Kenmore planning commission advances neighborhood-retail review after survey finds broad support

Kenmore’s Planning Commission continued its discussion of a proposed neighborhood-retail code on May 5, as staff presented early survey results showing broad resident interest in small-scale retail and commissioners debated where and how to allow such uses in residential areas.

Planner Britney told the commission the city’s April survey has yielded 173 responses so far and that “76% of respondents support living closer to neighborhood retail,” with the top preferred categories being eating and drinking, specialty shops and neighborhood markets. Staff recommended creating a new land-use definition for neighborhood-scale commercial, limiting hours (staff suggested a 6 a.m.–10 p.m. baseline), capping individual businesses at about 2,500 square feet (or 30% of net buildable area) with building clusters up to 3,600 square feet, and prohibiting industrial and drive-through uses.

The presentation and commissioners’ subsequent discussion focused on three location options staff will present to the public at upcoming open houses: allowing a short list of neighborhood-serving uses across all residential zones, concentrating a broader set of uses in defined neighborhood nodes (intersections and corridors with existing foot traffic and bike lanes), or a hybrid approach. Staff said the maps shown were derived from Kenmore’s zoning and were not direct survey outputs; staff will refine the options and run a second survey with Likert-scale questions to clarify where residents intend retail to locate.

Commissioners agreed the policy must balance use and scale. Several members favored option 2 — allowing a limited set of low-impact uses more broadly — while others warned that some businesses require a minimum density or supportive infrastructure to be viable and might be better sited in nodes. Commissioner LaSalle urged clarity about node locations and noted many proposed nodes overlap environmental buffers or low-density neighborhoods. Vice Chair Dorian emphasized the commission’s “duty of care to the community,” saying the code should protect livability while enabling equitable access to services.

Regulatory barriers for conversions — reusing an existing residence or garage for a corner shop or small studio — drew extensive discussion. Staff explained that conversions typically undergo a change-of-use review (which focuses on zoning and internal safety and accessibility issues) while new construction requires full site upgrades such as stormwater, frontage, and road improvements. Commissioners and staff noted common hurdles for small entrepreneurs: parking requirements that rise when a use becomes commercial, frontage or sidewalk improvement triggers that can be costly, and building- and fire-code steps needed for public-occupancy uses. Britney said staff will consult building and fire staff to identify which requirements might reasonably be relaxed for low-occupancy conversions while preserving safety.

Operating hours and noise were another focus. Several commissioners supported a clear baseline for neighborhood businesses (many favoring the 6 a.m.–10 p.m. window) and recommended that hours regulate all business activities (not just customer access). Commissioners asked staff to provide a plain-language summary of the applicable noise-code provisions to help the public weigh tradeoffs.

Signage drew similar nuance: the commission favored discreet wall signs and smaller-scale freestanding signs for neighborhood uses, limited illumination that does not cast direct light into residences, and tighter limits on temporary A-frame signs in pedestrian walkways. Staff noted many sign rules are zone-specific and can be adapted into a neighborhood-commercial standard.

Staff made several procedural commitments: hold in-person and virtual open houses to gather more granular location and scale preferences, run a second survey with more precise questions, research permitting and fire-code implications for conversions, and aim to return draft code language for commission review (staff suggested a June draft followed by SEPA/procedural steps and a September public hearing). The commission also approved the consent agenda earlier in the meeting and adjourned at 9:19 p.m.

What’s next: staff will present refined outreach results and draft code for commissioner review; the public hearing and recommendation to city council are tentatively scheduled for September.