked commissioners whether the city should treat districts rather than uses differently in the early ordinance.
Next steps: staff will return to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on the early‑action ordinance on March 12, with a tentative City Council adoption date of April 7. Staff also plans additional code amendments for the station area (including minimum density and development agreement flexibility) for public hearings later in March and April.
The commission closed the meeting with no additional public commenters and no formal vote taken; commissioners asked staff to highlight ADA‑access issues prominently in the public‑hearing packet.
