Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Land Use and Planning Board - 10/26/1998 CITY OF M • Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (253) 859-3390/FAX(253)850-2544 James P Hams,Planning Director LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public Hearing October 26, 1998 The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Chair Brad Bell at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, October 26, 1998, in Council Chambers of Kent City Hall. LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Brad Bell, Chair Sharon Woodford, Vice Chair Steve Dowell Ron Harmon Jon Johnson David Malik • Terry Zimmerman PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James P. Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner Linda Phillips, Planner Pamela Mottram, Administrative Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board member Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion to approve the May 26, 1998 minutes MOTION carried ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA None COMMUNICATIONS Planning Director, Jim Hams announced that upcoming elections for the Land Use and Planning Board Chair and Vice Chair would be held at the November 23 public hearing meeting NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS None 220 4th AVENUE SOU]H / KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)859 1300 • Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 2 #CPA-98-3/#ZCA-98-5 AMENDMENTS RELATING TO MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT Semor Planner Kevin ONeill stated that mixed-use zoning has been discussed at the Land Use and Planning Board workshops in July and September. He said that the City Council adopted a comprehensive plan under the provisions of the Growth Management Act in 1995 Mr O'Neill explained that the comprehensive plan supports mixed-use development both in the land use plan and the goals and policies of the land use element. He defined mixed use as development where commercial and residential uses can be combined in the same zoning district. Mr O'Neill indicated the areas within Kent that are currently designated as mixed-use Mr O'Neill explained that staff, along with a consultant, prepared zoning code amendments to implement the comprehensive plan and policies relating to mixed-use development. He stated that the City Council adopted the ordinances after hearings held by the Land Use and Planning Board in November 1996 which did the following: • established mixed-use overlay, and • amended the permitted uses and development standards within that overlay. He explained that the City Council adopted an overlay provision whereby the zoning code amendments would apply only to certain areas within the areas designated as mixed-use in the . comprehensive plan. Mr. O'Neill explained this as a new concept of allowing residential development to existing commercial areas Mr. O'Neill spoke at length on the criteria that the Board and the Council looked at in determining where the mixed-use overlay areas should be applied and how the permitted uses were changed within those overlay areas Mr O'Neill explained that development standards were developed to establish a way in which commercial and residential development can be regulated in a common manner. Mr O'Neill explained that the Mayor and City Council asked the Land Use and Planning Board and planning staff to consider amendments to zoning as it relates to the way mixed-use development is regulated in the(GC) General Commercial zoning district, and to consider if multifamily residential development in the GC zone should be required to be combined with a commercial use, similar to the way it is regulated on East Hill Mr. O'Neill explained that the Mayor's request would also necessitate amending the comprehensive plan map and policies. Mr O'Neill explained that mixed-use is used as a strategy to pinpoint areas that could accommodate future housing development with the benefit of combining residential and commercial uses in close proximity to each other permitting closer access to services, employment and transportation alternatives. He stated that every city in the county is obligated to accommodate a certain number of future housing units over a 20-year time frame as indicated in the comprehensive plan Mr. O'Neill said staff is requesting consideration of amendments to the comprehensive plan and the zoning code to order to standardize the mixed-use classification as opposed to having two separate and distinct classifications. He spoke at length on how staff would work to amend the zoning regulations. Mr O'Neill stated that it is staff s recommendation to standardize development within the three mixed-use overlay zones. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 3 Mr. O'Neill described how development standards differed within the three mixed-use zones of General Commercial, Office and Community Commercial He explained that development standards include floor area ratios, site coverage, building height, setbacks and off street parking. Mr. O'Neill explained that mixed-use overlay provides incentives for mixed-use development as it increases commercial site coverage, for example, from 40% for stand-alone commercial to: • 60% in (0) Office and (CC) Community Commercial zones, and • 75% in (GC) General Commercial zones. Board member Terry Zimmerman asked Mr O'Neill to estimate how many housing units have been developed since the adoption of the comprehensive plan and mixed-use overlay in the Valley and on East Hill. Mr O'Neill stated that he is aware of only one 160-unit housing project developed on North Central Avenue Mr. O'Neill responded to Ms. Zimmerman's concerns about developers being deterred from developing property based on requiring an office or other type of commercial component combined with a housing complex by stating that he felt development that combines uses is a challenge but not detrimental Board member Steve Dowell asked Mr O'Neill whether a building currently under construction would become a legal nonconforming use if the proposed amendments were approved. Mr. O'Neill stated that if the project was an existing stand-alone residential project in the GC zone, the development is and would continue to be legal but nonconforming, if the proposed amendments were adopted. Mr. Dowell asked that if a property owner wanted to improve or add to their units within a General Commercial zone would he need to comply with current development standards as they are approved or with the development standards in place at the time of the original request? Mr O'Neill responded that any expansion needs to comply with new standards. The only way to allow expansion of a non-conforming use is through a conditional use permit, as allowed by the zoning code. Mr Dowell voiced concern that financing for these projects would prompt additional scrutiny as a legal nonconforming use than these projects would if they were permitted outright. Mr Dowell stated that developers would confront difficulty in obtaining financing for future improvements or additions They would also experience difficulty in complying with the code requirements of the GC zone as they were before mixed-use zoning was in effect Ms. Zimmerman requested clarification of her understanding that the Growth Management Act requires the City of Kent and all municipalities to make room for the growth of more residential units within the city limits She questioned if the effect of the zoning change is to diminish the number of multifamily residential units built in Kent and will it have an effect on the cmty's ability to accommodate growth Mr. O'Neill concurred that tlus was an important question and explained that the intent of applying mixed-use in the first place was, in part, to increase the potential housing supply of the city Mr. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 4 O'Neill said that when analyzing the city's zoning capacity,the total number of units that the city can accommodate is compared to the total land area the city has. Mr. O'Neill stated that accommodating the city's targets would be difficult without incorporating mixed-use development. Mr. O'Neill said that the City Council was compelled to look at mixed use as a means to accommodate growth as well as combining residential and commercial uses to create a more lively urban fabric. Mr. O'Neill emphasized that the proposed amendment still allows for residential construction within a mixed-use configuration. Ron Harmon MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED a motion to open the Public Hearing. Motion tamed unanimously Manuela Ginnett, 1215 Central Avenue South, Suite 209,Kent,WA 98032 stated that she works with the South King County Multi-Service Center which provides emergency shelter, transitional housing and low-income housing apartments for homeless individuals and families She voiced concern that affordable, low income housing options would diminish as a result of developers being required to develop housing with a commercial component. Ms. Ginnett stated that she believes the homeless situation in Kent could escalate. Pat Crockett, 10326 Rainier Avenue South, Seattle, WA stated that she owns the creamery building located at the corner of First and Meeker Street in Kent She questioned staff if the intention of the proposal was to create a commumty where manufacturing, business, schools and housing would be combined within the same locality. Ms. Crockett asked what methods are used to rent both residential and commercial property simultaneously. Board member Terry Zimmerman read a letter from Catholic Community Services which was entered into the record as Exhibit 1. The letter communicated concern that the amendment to the City's comprehensive plan could mean less affordable housing within Kent. Ron Harmon MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED a motion to close the public hearing. Motion earned unanimously Mr. Dowell stated that focusing on growth in the valley makes sense for businesses and for the rail use. He stated his believe that approving the amendments before the Board relating to mixed-use would mean that the city would be downzoning. Board member Ron Harmon questioned Steve Dowell's definition of downzoning. He stated that his understanding was that mixed-use intent is to combine commercial and residential development and that currently the city does allow for stand-alone development. Mr Dowell explained that under current zoning you have stand-alone, commercial or a combination • of both types of development He explained that under the requested amended plan you lose the stand-alone portion for residential development and would be required to combine commercial and residential development. Mr Dowell stated that in effect you have less space on your property for residential development. This form of development would be financially unfeasible Mr Dowell expressed downzoning as a method of restricting what can be developed. . Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 5 Planning Director James Hams concurred with Mr. Dowell's definition of downzoning. He elaborated upon Mr. Dowell's definition saying if a developer came into the Planning Department they currently have options in the General Commercial versus Mixed-Use zoning districts Ms. Zimmerman concurred with Mr Dowell's statements She explained that she represents the Land Use and Planning Board on the Technical Advisory Committee for the Kent Rail Station Ms. Zimmerman stated that it is significant for the City to support the new rail station as it emerges in Kent by working towards making downtown vital and connected to the new rail station by promoting mixed-use in the downtown area of the valley. Board member Harmon concurred with establishing mixed-use in the downtown area. Board member Jon Johnson stated that he concurs with and supports Mr. Dowell's motion to encourage more housing in the valley, with the intention of drawing people closer to their center of work and alternate transit facilities. Steve Dowell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to recommend to the Council to leave the mixed-use zoning as it currently exists without changes. Motion carried unanimously. Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom requested clarification from Chair Bell that since the Board has • made a determination to recommend to the City Council that there not be changes in the zoning for mixed-use, that the Board would concurrently reflect no change to the comprehensive plan Chair Bell stated that they concurred with this request. #ZCA-98-4 RETAIL USE IN (DCE) DISTRICT Chair Bell described this as a request to clarify permitted uses in the pedestrian overlay of the Downtown Commercial (DC)district and extend the pedestrian overlay to portions of the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) district. Chair Bell presented a memo from City Attorney Roger Lubovich addressing a conflict of interest that Chair Bell is experiencing with this issue It was entered into the record as Exhibit 2 Chair Bell stated that he has a conflict of interest with this issue and could personally benefit depending on the ruling of the board He stated that Assistant City Attorney, Laurie Evezich has advised him that according to the RCW's this does not preclude him from running the meeting,but does preclude him from voting or being involved in deliberations. Assistant City Attorney Ms. Evezich clarified that the Land Use and Planning Board's Bylaws addresses that the Vice Chair can act when the Chair is absent from a meeting Ms Evezich stated that the specific statute in question is RCW 35, Chapter 35. 22, Subsection 030 Ms Evezich defined this statute as indicating that "if there is a conflict of interest, the appointing authority of the municipality may appoint an alternate in place of the person who needs to excuse themselves" Ms. Evezich said for this purpose Leona Orr,President of the Council and Mayor Pro Tem has authorized such an appointment as needed Chair Bell recommended Vice Chair Woodford as designate to reside over the meeting. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 6 Planner Linda Phillips said that planning staff received a request from the Kent Downtown Partnership (KDP) to: • review the pedestrian use overlay that exists in the city's zoning code, • to review and clarify the permitted uses in that overlay, • to review the uses that are not permitted • to extend the commercial use overlay into the (DCE) Downtown Commercial Enterprise zone on streets directly adjacent to the Downtown Commercial zone. Ms Phillips described the relationship between Downtown Commercial and Downtown Commercial Enterprise zoning. She stated that both zones were established as a result of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan, as areas where mixed use would be allowed with few restrictions on development Ms. Phillips explained that "enterprise" is meant to encourage a variety of mixed-use including residential, office, retail and service oriented uses Ms. Phillips stated that this proposal addresses a special overlay district. There are several streets within the (DC)Downtown Commercial zone that are considered appropriate for a special limited mix of uses intended to encourage intense pedestrian use and offer interesting activities intended to entice people from their cars. • Ms Phillips stated that the intent of this proposal is to extend the pedestrian overlay to an area along Fourth Avenue north of Harrison Street, continuing east along Smith Street to the east side of Railroad Avenue She said the overlay would continue from Railroad Avenue and extend to Titus Street; including the side streets of Meeker to Central and from Railroad to Central The overlay would include the side streets from the Burlington Northern Railroad on Gowe Street to Railroad Avenue. Ms Phillips stated that this proposal is consistent with the design review that addresses development standards relating to design as well as the design overlay along Railroad Avenue and the adjoining side street. Ms Phillips stated the proposal remains consistent along Fourth Avenue with very intense pedestrian streets but not along Smith Street from Fourth Avenue to Railroad Ms. Phillips explained that the proposal is intended to increase retail space and generate tax revenue within the DC and DCE areas She stated that the language within the zoning code would remain the same with the exception of"residential" as it applies to retail use Ms Phillips referred to the Draft Revision of Chapter 15 04 District Regulations in outlining the substance of the proposal including deletions and additions to the text. Ms. Phillips stated that mortuaries and stand-alone residential multifamily housing would be eliminated within the DC zone. Ms. Phillips said that the KDP proposal was reviewed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan policies and goals and found to be consistent. She said that one of the policies: • promotes and encourages retail uses that serve the residential population in and adjacent to the downtown area, and • promotes orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen those districts, Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 7 • to minimize cost associated with extension of facilities, and • to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Ms Phillips stated that these points are important in that retail and service uses attract a similar customer base. A synergy develops so that retail use becomes stronger and more viable where retail and service uses are found together Ms. Phillips said that staff recommends approval of#ZCA-98-4 regulatory review request with the exception of the area located along Fourth Street north of Harrison and Smith Street from Fourth Avenue, east to Railroad Avenue. These streets are high traffic arterials that might not attract the same kind of pedestrian retail and service uses that the other proposed streets would. Vice Chair Sharon Woodford questioned why the north side of Harrison Street is not included as part of the proposal Ms Woodford stated that the north side of Harrison Street is more suitably designed for pedestrian usage than Smith Street Ms Phillips stated that Harrison Street is definitely related to the DC pedestrian use overlay area She stated that staff would not object to the inclusion of Harrison Street. Ms.Zimmerman stated that she understood that the proposed changes indicated that buildings within the downtown commercial district must maintain the first floor area for retail uses and that the • second floor levels and higher would be utilized for other types of office use Ms Phillips explained that KDP's proposal does not disallow residential or office usage on the same floor of a one or more story building, as long as there is useable space that will provide for pedestrian retail or a service business adjacent to the street and the sidewalk. Ron Harmon MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to open the public hearing Motion earned. Bruce Anderson, Post Office Box 3821, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that he is a property owner in the downtown core He said that he recently built the Meeker Street Law Building located at Fourth and Meeker This building was designed to house two law firms with retail space provided on the ground level. He stated that he aware of the process and problems encountered in creating a pedestrian oriented retail building with service use Mr. Anderson stated that a pedestrian oriented building creates a synergism and value that property owners look for in a downtown core Mr. Anderson said that he has service oriented and retail tenants coexisting in most of his projects with 80%retail, 10% office and 10%industrial. Mr Anderson stated that the Kent Planning Department had told him that a law firm would not be considered a pedestrian oriented retail use Mr. Anderson stated that he felt that this information was an anomaly because in developing a downtown core you are attempting to create a synergism in the downtown area. He said in the normal development of economics in a robust core you need to bring people into downtown and retail will follow. Mr. Anderson said that office could take over ground floor levels during initial stages of a downtown core's development. During the natural progression • of development in downtown cores,office personnel and clientele will generate more retail business. Retai I tenants will move in and displace the office space moving them up a floor or two Mr. Anderson said that if Kent attempts to limit development to some selective retail uses in the downtown floor areas of these buildings it would impose a tremendous risk on developers.. a` • Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 8 Mr. Anderson spoke at length on the logistics and cost factors involved in developing business in Kent under the current Planning department standards He stated that by forcing retail tenants into the core and forcing developers to build out retail space he does not believe that there is enough synergism in Kent's market place to warrant the rental rates necessary to break even on the development of new construction in the downtown area. Mr. Anderson expressed his desire to see the city open its market place to less restrictive uses in the downtown area. Alan Gray, 112 Railroad Avenue South, Kent,WA stated that he is a Certified Public Accountant by profession with his business located in downtown Kent. As a property owner he disagrees with the aspect of excluding professional, administrative and financial offices from the ground floor levels Mr Gray stated that he currently works within an area that houses a mix of service and retail oriented businesses that coexist well together Mr. Gray said that restricting the use of buildings along Railroad Avenue would be prohibitive as it would- 1) eliminate the possibility of selling his building to an owner who would want to turn it into a retail establishment 2)necessitate that a new owner compensate for the additional cost to turn the business from an office setup to a retail establishment and 3)create the potential for more vacant retail space in downtown Kent. This is reflected by the Dragness Office Supply store, which has been vacant for one and one-half years at the corner of Meeker and Railroad. • Mr. Gray stated that if this proposal is accepted, a grandfather clause needs to be implemented to protect established businesses. Bill Stewart, 28203 160th Avenue Southeast, Kent, WA stated that he is a property owner in downtown Kent. Mr Stewart concurred with the first two speakers whereby restricting uses in downtown would be detrimental to the vitality of downtown and limit the opportunities for landowners to rent their properties. Pat Williams, 21205 110th Avenue Southeast, Kent, WA stated that she has owned a retail business in Kent for 22 years She voiced her concerns over maintaining downtown as a pedestrian friendly area. She expressed appreciation for the new retail building on the corner of Fourth and Meeker Ms. Williams said that the one drawback to the building is that it creates a wall along Meeker Street without an accessible entrance to the building, limiting pedestrian appeal with the exception of Starbucks Ms. Williams voiced her concern that if businesses are not accessible at the ground level, this will destroy the vitality of businesses within the downtown area. Linda Johnson, 16605 264th Avenue Southeast, Kent, WA stated that she represents the Kent Downtown Partnership and facilitated the proposal under discussion. Ms. Johnson explained that the proposal was generated as a result of the dead spaces occurring in the core area of downtown Ms. Johnson symbolically compared downtown Kent to a shopping center such as South Center but owned by many property owners She stated that the value of downtown is probably triple what the value of South Center is in infrastructure, streets,the actual businesses and residences as well as the • activity generated to Kent. However, in a shopping center there is no dead space. There are people who manage the facilities for the right tenant mix to attract people. Ms Johnson explained that the intent of KDP's proposal is to enable pedestrians to effectively utilize the entire district in the downtown area. Ms. Johnson addressed Ms. Woodford's concern about the deletion of Harrison Street She stated that Harrison Street was inadvertently left off the proposal i Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 9 and she concurs that Harrison Street should be included as part of the proposal. Ms. Johnson concurs with Planning staff that Smith Street is a high traffic arterial and may not attract pedestrian retail and pedestrian service uses. Ms Johnson said that it has been difficult to fill the downtown area with vital business but has observed that Kent is engaging better quality business each time there is a turnover. She voiced concerned about the need to have businesses grandfathered to allow a merchant to remain in the existing business. Ms Phillips responded to Ms Johnson's concerns by ensuring that if a business remains in its location and remain current on renewing their leases, they will be allowed to stay. Ms. Johnson reiterated that the proposal recognizes that service and office oriented uses are very important to the downtown area.. Jim Bitondo, 106 East Titus Street, Kent, WA stated that he is a property owner and has operated a business in Kent for 18 years. He concurs with the facts that the other property owners have brought forth Mr. Bitondo said that he is in favor of the Kent Downtown Partnership proposal as presented by planning staff and Linda Johnson Mr. Bitondo explained that Kent was fairly derelict 18 years ago until the City Planning department • stepped in and esthetically changed the image of downtown with the use of landscape trees, street design contouring and street lights. Mr. Bitondo related how these improvements fostered more pedestrian traffic. He said that the grandfather clause has given him the opportunity to be in business Mr Bitondo expressed his believe that Kent is experiencing change with the inclusion of the Regional Justice Center and the rail station implementation He stated that the property values of Kent are experiencing an upswing Mr Bitondo stated that part of the nature of Kent centers around a downtown that has remained unmarred by high-rises. Mr Bitondo voiced his opinion that future development in Kent will occur in the form of renovation of existing buildings to create more revenue and not in the construction of new buildings. Mr Bitondo said that he supports the implementation of the proposal to extend the pedestrian overlay. Morgan Llewellyn, Post Office Box 902, Kent, WA stated that he has been a life long resident of Kent and has been employed in Kent for 18 years. He said that as a graduate of the University of Washington College of Architecture and Urban Planning he brings sensitivity to this issue Mr. Llewellyn stated that he has been active in the sale, development, management, ownership and brokering of downtown Kent real estate markets since 1983 He stated that he has worked for property owners as well as businesses arriving in this market Mr. Llewellyn expressed confidence in having a sense for where the market is and stated that he currently manages 160,000 square feet in the downtown core consisting of, offices,mixed use,retail, residential and retail space exclusively Mr. Llewellyn stated that he is opposed to extending the . pedestrian overlay into portions of the downtown area, as it would create a negative impact for the downtown area by restricting uses arriving in this market He expressed concern that this proposal would not be good for the vitality of the community nor for people working downtown. Mr. Llewellyn stated that restricting use restricts revenue. • Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 10 Mr. Llewellyn said that an office could be determined to be a pedestrian oriented use. People come into town for the purpose of using those businesses He stated that he has leased 22,000 square feet in the past 90 days of which 16,000 square feet has been for office use. Mr. Llewellyn explained that more revenue is generated from leasing space for offices enabling property owners to maintain upkeep on their buildings as well as receive a fair return on their investments. Mr. Llewellyn reminded the Board and staff that recently constructed buildings in Kent have included the Centennial Center, the Meeker Law Building and the Phoenix Plaza which have been built for office use. He urged the Board to vote against extending the pedestrian overlay areas Sharon Senn, 402 West Meeker Street, Kent, WA stated that she resides on East Hill and runs a business at 402 West Meeker Street She explained that she moved her business from East Hill to downtown Kent four and one-half years ago. Ms Senn said that she has noticed a tremendous improvement in the appearance of downtown over the last few years She stated that the volume of people shopping in Kent has increased due to its small town feeling and variety of unique shops. Ms Senn stated that it is necessary to retain retail space in the downtown core to attract a repetitive customer base Ms. Senn said that the more retail businesses that are generated,the more synergism is created Ms Senn stated that she supports extending the pedestrian overlay into portions of the downtown area. • Sharon Woodford MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to close the public hearing. Motion carved. Mr. Dowell questioned why offices would want to locate in the downtown core area rather then in an established office zone with other offices. Mr Hams deferred to Bruce Anderson stating he was not an authority in this area. Mr Satterstrom responded to Mr. Dowell's question by describing the zones throughout the city that allow for office usage Mr. Satterstrom stated that much of this proposal clarifies a policy already in place and said that existing policy state that retail and pedestrian service uses must be located on the first floor. Mr. Satterstrom said that in enumerating the kind of uses that are pedestrian oriented and those that are not, the KDP recommends in their proposal that the first floor retail extend into other areas of the Downtown Commercial Enterprise district. Mr Satterstrom stated that in reference to the extension along new street frontages, this is a new policy proposal. Terry Zimmerman asked planning staff to provide her with a list of the business names, locations and professions that exist along the proposed overlay area along Railroad Avenue for her to make an adequate decision. Ms Zimmerman stated that she did not see the significance of including Fourth Avenue north of Harrison and Smith Street up to Railroad Avenue as part of the downtown commercial zone. She voiced her concern over the certified public accountant located on Railroad Avenue who could be in danger of losing his business by converting the downtown zoning to retail • use. Linda Phillips stated that the accountant located on Railroad Avenue could sell or transfer his business to another accountant as long as that business is not abandoned for longer then six months Business operations can continue as a nonconforming use Linda Phillips stated that she would provide a list of nonconforming businesses within the proposed overlay area at a later date F r Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 26, 1998 Page 11 Mr. Harmon requested that this item be continued to the next workshop meeting of November 9 Mr. Satterstrom asked the Board what additional information staff could provide in addition to the requested information on the kinds of uses allowed in the areas where the policy is being extended Mr. Dowell asked Mr. Satterstrom about the feasibility of scheduling a tour of the areas in question. Mr. Satterstrom encouraged the Board to tour the area during the workshop with Planning staff providing photographs of the area. Ms Evezich stated that she needed to clarify procedural issues. She stated that when an issue is under discussion during a public hearing, it is not permissible to continue discussion or deliberation of this issue outside the public forum at a workshop. Ms Evezich reiterated that this item needs to be continued at a public hearing Ms Evezich further stated that the Board has the right to, • request clarification of the information they are seeking on the issue of nonconforming uses, and whether or not a sale can be executed within a six months limitation period , and • request the number and identity of businesses along Fourth Avenue and Harrison. Terry Zimmerman asked Planning staff to explain why it would be advantageous to include Harrison Street as part of the DC zone when the recommendation excludes Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. • Mr. Hams stated that a motion has been made to continue discussion of this issue to a workshop. He questioned Ms Evezich as to why she stated it is not permissible to continue the discussion to a workshop. Mr Hams stated that the Council sends items of discussion back to committees to be discussed outside of public hearings and that the Board has the right to determine where this issue will be heard. Steve Dowell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to continue the hearing of #ZCA-98-4 Retail Use in(DCE)District to the next regularly scheduled meeting of November 23 Motion Gamed. Ron Harmon MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED a motion to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9 00 p in Respectfully Submitted, James P Harris Secretary •