Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. The PLP Planning Commission meeting for Wednesday, June 10th, 2026 is now called to order. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Commissioner Washburn? Present. Commissioner Barney?

Present.

Commissioner Martin?

Present.

Commissioner Crosby?

Present.

Commissioner Landon? Vice Chair DeGroote?

Present.

Chair Taylor.

Present.

Thank you. With six present, we have a quorum.

Thank you. The next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda. However, the staff would like to request an item to be added to the agenda. The item will be code amendment to allow urban agriculture uses on vacant single-family residential sites. and will be added under work session topics as item five B. Do I have a motion? So move. Do I have a second? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. So moving on, can we now approve the amended agenda? Do I have a motion for approval?

So move. Do I have a second?

Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Item number three is approval of the minutes. Do I have a motion for approval of minutes, please?

Motion.

Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. We'll now move on to citizen comments. The chair will call those who have provided their names in advance, then the chair will call for other citizens who wish to speak. For the record, please state your name, address, or city council district in which you reside. Please be advised that each speaker is limited to three minutes. The clerk will provide verbal notice when only 30 seconds remain. As a reminder, this portion of the meeting is the Planning Commission's opportunity to hear from the community and not a time to engage in debate. Are there any citizen comments? I believe we will move on. We are moving quickly this evening. We are now entering work session topics. Number five, a scheduled updates and amendments to the commission's rules of practice.

All right. Good evening, Kendall walls with the planning division. We have some changes to our work plan. And that's what we wanted to cover tonight as well as changes to the planning commission meeting schedule, which we sent out via email, but wanted to just talk with you all on. And then there's also some amendments to your rules of procedure related to the changes for your meeting schedule. So I'll just briefly talk about what those changes are to the work plan, kind of what the schedule will look like for the remainder of the year, what the meeting schedule for the planning commission will be, and then those rules or procedure changes. Have a window in the way here. So for our work plan, you may recall we've had six packages of code work that we've been working through this year. We've already gone through the first four with the planning commission. So we're now to package five and six. Package five being the design review standards update, which is the clear and objective design standards themselves. It also had some other, were being called housekeeping items associated with that code package, which involved the permit review types, which would really kind of be an overhaul of how we handle permits in our code and kind of streamline processes for review processes and noticing that type of thing. So that has a bigger undertaking associated with it. Also wireless code updates. They were more minor kind of cleanup items. And then we also identified electric vehicle infrastructure as kind of another cleanup item that we have spoken with the planning commission about back in March. PACKAGE 6 IS THE PHASE 2 ZONING MAP AND CODE UPDATES. THOSE ARE TAKING CARE OF THE REST OF THE UPDATES TO THE ZONING MAP. CLEANING UP THE ZONE LIST AND CODE, DOING SOME CLEANUP OF THE OP, PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONE, REMOVING THAT FROM THE CODE. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE CONSOLIDATION. and then there's kind of various updates to different code chapters so there's our commercial zones or c zones mx is our mixed use zones m manufacturing zones and our fair zone and our fair parking overlay chapters so initially we were planning to do package five in sequenced and then package six We're realizing that we need a little more time with package five, and we want to make sure that package six gets adopted this year. There's map changes that property owners are waiting for. There's also code changes involved in that package that people have been waiting for. So we wanted to bring that forward before package five. So we're kind of switching gears that way. We have been doing some initial policy work with council to kind of set the stage for the work that comes through the planning commission. So that is also another reason why we want to move that package forward and then we'll return and continue work on package five. So I have this little line here for the electric vehicle infrastructure note. We may be incorporating that with package six now. Um, because it is kind of a cleanup item that we could already address in code chapters that were already opening. So that's something that we'll be looking at as part of package six now. so what that looks like for your work schedule this year planning commission will review those amendments for package six the phase two zoning mapping code we are proposing that we kind of hold off on the single family residential rs zone consolidation until next year recognizing that there needs to be some good outreach done with that effort There may also be some environmental analysis support that's needed depending on which direction the council recommends we go. So we think that that deserves some more time. And so we're kind of proposing that that gets postponed until next year. So it would be everything that I mentioned in the prior slide, except for the single-family residential. And then in the fourth quarter, we would be taking that through the council process, and we would be coming back to Planning Commission to work on Package 5, Design Review Standards Update. So then in early next year, we would be focusing on... taking package five through the final review and adoption process, and then moving into the zone consolidation work, as well as other work plan items that will come later. We'll flesh that out for next year. So with that, we are recommending, and actually it's already been instituted, that the planning commission will be reduced to one meeting a month with the option to add an additional meeting. So if we are working on items and we're not able to get through all of them or you want more time, We can put that on to what would have been our normal second meeting of the month. We can add that meeting back in. We just won't be creating a new agenda item for that meeting. Or if there's a public hearing that needs to be scheduled, that's something that we would add. consider if we needed to within time timelines and that type of thing. But we would be coordinating with you all before scheduling a second meeting of that month. So their revised schedule is typically on the second Wednesday of each month. October and November are a little bit different because of holiday or meeting room conflicts. So that's why they have alternate dates for those months. And then with that, we had in your packet, some amendments to the rules of procedure, the clerk's office, also, as part of this effort, are planning to streamline the rules of procedure for other boards and commissions to be a little more general, to add some flexibility in for when these groups can meet. So that is what we have as an actual action item for you tonight as far as the rules of procedure, but I'm here to help answer any questions on the information I just presented to you.

Do we have any questions on the dais?

Any comments? The only comment I have is that it feels like in some ways, as we're going through some of the really meaty things on our agenda, just over the last year or so, some of the meetings can run quite long. Do you foresee that happening going to one meeting? Or would the adding a second meeting sort of keep us on our time limit schedule, and then we can push whatever remains to an elected second meeting potentially or elective second meeting?

The thought is, if they are feeling like they're going long, we can just hold the conversation and reconvene for a second meeting that month, recognizing that this could be an adjustment going down to one meeting a month and and it is code work. So sometimes that takes some time to get through.

So Commissioner Washburn, your microphone is on. Did you have a comment? Anyone else? Do I have a motion to approve the amended rules of procedure? Motion?

So moved.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right. Thank you. I believe we can move on.

Thank you.

Are we good? Are we not good? There we go. Well, hello, everyone. I am Shane Piran. I am the code compliance officer for the city of Puyallup. And I've been here for 11 years. And this is my first time talking to you as a group. So I appreciate you as the commissioners doing this. And for also adding this the last second. So this is a minor code revision. Essentially, This is a council initiated change. And what has happened is that back before 2018, the use of vacant lots for urban agricultural use was allowed. And it got switched so that it was only accessory to a dwelling unit, meaning that a house has to be on a vacant lot or it wouldn't be vacant anymore if a house was on it. House has to be on the lot in order for any of the urban agricultural stuff to take place. And so what this does, it would allow RS lots, or in this case, we're changing the word to sites. And site would mean if you had more than one contiguous lot equaling over one acre to engage in urban activities outside an accessory use if the property owner lives within the city limits. And so what this is addressing is there are people who own lots in the city limits who are doing agricultural uses. The property is vacant, but they live in town and they're coming to the lot, kind of like a community garden kind of thing, and doing work there. And technically that's illegal right now. So it's only currently allowed as an accessory use. So the proposed language change, and you'll see there that this is what our current language is, is that urban agricultural activities on lots one acre or greater in size are permitted as an accessory use to the residents as follows. And it talks about all the uses permitted in subsection 6A and B, which is small farm animal propagation and growing vegetables and things like that. And now it says, changing it here to urban agricultural activities on sites one acre greater in size are permitted, or if the site is vacant and the property owners live within the city limits of Puyallup. And we limited it to this property owners because we don't want necessarily uh some someone buying a bunch of rs land you know land and starting a farm in the middle of a residential area that's not what this is for this is for for minor urban agricultural activities Dave Kuntz, And here are the definition of urban agriculture and also what six A and B is referencing and in that previous code. Dave Kuntz, A range of agricultural activities of various intensities. Dave Kuntz, agricultural activities falling into this definition include both horticulture and limited animal husbandry uses. Dave Kuntz, So. Right now, we want to leave it the same. So if you're going to do some small animal uses on lots or sites under one acre, you still have to have a house there. But if you've got more acreage there, we would allow this horticultural activity or limited animal husbandry of small farm animals But it also allows large farm animals too. So if someone owned two acres in the city and they keep horses there, they would be allowed to keep their horses there. This doesn't preclude that they can't create a public nuisance there. If someone's keeping their animals in a way that causes a public nuisance, that can still be addressed. So Um, the timeline is, is that we would have a public hearing on this at your next meeting, and then we would take it to council, um, in July before they go off break. Any questions or concerns or.

I have a question.

Sure.

What if I own two acres that are vacant? I live in Puyallup, so elsewhere. Can I rent that to another farmer or somebody doing the same allowed uses that I rented to them to do?

Under this, you would be allowed to. It's just the property owner has to live within the city limits. Okay.

Commissioner Martin or Commissioner Martin?

Why the restriction for one acre? This seems like a really good use for land that's vacant. Why not smaller?

That's a good question. The council didn't initiate that part of it. I think that would be fine with me. I don't have any skin in this game, so I would say that was probably fairly reasonable to do. I know that I have... a vacant property right now it's it's about being bought that that's exactly what they plan on doing is that they live across the street and they want to plant a garden there and technically it's illegal yeah But that would definitely be legal for them to do that. So that's something that we could talk to our director about and bring that back if that's what you would wish to do.

Commissioner Martin, can you suggest a size?

I think anything probably over an eighth of an acre would be acceptable.

That would be my recommendation as well. And I don't think we're actually voting on anything. We're just having a discussion now, right?

Correct.

Yeah, I see no problem with that. I mean, I love community gardens and what people are doing. And the more gardens, the better.

Yeah. It was a great idea. And that came out of the council?

Well, I think there was a citizen who was getting involved with this that came to council and said, hey, why can't I do this?

Commissioner Landon?

So I guess mine is playing off of Commissioner Martin's question, but I was just asking for clarification if the ore vacant site was still constrained to that one acre size, the way this is worded or not.

Yeah, it would be, but that's what Commissioner Martin was saying is could we eliminate that and use it for the smaller parcels as well? But under how we have it written right now, it would be for lots over one acre or contiguous lots. So let's say someone's about to subdivide a property and they have five lots, but they're not gonna plan on building on it for quite some time. Chris Wanner, Maybe they want to put some goats on it to keep the vegetation down or something like that.

David Ensign, Okay, so do we have sites to find somewhere.

Chris Wanner, Sites is in our definitions. Yeah.

All right. Thanks.

Tanya Hertz, Vice Chair. Tanya Hertz, Thank you.

Um, So first of all, I like this idea. We have friends who have a house on Southwest 16th who for years had sheep in the lot next to theirs. And I was born and raised not on a farm, but in farm country. So my question is, You know, just as we have houses, for instance, that, not true in all cases, but in some cases, an owner occupied house is probably a little more likely to be cared for than a rental. And so I'm thinking about when you have something that's not on, where the owner is not present, especially if you have animal husbandry and, I don't know. That makes me a little bit concerned as far as oversight, maintenance, so on and so forth.

Right. And that's why we say that the owner of the property has to live within city limits. They can rent it out to someone. But when I start in an enforcement case, it's always directed to the owner of the property. The city is not the... property manager of the property. So when I issue citations or correction notices, it goes to the property owner. So if someone were to have rented one of these spaces out and they weren't taking care of their animals properly, that notice goes to the property owner. And hopefully since they live in town, they're aware of what's going on at the property. You know, I sent a notice today to someone in Las Vegas, so they don't know what's going on in their property.

It doesn't mean they're going to care.

That doesn't necessarily mean they're going to care. And that's why we have the violation process where they can be issued citations.

Okay, thank you. The other thing I'd just like to address this issue of... Large farm animals, for instance, a horse or a cow or something like that, and the size of the lot. These animals are grazing ruminants. And I don't think I, you know, there's nothing in here that says anything about number of animals.

Yes.

On the lot.

And, you know, I...

I can address that. So what the code, and then you go back here to what it says. It says... Subject, large farm animals, including cows, horses, sheep, and hogs, sheep and hogs, subject to the provisions of Chapter 8.08. That's where we get into the numbers of what animals can be. And so currently, that is... Refer to my notes here because I don't have this 100% memorized. I don't get too many large farm animal complaints. So keeping of large farm animals is permitted on properties over one acre provided that the property contains a minimum of one half acre of lot available as pasture, yard, or stall space for each such animal. And so they need a minimum of a half an acre per large farm animal. Okay.

All right, thank you. Commissioner Washburn.

This is kind of off a tangent, but it's happening in my neighborhood right now. What do you do when the property owner is deceased?

Yes. So it depends a lot on what happened with the probate of the property. A lot of times they turn into something we call a zombie property, where you have perhaps family members who do not want anything to do with the house there's no will and they don't want to go hire an attorney to get um a will i've get occasionally i have houses where um the elderly owner just before they passed away uh obtained a second mortgage or a reverse mortgage and then they pass away And in the state of Washington, it's at least seven years before it goes through the judicial process to get those to go back to the bank. And so often those properties just sit there for years and years and years. And, um, I've been dealing with it for 25 years. So it's really frustrating, not only for me, but especially for the next door neighbors and the neighbors in the neighborhood to see what happens. Because a lot of times the grass will grow up and you end up, you know, I can go get a warrant to go mow the lawn in the middle of summer, but it takes six months to get a warrant. You go mow that lawn and, you know, three weeks later, it's tall again. You have to go through the whole process again.

I'm thinking of a case in my neighborhood where the heirs have moved in. But they're not going to change the title over. They're just going to leave it.

They just stay in there. And I've had that happen before as well. It depends on how they're taking care of the house. If it turns into a nuisance, you can always report that. And I'll go try to address it the best I can.

To the heirs. Yes.

Yeah. And what I address it to is to the heirs and all designees of the estate. And so then we can go after those folks who are living there causing the problem.

Well, my question is, how would you know they're deceased?

uh a lot of times that is published um i i look for obituaries uh hers will call and tell me okay uh john died two years ago and now his ne'er-do-well son has moved in and how can we uh you know how do we address this he's he's brought a bunch of you know 17 junk cars and how do we yeah okay that's all i wanted to know thank you you're welcome

Any further comments or questions? So I think we're all in favor. Okay. But we would like to see the property size smaller or the lot size. Okay.

Well, I will talk with everyone I talk with at work and we will probably see you again on July 8th. Thank you.

Thank you. Item number six, staff report. Kendall, do you have a report for us?

I don't have much one since I just went over your work plan, but... At the council's next meeting on the 16th, I will be seeking policy direction related to the LMX code changes. That's our zone that we are modifying to be our neighborhood serving commercial zone. So we're seeking policy direction to help guide the work that you all will be doing. And then we'll also return to them. I believe we've talked about June 30th for a study session to recap some of the prior policy direction that we've received from them to just confirm that we've heard correctly. Also to get a little more direction on certain components and then give them an overview on a couple of additional components associated with that phase two package. And then we plan to turn around and give you all that feedback at your July 8th meeting, as well as a couple of draft code from that package at that meeting. So we're planning to hit the ground running.

Thank you. Vice Chair?

I'd like to ask a question, please, since this came up. In a residentially zoned neighborhood, if you have a business that's been grandfathered in, how do the sign ordinances apply to that business? So for instance, we had some discussions at our last meeting about sign sizes and so forth and what they are.

I probably need to look into it a little bit.

Okay.

I'm not a current planner these days. We have to look at the code.

Okay. I figured with two of you here, it was a good time to ask.

Generally, um, signs on those businesses, if they're preexisting nonconforming, they're allowed to continue to exist going forward. If they're putting up new signs that would require permits, they would have to follow the current regulations.

There were previously were no signs. It was a family. Um, and now it's turned into a storage. It's on Shaw road, uh, around 30th. And, um, And they've got several larger signs posted now on the fence and so on. And I was just curious about that because it's clearly a business. The business has morphed somewhat.

And I think that was annexed in fairly recently, by recently, within the last 15 years. Oh, yeah. So they... I know what the storage business you're talking about. The signs on there, I believe I looked into this a couple of years ago, more legal at that time. But I can look into it again. If you drop me an email, I can look into it for you.

All right. Just curious. I'm not clear myself. As we go over these zoning issues, I'm not clear myself on it. how that applies to a grandfathered business. So anyway, thank you. We'll talk about it later then.

Any other questions or comments? Our last item on the agenda, Commissioner comments. Commissioner Barney, do you have anything for us today?

I have no comment. Thanks.

Commissioner Crosby.

I have one comment and I was watching the council meeting last week and you were talking about the river road corridor and the South hill for car parking up there. And you made it sound like we made a recommendation to have car lots up there, but I don't, we never really discussed that. And, uh, I'd like to have that recommendation kind of taken away because they all thought we were saying it's okay to have car lots up there.

That was what we understood the recommendation to be because the modification that was presented would be to allow motor vehicle sales in the CCX zone, which is the South Hill Mall property, as well as RMX property. And then the planning commission recommendation was to not allow it in RMX, but to allow it in CCX.

That was a little confusing because the only thing I heard about that was the comment that she read from a constituent. And that's pretty much all I remember. So I guess I was a little confused on that part to, to where, you know, I, I don't want any more car lots up there. So it was a little bit misleading.

I will say that the council direction was to change that back. So it's basically as it was for the CCX zone, which has very limited allowances. They're mostly like indoor interior sale type of thing or zip car kind of things. And then I think they are recommending the allowance for them in the RMX zone.

Yeah, I heard that part, but I just want to make that clarified up there that I don't agree with. I'd rather keep it the same.

Commissioner Landon, do you have any comments this evening?

I just echo what Commissioner Crosby had to say, but that's it for me.

Commissioner Martin?

Code enforcement guy, thanks for showing up. Thanks for what you're doing, Great Beard Brother.

Commissioner Washburn?

Nothing for me.

Vice Chair DeGroote? I just wanted to say our next meeting will be, I believe, after the 4th of July. And the city is moving ahead with a 250 flag project, which is intended to be citizen-funded. And I would just like to say that I think it's a good idea to have this be citizen-funded, but voluntarily I've sent my donation in, and I would encourage the rest of us to do so as well. That flag should stand for all of us, okay? It doesn't stand for any particular party. It stands for Americans. And so that's my encouragement. Thank you. Thank you. And from me, a couple of things. Quick reminder, Meeker Days this weekend.

Everybody come out and celebrate. Tomorrow evening, Watson's is having a garden party. I believe it's $40 a ticket, but it's after hours. I think it starts at 5. And they have trays of appetizers and wine tasting and 20% off across the store. And it's a really fun event. I've done a few of them. Lastly, and this is just completely candid and not from the chair, but from me as a citizen, I feel really frustrated when we are asked to review and make recommendations, and it feels like 90% of the time our recommendations go unheard to the city council. And so I feel like I just need to vent that. I feel very strongly about the River Road corridor. And I feel like I don't expect every one of my recommendations to be taken verbatim, but I don't feel like they're even really contemplating. And I wasn't at the meeting. I had something else that I had to do. But I do feel like we really think these things through. We hash them out. We have conversations. I just don't feel like we're listened to most of the time. So I'm not sure what the response is. But I know we've lost a couple of good commissioners over the same issue. And I'm not going anywhere. But I do feel like it's beyond frustrating to dedicate so much time to not be heard. So on that note, we are incredibly early this evening. And I move to adjourn at 7.06.