BEBuild Eastside

Kirkland permit data

What 547 new-home permits reveal.

See how long recent Kirkland permits took to be issued, where active permits are now, and how results differed across builders. The data follows each permit from application through review, revisions, issuance, and final approval.

547 qualifying new-home permitsApplications from Aug 2024 through Aug 2026Updated Aug 24, 2026
189 days

median application-to-issuance time among 315 permits with both dates.

144 to 243 days

the middle half of observed issuance times where quartiles are available.

78 permits

are Ready to Issue or preparing for issuance, where fees or contractor details may remain.

30.9%

are Applied, Pending, Open, or in review in this snapshot.

Showing the full 547-permit sample. 280 permits currently have a reviewed custom or spec builder label.

Permits in sample547Builder field grouping
Issued with dates315Used for timing
Median time to issue189 daysLess sensitive to outliers
Average time to issue204.2 daysIssued permits only
Currently in review169Applied, review, or revision review
Ready to issue78Owner-side steps may remain

Builder comparison

Timing across the full sample

Only permits with both application and issuance dates are included. Custom and spec groups use reviewed builder labels and recalculate weekly. Spec builders often repeat teams and processes, but the public data cannot isolate why one group was faster or slower.

Median time to issue
Selected
189 days
All builders
189 days
Average time to issue
Selected
204.2 days
All builders
204.2 days

Current pipeline

Where the 547 permits sit now

A status snapshot, not a measure of delay or fault.

Issued211
In Review148
Finaled89
Ready to Issue78
Revision in Review15
Applied6

Issued permits

How long issuance took

Calendar days from application to issuance for 315 permits with both dates.

90 days or less19
91 to 150 days79
151 to 210 days96
211 to 270 days64
More than 270 days57

Project mix

What is being built

Normalized from each public permit description.

Duplex or middle housing231 permits
New single-family house215 permits
New house with ADU101 permits

Construction

Issued permit to final approval

89 permits include both issued and finaled dates.

Median construction duration266 daysIssued through finaled
Average construction duration277.8 daysCalendar days

Location context

Where projects are concentrated

Neighborhood names come from the public parcel geocoder and are directional rather than formal boundaries.

Kingsgate10 permits
South Juanita4 permits
Finn Hill3 permits
South Rose Hill2 permits
Central Houghton1 permits
Highlands - Kirkland1 permits
Market1 permits
North Rose Hill1 permits

Supplemental parcel context

Most common assessor zoning labels

These labels support broad comparisons only and are not city zoning determinations. Confirm current zoning in Kirkland's official map.

RSX 7.2162 permits
RS 8.598 permits
RSA 689 permits
RS 7.281 permits
RSA 413 permits
RM 3.612 permits
PLA 3C5 permits
RSX 355 permits
RS 5.04 permits
RSX 8.54 permits

Supporting permit records

Fees, inspections, and companion permits

These describe the public permit record, not total design, construction, utility, or professional costs.

Average listed permit fees$24,324547 permits with fee data
Median inspections8547 permits checked
Average related permits0Other records found on the parcel

Data quality

How much of the live sample is enriched

Coverage is published with each snapshot so missing optional data is not mistaken for zero activity.

Permit detail100%
People and builders100%
Review activity100%
Fees100%
Inspections100%
Related permits100%
Optional parcel context88.8%

Recent direction

The latest 90 days compared with the prior 90

Issuance timing is grouped by when a permit was issued. First-review timing is grouped by when that review finished, avoiding an unfair comparison with recent applications that are still open.

Latest 90 days

May 28, 2026 through Aug 25, 2026

Applications
55
Issued
50
Median time to issue
234.5 days
Median first review
46 days

Previous 90 days

Feb 27, 2026 through May 27, 2026

Applications
73
Issued
49
Median time to issue
228 days
Median first review
50 days

Review and revision timing

City review time and between-round handoffs

City review runs from the earliest published assignment to the last dated response in each version. The handoff runs from that response to the next version's assignment.

Initial intake + assignment6 daysApplication to first published V1 assignment
Middle 50%3–8 days539 permits with both dates
Review versionComplete roundsMedian city reviewCity middle 50%Median handoff to next roundHandoff middle 50%
First review (V1)Assigned to returned51443 days35.3–51.8 days40 daysV1 response to V2 assignment · 434 permits22.3–62 days
Second review (V2)Assigned to returned40825 days18.8–34 days21 daysV2 response to V3 assignment · 208 permits10.8–44 days
Third review (V3)Assigned to returned20323 days18–31 days13 daysV3 response to V4 assignment · 60 permits6–35.5 days
Fourth review (V4)Assigned to returned5815 days8.3–28 daysNot enough dataNot enough data

Initial intake + assignment is measured from application to the first published V1 assignment. Later handoffs combine design-team revision work with Kirkland's re-intake and assignment step; the public record does not expose a dependable revision-received timestamp to separate them. Versions or handoffs with fewer than 10 records are withheld. All durations are calendar days.

Revision likelihood

How many review rounds issued permits needed

This historical cohort includes permits that eventually issued and had contiguous, complete pre-issuance review versions. That avoids treating still-open permits as if they had already cleared review.

Typical number of rounds2Median among 314 issued permits
Middle 50%2 to 3 rounds25th through 75th percentile
Reached V348.4%Needed at least three review versions
Reached V413.4%Needed at least four review versions
Review versionIssued permits reaching itContinued to another versionCumulative share cleared by then
First review (V1)31498.1%1.9%
Second review (V2)30849.4%51.6%
Third review (V3)15227.6%86.6%
Fourth review (V4)427.1%99%

A later V-number proves that another package entered review; it does not identify every reason the added round was needed. Another-round percentages are withheld when fewer than 10 issued permits reached that version. These historical results do not guarantee the outcome of a permit that is still open.

Repeat correction themes

Which review disciplines returned corrections in multiple rounds

Among the same issued permits with complete, contiguous review histories, this can point design teams toward recurring coordination issues. It is not a staff-performance ranking and does not show whether the underlying correction was minor or substantial.

Review disciplinePermits with a correctionPermits corrected in 2+ roundsRepeat shareTotal correction rounds
Planning23911548.1%380
Public works24510141.2%363
Building2947525.5%390
Urban forestry2036331%277
Fire2129.5%23

Disciplines with fewer than ten permits receiving a correction are withheld.

Comparable projects

Permit timing by project type

Separating a single house from an ADU or multi-building project makes the benchmark more relevant. Small groups should be treated as directional.

Project typePermitsIssued sampleMedian to issueAverage first reviewAverage revision rounds
Duplex or middle housing231127149 days48.4 days1.3
New single-family house215130217.5 days57.3 days1.8
New house with ADU10158211 days53.7 days1.8

Plan corrections

Timing by observed revision rounds

Median application-to-issuance time for completed permits. This shows an association and does not claim each revision caused all of the difference.

No revisions126 days
6 permits in this comparison
1 revision round162.5 days
156 permits in this comparison
2 revision rounds216 days
110 permits in this comparison
3+ revision rounds238.5 days
42 permits in this comparison

First-review bottleneck

Which department finished last

The department with the final dated response in a completed first review. A higher count does not mean that team performed poorly.

Urban forestry508 permits
508 permits in this comparison
Public works5 permits
5 permits in this comparison
Planning1 permits
1 permit in this comparison

Who has the next action

City, design team, issuance, or unclear

Based on the latest public review state for active permits. Issuance requirements are kept separate from plan corrections, and incomplete activity records are labeled unclear rather than guessed.

Design team103 permits
Issuance requirements78 permits
City51 permits

Parcel permit history

Timing by other permit records on the parcel

Median time to issue grouped by how many other permit records MyBuildingPermit returned for the parcel. These can include unrelated historical work, so this is context rather than a true companion-permit count.

No other parcel records189 days
315 permits in this comparison

Additional complexity signals

Timing by size, parcel, zone, and neighborhood

Project size and story count are extracted from public descriptions, while lot size, zone, and neighborhood come from matched parcel records. These are descriptive groupings, not proof that one characteristic caused a delay.

SignalGroupPermitsIssued sampleMedian to issueMedian revision rounds
Lot sizeUnder 7,000 sq ft3217Directional sample281 days2
Lot size7,000 to 9,999 sq ft202123218 days2
Lot size10,000 to 19,999 sq ft185104179 days2
Lot size20,000+ sq ft6711Directional sample164 days1
Assessor zoning labelRSX 7.216290181.5 days1
Assessor zoning labelRS 8.59849218 days2
Assessor zoning labelRSA 68946164 days1
Assessor zoning labelRS 7.28149221 days2

Groups with fewer than ten issued records are withheld; groups with 10 to 19 are directional. Project-size and story comparisons appear only when the current parser can classify at least 60% of issued permits. Missing description or parcel fields are not inferred.

Repeat-builder experience

Timing by permit volume in this sample

Median time to issue based on how often the same normalized builder name appears. This measures observed volume, not whether the same staff or plans were used.

Builder appears once219 days
27 permits in this comparison
Builder appears on 2 to 4 permits195 days
59 permits in this comparison
Builder appears on 5+ permits176 days
208 permits in this comparison

Slower-permit patterns

Share that took longer than the upper quartile

Overlapping project characteristics among issued permits. These are descriptive flags, not a prediction that a future permit will be slow.

2+ revision rounds39.5%
152 permits in this comparison
New house with ADU34.5%
58 permits in this comparison
New single-family house33.1%
130 permits in this comparison
Custom home builder22%
41 permits in this comparison
Spec home builder21.6%
153 permits in this comparison
Duplex or middle housing11.8%
127 permits in this comparison

After issuance

Construction and inspection benchmarks

These measures describe the public inspection record after issuance. They do not include unrecorded jobsite work, contractor scheduling, or private quality-control checks.

Issue to first substantive inspection17 days302 permits with both dates
Typical inspection cadence8.9 daysMedian average gap between distinct inspection dates
Repeated correction checkpoint24.2%Same public checkpoint recorded with 2+ correction outcomes
Issue to final266 days89 finaled permits

Field-inspection timing excludes canceled, scheduled, preconstruction, job-conference, and job-start rows. A correction includes public outcomes containing “correction,” “failed,” or “denied”; “Not Ready for Inspection” is not counted as a city correction. A repeat requires two correction outcomes at the same normalized public checkpoint. The cadence metric calculates each project's average gap between distinct inspection dates, then reports the median project. Metrics with fewer than ten permits are withheld. These projects come from the same 24-month application cohort as the rest of this page.

Listed permit fees

Use the range, not just the average

Publicly listed permit fees only. These figures do not include architecture, engineering, construction, utility, or other project costs.

Lower quarter$025th percentile
Median$24,277Middle of 547 permits
Upper quarter$38,96975th percentile
Average$24,324More sensitive to unusually large fees

How to use these numbers

Benchmarks, not a promised schedule.

The source contains 547 recent Kirkland BSF “Single Family” permits labeled “Class: New,” applied from Aug 2024 through Aug 2026. This is a new-home cohort, not a count of every Kirkland building permit. Issuance timing uses the 315 rows with both application and issuance dates.

The dataset checks for newly filed projects daily, refreshes existing project details on a rolling monthly schedule, and rebuilds this analysis every Sunday. Inspection and status detail may therefore lag the public record by up to about a month.

Initial intake + assignment runs from the application date to the first published V1 assignment. V1 through V4 city turnaround then uses the earliest published assignment and final dated response within each completed pre-issuance version. The between-round handoff runs from that response to the next version's assignment. It combines design-team work with Kirkland's re-intake and assignment step because a dependable revision-received timestamp is not public. Durations are calendar days; Kirkland publishes separate business-day goals on the official permit review-times page.

Round-outcome percentages use only permits that eventually issued, have complete activity data, and contain contiguous completed versions from V1 through their last pre-issuance round. This mature cohort avoids counting an open correction package as if it had already cleared review.

The median is the best single baseline because a few very fast and very slow permits can pull the average. Project categories, status changes, department review activity, inspections, other parcel permit records, and parcel context are refreshed from the underlying public records as they become available.

Construction measures use substantive dated inspections after issuance and exclude canceled, scheduled, preconstruction, job-conference, and job-start rows. Issuance-to-final timing includes only permits already finaled, so recent or unusually long active builds are not represented in that completed-project duration.

Custom and spec builder comparisons include only builders with a reviewed label and recalculate with each weekly snapshot. Builder names are missing on 121 permits and may reflect contractors, development partners, or normalized public labels. Builder comparisons are descriptive only: project complexity, intake timing, grouped developments, and small samples can drive the differences.

Build Eastside provides this benchmark analysis for free under its Terms of Use.

Practical interpretation

What homeowners should watch.

In Review is not one queue. Kirkland can assign Building, Fire, Planning, Public Works, and Urban Forestry reviews, and the permit moves at the pace of the unresolved review.

Corrections shift the next action. In the public activity record, “Corrections Needed” means the applicant or design team must respond; “Under Review” means the city has the current action.

Ready to Issue is not the same as issued. Outstanding fees and licensed contractor information can remain. Build Eastside checks both before recommending the next step.

Post-issuance revisions are their own workflow. Kirkland may restart version labels at V1 after issuance, so they should not be confused with the original first review.