City Council to consider building moratorium along with other options
On Tuesday, September 16th, the Kirkland City Council will consider a building moratorium for downtown during a study session in which they will discuss zoning and the design review process. With the possible exceptions of Parkplace and the Bank of America project (which is heading to Superior Court), a moratorium would stop most all development downtown.
The City of Kirkland finds itself in an unenviable economic position due to a looming budget shortfall. Sales tax revenues are are down well below estimates. The City is facing a $13 million – $17 million deficit between tax receipts and planned spending in the next two years. City staff are being asked to calculate up to 8% cuts in their departments. Citizens are being prepared for large-scale service level cuts as well as tax increases on citizens and businesses.
A moratorium on building downtown at this time would come at the worst possible moment. The City of Kirkland needs any revenue it can get. Construction fills the City coffers and help prevent our taxes from being raised.
A memorandum to the Council was prepared by the Planning Department and is a part of the Council Packet. You may download the memorandum here.
Print This Article
Posted by Rob Butcher on Thursday, September 11, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Filed under Development · Tagged with City Council, Comprehensive Plan, Development, Downtown, Moratorium
Print This Article
Related Stories:
|
|
|
|
|
Would a moratorium be a chance to fix the problems or a chance to make things worse. Things need fixing like superior retail because no one in the world knows what that means.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I believe that the moratorium is overkill. If we stop all development every time the city wants to fix issues then we’ll never get anything refurbished downtown or anywhere else. We seem to be able to have comprehensive plan updates and other plan changes without doing a moratorium each time. Perhaps not putting a moratorium in place will strongly encourage the city council and staff to get the fixes done in a timely manner rather than talking them to death- sometimes it seems that our version of “process” in Kirkland is merely “paralysis”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
An interesting counterpoint to this proposal can be found in the packet of information for the DRB study session before the council meeting. The materials there give a good outline of the development process and concerns for Downtown and if you look on p.5 you can see ways that the process can be amended
http://www.ci.kirkland.wa.us/__shared/assets/3a_StudySession9933.pdf
some of which do not include halting everything until matters are clarified. This gives some reasonable ideas on how to improve matters without taking such drastic measures. Worth checking out in conjunction with the proposed amendments.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
State law sets out the rules for how a moratorium operates. That leads me to believe the legislature finds it is appropriate under some circumstances. When do you think it would be appropriate for a City to enact?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My concern about a moratorium is the message it sends about the City of Kirkland. A moratorium is an emergency action. It stops everything. Now I doubt there are developers lining up to build in downtown Kirkland given the recent past and given the uncertainty surrounding development.
The City needs to send out POSITIVE messages rather than continuing the stream of NEGATIVE messages. Moratoriums have a tendency to be extended and to last far longer than originally intended.
I hope our Council will be cognizant of the unintended consequences of the heavy hand of government. Far too often, what starts out as a good intention ends up causing bad and unintended results.
The issues of “superior retail” and height are tweaks that could be corrected and thus limit ambiguity that surrounds development today.
In my opinion, a moratorium sends the wrong message from the City at this time. It is a heavy-handed response that may do more harm than good. Caution and measured responses are what we need.
Unless the Council plans to overhaul the entire downtown zoning scheme, a moratorium seems like overkill.
Thanks for your comments.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Speaking of needing more sales tax revenue to balance the budget, what is, or can be done to expedite the redevelopment of the Totem Lake Mall. That’s a cash cow that ain’t gettin’ milked.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DDR can’t get their funding to start their project- or at least that is what the rumor and innuendo is stating.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There is more to “tweak” than heights and defining Superior retail: building mass, quality materials, incentives to developers to NOT build to height maximums so that the entire downtown core doesn’t end up looking like a continuous massive building with different facads.
I understand the downside of a moratorium. Past moritoriums were enacted following public outrage about bad decisions that we are forever stuck with, and it is only going to continue by not comprehensively addressing the issues. Short term pain or long term gain?
Examples of projects I find unfortunate and inappropriate for varying reasons:
- Portsmith – height & MASS
- Waterview – height
- Carillon Point: 3 MASSIVE waterfront/view blocking office buildings (lack of variation in height, mass, use as in lack of residential mix). Think Parkplace.
- Carillon Heights/Villas at Carillon (mass – too much the same roofline, design. A blight on the hillside viewing from the lake. Ironically at the time of construction, some of the buildings roofline exceeded the height limit by a few inches. City halted the project, forced redesign. End result was worse than the original because design compromise was forced.)
- Strip Mall on Central (my understanding is a hotel was originally proposed for this site but nixed by the City Council in favor of a …strip mall)
- Google Campus (location, architecture, landscaping)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Reminds me of their fight with Honda over an additional lot for parking but they let a pay day loans place go in down the street. Which is the bigger blight on society (my apologies in advance to all owners of similar establishments but I truly believe the world would be a better place without another PDL shop ever opening again).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think that last thing we need is more bad news for Kirkland. Murph makes a compelling list of blight but to judge projects of other eras by today’s standards is not useful. To overhaul the entire comp plan and change zoning etc would be as Rob says a totally different animal. Tweaking would be quick if that is what’s needed. A complete overhaul would take foreverwith studies and would hold up bulding well in to next year.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Interesting that City Council is limiting comment on Tuesday to 3 people and 9 minutes. Doesn’t that say something about this misguided attempt to, in effect, shut down further development at the behest of less than 1% of Kirkland’s population??
Please take the time to be heard: show up, write, call and e-mail your sentiments, before Tuesday. You can bet the 1% will!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In this case it is the rules that have been in effect for a long time. Since it is not a public hearing they only have to hear three fors and three againsts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I leave for a few days and see what happens! First the Gang of 4 gets us in a lawsuit. Then they try the late night moratorium. It is obvious that these guys haven’t read the history of this place. The last moratorium was a disaster. Put us way behind our neighboring cities and cost us plenty. This time how long will it last? Who knows but hopefully if these 4 vote it in we will vote them out! My math is pretty good. My opinion is that these 4 may need those 200 votes next time around. However those who signed that petition should be ashamed of themselves for taking the Council away from real business. Oh and how much will this cost? Good Grief!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
…are any of you planning to attend the council meeting tomorrow eve? The question is will it make a difference. It seems like the fix is in. The ‘gang of 4′ plans their vote in advance then gives the appearance of deliberation and process during the council meetings. Even if citizens protest I think the gang will, in their arrogance, vote for the moratorium. This is very frustrating! I do think,however, that all of the bloggers here should e-mail the council on this issue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Done yesterday to all members of city council. Hopefully, no matter which side of the issue one is on, we each take the time to get the word to the city council one way or another. I would like to be there tomorrow night but have another meeting already scheduled.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Councilmembers themselves say that the number of advocates attending a meeting does sway them. I myself think that an email, fax or call should do the trick. However, it does cause one to listen to both sides of an issue, and that’s a good thing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0