June 2 Planning Commission Meeting

Planning Commission 6-2-26: Corner Stores

Cait’s Note: This was a difficult meeting to summarize.  Commissioners were asked to give feedback on Staff recommendations regarding changes to code to allow neighborhood commercial.  Commissioners spent quite a bit of time on specific use-cases; I have left some of this out for brevity. The meeting was nearly 3.5 hours long, and Staff was asked to continue doing more research.  

Commissioners Lassalle, Vanderlinde and Olson were absent.  C. Lassalle joined online about an hour late.

Brittany Chue presented the results of the survey on neighborhood commercial/corner stores and recapped the previous Planning Commission 

Location Preferences

Commissioners agreed that they would like them throughout the residential areas. [Staff has abandoned the “nodes” idea because implementation is more difficult]

Zoning and development regulations

The commission discussed staff’s recommendation on hours, size, and whether one property could include multiple businesses. 

C. Thompson expressed concern about allowing businesses to stay open until 10pm because if people are chatting after they leave it could ruin a neighborhood [he later changed his mind, after C. Macias’ comment below].  He asked for robust public discussion on conversions, and wants a “Type 2” permitting decision if the conversion is 2,500sf. He requested studies on traffic of people, cars and deliveries, as well as more information on our sign code and who would enforce the sign rules.

C. Macias pointed out that businesses will follow the noise ordinance, and we shouldn’t regulate based on “potential noise.” The code can always be changed in the future if needed.  She also asked to allow freestanding signs if the business is under the impervious surface threshold.

C. Lassalle joined the call and said that he thinks that if we had visibility into where parking is already at a premium vs. where they exist that might naturally create pockets where it would be easier for commercial entities to develop. He really likes the A-frame signs because they are easy to set up, however he doesn’t want them encroaching on sidewalks. 

Chair Banaszynski said that we are trying to think about the Kenmore of the future and designing for people-oriented places. Thinking of these as things that people will walk to or bike to will minimize noise. She was open to considering freestanding signs as long as they were not too tall. 

The Commission would like more examples of signs and language about freestanding signs. Consensus is that A-frame and wall signs are OK. Debbie cautioned that sign code is difficult code, and most of the residential neighborhood signs are real estate signs.

Eating and Drinking Establishments

Staff proposed to keep the definition and expand to R4-24 at a 2,500sf limit. 

Commissioners generally agreed with the recommendation.  C. Lassalle asked for conditional use on businesses serving alcohol, since a tasting room vs. night club would be very different impacts on the community.  

Chair Banaszynski requested more specific definitions on various uses, such as Seattle has. She understands that people like to get a drink but alcohol is not healthy for our bodies; even a little bit is not good for us.  She believes that drinking establishments have a higher impact on the neighborhoods. She also wants to prohibit anything with a drive through, and fast food restaurants without a drive-through with an eye towards healthy communities. She said “in some jurisdictions, fast food, restaurant, and municipal code can be defined as any establishment where customers order and pay for food before eating with meals typically served in disposable containers primarily catered to quick carry out or self-served dining often feature drive-through windows. But with or without drive-through windows, I would prefer to see if we could not have fast food restaurants.”

Retail

Commissioners discussed various types of retail, and what should be allowed to be sold. VC Dorrian expressed concerns about cannabis shops, C. Lassalle added that we should ban Kratom.  C. Lassalle expressed concern over combination pet/art shops, by which he meant where handmade pet accessories could be sold.  C. Macias clarified that “pet shops” are where you procure a pet; pet supply stores are where you outfit the pet. 

Chair Banaszynski wants to prohibit everything in the recommendations from staff, including cannabis. She also believes we should be thinking about restricting sugary drinks, and promoting healthy food over junk food. She wants to prohibit small box retail and dollar stores. She thinks we are not a healthy society and if we can craft our codes to steer our ship in a different direction she is open to it. 

C. Macias offered that incentivization for preferred behavior is better than legislation that limits personal choice.  

Personal Service

Commissioners agreed upholstery cleaning services, pet grooming, and diaper services should be prohibited.  Allowing beauty and barber shops, clothing alterations/repair, photo studios, shoe repair, and repair of personal/household items should be allowed.  

C. Thompson asked about massage parlors.  

Chair Banaszynski expressed hesitation about healthcare facilities fitting into the 2,500sf size and viability at that scale. She wants further information on healthcare facilities.  Chair Banaszynski wants to keep winery/brewery as light manufacturing, since Commissioners realized their prohibition on alcohol may cause an issue for former commissioner Wycoff unless it’s considered small manufacturing..  

C. Macias pointed out that, according to Appendix A, small manufacturing is not allowed, but requested to add it as an allowed use because of small artisans/artists.  She pointed out that if this is a home business, pet grooming would be one or two dogs so would not have the impact of a larger facility.

Gyms and fitness studios

Only gyms/fitness studios would be allowed. C Macias asked about grandfathering, something like little fish swim school.  Brittany said that they were most likely operating under conditional use permit, so there wouldn’t be a change. C. Dorrian asked about whether someone could make a youth center where kids could play games. This also isn’t covered.

Commissioners spent a lot of time talking about whether playing boardgames fit into recreational facilities. 

Arts/Entertainment Indoor

Adopted recommendation.

Specialized instruction school

This category is already allowed through a home occupation permit. 

C. Lassalle referenced Make Apothecary in Bothell, and asked why we’d limit it to 20% of floor area. Art studios are not specifically defined in the code because of overlap with the artist studio codes.  

C. Macias asked for clarification on the home occupation code, which allows only one non-resident employee.  This needs to be a bigger conversation, as it is problematic for businesses as they grow. 

Commissioner Dorrian commented about overlap between fitness studios and dance studios.  Chair Banaszynski said if we are OK with cafes, we should allow dance lessons. She doesn’t feel the same way about driving schools, because she doesn’t think those happen in the building – she thinks about the driving part.  

Chair Banaszynski asked if we could modify the parking requirements with home occupation. Brittany said she believes so.  Further discussion on parking with Debbie, who said it’s like pulling a string on a sweater; you have to look at other home occupation codes to make sure it all fits together. 

Appendix A

Chair Banaszynski doesn’t know if mausoleums and cemeteries are the best use of our residential areas, and stand-alone parking is strange that it’s permitted in R1-R4. C. Dorrian asked about allowing coffee carts.