Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. This is the Puyallup Planning Commission meeting for August 13, 2025. The time is now 6.30, and I would like to call the meeting to order. Will you please call the roll?

Commissioner Seeley?

Here.

Commissioner DeGroat? Commissioner Martin?

Present.

Commissioner Landon?

Here.

Commissioner Taylor?

Present.

Vice Chair Kilsgard?

Here.

And Chair Jones will. Here. Thank you. You have a quorum.

Thank you. The next item on our agenda is approval of the agenda. I know that we have a suggestion from staff. Did you want to go over that, Katie? Yes, please. Thank you, Chair.

Staff is recommending that we remove the unit lot subdivision item from the agenda. WE HAVE, AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE MAKING A NUMBER OF CODE AMENDMENTS, AND WE ARE ALSO WORKING ON OTHER CODE AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 19, AND WE FELT THAT IT WOULD BE JUST MORE EFFICIENT FOR BOTH THE COMMISSION AND FOR STAFF TO PACKAGE ALL OF THOSE AMENDMENTS TOGETHER, SO WE'RE DEFERRING THE UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION DISCUSSION UNTIL WE BRING BACK TO YOU THE MORE FULL PACKAGE OF TITLE 19 CODE AMENDMENTS. SO WE REQUEST THAT THAT ITEM BE REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA TONIGHT.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR KATIE? Okay. Yesenia, can you please record that Commissioner DeGroote has come?

Yes. For the record, I'll mark Commissioner DeGroote as present. Thank you. Thank you so much. Of course.

I will entertain a motion to approve the agenda.

I make a motion we approve the agenda as modified by the city.

I'll second.

All those in favor? Aye.

I any oppose.

Motion passes next item on our agenda is approval of the minutes these are the approval of the July 23rd 2025 minutes.

Second.

All those in favor aye aye aye. They oppose motion passes. Next item on our agenda is citizen comments. If any members of the public wish to come before the podium at this time, which is the object in the middle there, they can come up and they can speak and address the dais as a whole. Please be advised that each speaker is limited to three minutes and the clerk, who is Yesenia, she will provide a 30 second warning for you guys. At the three minute mark, we do have to stop you from speaking. just to make sure that everyone has the same amount of time and everyone is heard. This is our opportunity to hear any input from you all in the community, and I just wanted to make a clarification at this time. This is citizen comments for the entire agenda. After we finish citizen comments for the entire agenda, we'll close that portion and then we'll go into our public hearing, which I think lots of you are here for. Once we go into our public airing, Kendall will stand up at the podium and she'll give us about a 20-ish minute presentation on our critical ordinances. I will then open the floor back up again for public comment on the public hearing. So if you would like to comment on the overall agenda, you can comment now and I will open the floor back up again after Kendall's presentation for comments on the public hearing. So anyone who would like to make a comment, please come to the podium. It is usually best if you give us your name and your district so that we can follow up with you.

I got your city's letter about the critical areas.

I'm a few because setback

The setback that's proposed, my house, my garage, my gazebo, everything on my property is with this 100-foot, and I'm on both sides of the creek. So there's been no setback before. I'm on the upper reach of this Deer Creek drainage, and I'm really furious that the city is bringing this up we don't have any water in this quote unquote creek. And I have an enclosed culvert, an energy dissipator, and a paved, brick paved swale through my property. And fish don't make it up that high there's not any water in that creek so a hundred foot buffer is ridiculous and there was no buffer before because i got a building permit in 2017 added on to my house i'm within 25 feet of actually that my culvert i have an enclosed high density polyethylene culvert so um for the city to come in and now say, well, we're going to make it 100 foot. So all of my property is in the 100 foot buffer and I have eight cents of an acre. So this is going to make it difficult for me to do anything. I have to get a building permit, then I have to come in and I have to prove that I'm not adversely affecting the stream, the dry creek. So this, you know, it's different if we're down on the creek in the valley. where there are fish, but I am told that this is a fish-bearing stream, or it contributes to a fish-bearing stream, but we're at the very top of the basin. I'm in Redesco at 27th and 36th, and the very top of the basin is about two blocks south of me. So please, provide some justification. And if you can't do it, and matter of fact, the stream was rerouted three years ago upstream from me around the development. So, yeah, and why I appreciate getting three minutes, three minutes because three minutes. This, you're affecting me, or the city is affecting me at my cost if I have to do anything. If I have to get a building permit, if I have to take down a tree. I have to get approval from the city. I don't know. Well, hopefully once we get the presentation, we'll better understand how you're limiting.

Madam Chair, the speaker has three minutes.

Thank you so much. Are there any other comments towards the overall agenda? Yeah, go ahead.

Chris Taylor, District Two. I live on Silver Creek. And I'm assuming common sense is going to take effect here. Because I, like you, my property is all within 100 feet of Silver Creek. You're not going to make me tear my house down. And you're just trying to protect everything. So let's not get all excited until we find out what's going on. That's where I'm coming from. Okay, just have an open mind. Thank you.

Are there any other comments towards the overall agenda? Hearing no further comments, I'm going to move on to the next agenda item, which is our public hearing Kendall, with the city planning office is going to come up and give a 20 minute presentation, then we will open the floor back up. Thank you.

I'm not seeing where I can share.

Oh, never mind. Just fine. All right. Sorry about that i'm Kendall walls, with the planning division here before you tonight to give the presentation on the critical areas ordinance update, we also have Claire Hoffman with parametrics online to assist with questions as well. So the proposed amendments are to pull out municipal code chapter 2106. And the presentation, I'll give a general overview of critical areas and the regulations. We'll go through the high level of the updates that are proposed to the code. We will spend some time on the stream buffer updates and wrap up with the analysis and recommendation to planning commission. So first, to overview on critical areas, there's five critical areas that are defined. And that's wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, conservation areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, geologically hazardous areas, and frequently flooded areas. I do want to note that as part of this effort, we are not proposing changes to frequently flooded areas, so I won't be spending time on that in our presentation tonight. What these regulations do are protect the public from threats to human safety and protect public and private property from natural hazards, protect the environment and enhance the state and city's quality of life, and preserve environmentally sensitive areas that are valuable to the public and provide ecological function. So to briefly describe what these different critical areas are, our first, wetlands. These are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater and typically support certain types of vegetation. They are beneficial because they store water and reduce flooding. They filter pollutants and sediments from runoff. They provide aquifer recharge for drinking water, and they provide habitat for plants and animals. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas serve a critical role in sustaining important habitat and systems and species for ecosystems. Some examples include wildlife habitat areas for endangered threatened or sensitive species streams lakes ponds, including those that are planted with game fish and other priority habitat areas. Critical aquifer recharge areas are special zones that play a critical role in replenishing underground water sources, which we use for drinking water. They are essential because they help maintain the supply of clean drinking water. We protect them because they can be vulnerable to contamination and are susceptible to reduced recharge, which is the natural process of water seeping back into the ground. And geologically hazardous areas are those that are susceptible to erosion sliding or other events in the city's code, they are categorized as erosion landslide seismic and volcanic hazard areas. so for the code update the reason we're doing this update is the state requires cities to protect and regulate critical areas and the state growth management act requires jurisdictions to update their critical area regulations with their comp plan periodic updates the city recently went through a periodic update to its comprehensive plan so this is a follow-up to that work. The updates are required to be based on best available science and consider conservation and protection of anadromous fisheries, i.e. salmon. The last major update to the city's critical area ordinance occurred in 2006. There has been other updates, but it hasn't received a major update since that time. And this update is required to be adopted by the end of this year. To briefly walk through kind of a high level of what the updates that are proposed for articles one through eight these are the areas that kind of cover more of the purpose and general provisions the procedurals as well as kind of our definitions so a lot of the changes that are proposed to these sections are more procedural updates and to provide consistency with current standards or existing processes as well as providing some internal consistency throughout the code. There's also updates proposed related to mitigation sequencing, which is a step-by-step method to reduce environmental impacts to better align with current practices and provide more guidance in the code. There's also some new definition changes since the Planning Commission last saw the draft that I wanted to highlight. And these were also highlighted in a blue color throughout the draft code to kind of help take your eye to the newer changes. So the first ones were related to the Fagnum bog and fen. Fen is not used in the code, so that was just eliminated because it was no longer necessary. The bog-related definitions were updated to follow the Department of Ecology's definition, as that's what's used for wetland rating. And then we have some changes proposed related to lahar definitions. So we are proposing to remove case one and case two lahar definitions. And then also some updates to the definitions for lahars as well as lahar inundation zone. And that's largely to do with a proposed change in the mapping data that we are proposing in the geologically hazardous areas portion of the code, which I will talk about on a future slide. So this is just to provide internal consistency with that proposed change. So article nine is regarding wetlands, it has to do the changes that are proposed are related to wetland buffers and what you can do within those buffers in particular wells water wells so there's. These changes are being proposed for consistency with federal and state law requirements. There's a new restriction on the size of pump houses not exceeding 200 square feet, as well as adding a prohibition on well construction for within the buffer area for category one and two wetlands. These are wetlands that have the highest qualities. There's also updates to wetland mitigation requirements to meet state and federal standards. And there was consolidation and reorganization of sections related to mitigation ratios. However, the ratios themselves are not proposed to change. They were reformatted into a table for easier reference. Some additional updates are proposed for hydro period analysis requirements for consistency with current processes. Adding a new mitigation option of in lieu fee was also included and a new update since the June 25th draft had to do with adding more information direction related to functionally disconnected buffers. So these are those areas where you have a wetland buffer that crosses a street. It gives more guidance that that buffer would not extend Over the street to properties on the other side of the street because that buffer is functionally disconnected and there wouldn't be benefit by extending the buffer beyond that point. So this is something that we've talked about during the update this is just providing more clarification in the code itself. For Article 10, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. This is the area where we're seeing the most changes, and I will touch on it here, but I have a whole section on it to go over those proposed changes. But to just highlight some of the main updates, the first is related to the stream classifications. We're proposing to follow the um state law and so instead of going by type one two three and four we're proposing to use the type s f and n um naming convention so it's shoreline is type s fish bearing streams are type f non-fish perennial or type np and non-fish seasonal or ns The Department of Fish and Wildlife has recommendations regarding stream buffers. We are proposing a hybrid approach to applying those recommendations. And that's, again, what I will dive into on those future slides. I did want to note too, changes to this section in the latest draft since the one before planning commission at the June 25th meeting. That was, we added an option to allow for a buffer reduction up to 25% for streams which didn't previously exist. It's framed similarly to what we already have in code for wetlands. And this was something that we received direction from Planning Commission to add into the draft code. So that's included there. And as similarly to the wetlands, we've also added in language to provide guidance for those functionally disconnected buffers. For Article 11, critical aquifer recharge areas, these proposed changes are generally to City Council Chambers, update standards for consistency with state guidance and clarify our current standards or processes. City Council Chambers, So they include adding the protection of group B wells within the one year travel time boundary as a critical aquifer recharge area. Um, clarifying the use of the state health department map as a mapping source for groundwater, um, wells, and this is existing practice, just not reflected in the code. HAB-Juliette Boone, Expanding some of the prohibitions to better protect groundwater quality and updating the critical area reporting requirements specifically or, in particular, the license geotechnical. HAB-Juliette Boone, Professional requirement for preparation of these reports. And the last section has to do with Article 12, geologically hazardous areas. This was one that we were researching behind the scenes and were able to receive some confirmation. that there is new data out there for a mapping geologically hazardous areas, specifically the volcanic hazard area. So a new amendment is proposed as part of the draft code to reference the US Geological Survey, USGS, 2022 report. This report includes data that's been derived using a state of the art model for a suite of hypothetical volcanic mud flows known as lahars. So we've been informed by USGS that this is the best data out there for us to be using. And this next slide provides a map comparison of the two data sets. so this lighter kind of brick color is our existing um volcanic hazard area and then the darker more maroon color is the 2022 usgs data we would not be leaving these pockets Out we would regulate essentially from these double lines on either side, so we wouldn't have it wouldn't be broken up as it's currently depicted. For the stream buffer changes. Where these are coming from, as I mentioned, we're required to make updates to be consistent with best available science, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is recommending that we apply the riparian management zone. So the riparian management zone is the area that's close to the stream containing smaller types of vegetation. And then uplands is typically more forested. The area provides riparian function, which means it provides pollution removal. It catches stormwater runoff and cleans it before it enters the stream. It helps provide bank stability. shade for the stream as well as large wood input that helps to provide habitat. So the Fish and Wildlife Riparian Management Zone recommendations for a high level explanation, they use this site potential tree height measurement. So it evaluates the type of tree that could be located in this area along a stream based on soils and other data. and how tall that tree type could be at 200 years old with the concept being if the tree were to fall down, that would be your buffer area for the stream. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife mapped site potential tree heights based on soils and other data throughout the state and are recommending that they be applied to help protect streams and water quality. So we considered the application of this concept in the city and we recognize that the city is an urban environment and buffers not extending over roadways and that type of thing where it's not necessarily feasible for us to implement their recommendations. So we are proposing a hybrid approach to allow additional protection where it's feasible. So first and foremost the science has found that the minimum buffer. For effective pollution removal occurs within that first 100 feet of a stream, so that is being proposed as the minimum buffer for all stream types. So, looking through our different stream types, type S, which is our shoreline streams, they have an existing buffer of 150 feet that would remain the same except for specific locations, which I'll walk through on future slides. Similarly for type F, which is the fish bearing stream classification, it already has a 100 foot buffer, which would remain the same, except as noted on specific stream reaches that I'll show on future slides. The type NP and NS streams have are impacted, they have an existing buffer of 35 to 50 feet, depending on the type and those are also proposed to go to 100 feet. I don't know how to get this thing out of the way. But also wanted to note that city park and open space properties follow the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's riparian management zones. So that varies depending on the stream and site. But we'll point to a few of those as well. I thought this was just on my screen. So I'm sorry that all of this was cluttered that whole time. Hi, video panel. Okay. We'll work with this. So here's an example showing type F stream. So these are the ones that have an existing 100 foot buffer. And these in particular, we aren't changing that buffer. And just for Orient orientation, kind of this pink color is showing the existing buffer. These lighter blue are showing proposed buffers that extend beyond existing. And the maps are also showing city parks and open space properties, as well as wetlands for context. So this next one is for type NP, which is the non-fish-bearing perennial streams. These are examples of where that buffer extension or the change to 100 feet is a change. So the existing for these ones would be a 50-foot buffer, but you can see the blue outline is showing the new buffer that's proposed. The next one is Clark's Creek, which has a portion that's classified as shoreline, so a type S. For the portion between 12th Avenue north to the city boundary, there's a recommendation for an extended buffer to 225 feet on the west bank. The end the 225 foot measurement is based on an average of the site potential tree height those numbers can vary based along along a stream, and so we wanted to provide an average to have more consistency for applying buffers in the city. For type F fish bearing stream for Clark's Creek is the south end of the stream. And it is proposed to have an extended buffer to 231 feet, which is also an average of site potential tree height. For the Puyallup River, it is a type S shoreline. And for the portion located east of SR 512 within city limits, it's proposed to have an extended buffer. A type S would have 150 foot buffer, critical area buffer. And it's proposed to go to 202 feet. woodland creek which is over here on this screen is a type f fish bearing stream and it's proposed to have an extended buffer to 182 feet as opposed to a hundred foot buffer Wildwood Creek is also classified as a type F fish bearing stream for the eastern and western banks between 12th Avenue southeast and 23rd it's proposed to go to 218 feet. And Meeker Creek is a type F fish bearing stream for the portion that's east of SR 512 and south of 15th. It's proposed to have a 231 foot buffer. And then for city park and open space properties, here's a couple of examples of using the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's riparian management zones. So those, again, the buffer widths vary, but you can see how they're extended on those city properties. So the analysis and recommendation Sarah Silver, portion as just a reminder, the planning Commission has the authority to review and make recommendations to city Council on proposed amendments to city regulations concerning land use and development. Sarah Silver, And these updates to chapter 2106 are also required to be based on consistency with goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. Staff did analyze the proposed amendments and found that they were consistent with the state requirements, the best available science, and the goals and policies of the city's comprehensive plan. And as a result, city staff is recommending the planning commission forward a recommendation of approval to council for the proposed amendments. And just to touch on the project schedule, we're obviously here tonight for the public hearing. Once we receive a recommendation from the Planning Commission, we will take that to City Council for final review and adoption this fall.

Madam, tear your microphones off. I'm so sorry.

Sorry, guys. Thank you, Kendall. I'm going to open the public hearing for public comments at 7.04. The same rules still apply. You'll get three minutes once you come up to the podium. It is super helpful if you guys let us know your name and then also the property that you're talking about. Plenty of us have computers up here. We look at things while you're speaking. And when you approach your 30-second warning, the clerk is going to let you know that you have 30 more seconds to speak, and then we will have to stop here.

I don't have the phone.

Are we good, Kendall?

It's not up there.

Let me scoot back for a minute.

Yes.

Oh, yes. And also, for the bias, we are following section eight of our rules and procedures because this is a public hearing.

Okay, where's, where's your creek on that? My house is

I don't have that specific view. It would be going off of the map here.

It's Oh, you don't have it in the map, but you're restricted on the slide.

Gavin on another slide that shows it don't have that specific area on the fly. It's in the packet, though, where we can refer to

Robin O'Donoghue, 2607 36th Street. Again, what my concern is, is we have this carte blanche, let's make it 100 feet, regardless of where you're at in the basin. If you're in the very upper reaches of the basin, such as my property is, there's very little flow, in fact, virtually no flow, 98% of the time. What I'm concerned about is this, with this 100-foot buffer, it's easy to take it from 100, you're flying over it, yeah, from 5,000 feet, that's 100 foot, but it's easy. But what about the property owners? What about us? We are the ones who adversely are impacted by, If the tree is 200 feet high so that it can fall toward us, based on that slide, well, you know, I've had two trees fall that are 48 inches in diameter, about 100 feet tall, and they have come down, and they are in this quote-unquote buffer. So is the city going to take them down since they're basically taking control of my property? I have walked up and down this basin, not entirely, but on the upper reaches of it and looked at it. And there's so much development that's around it. Like me, I got a building permit in 2015, and I'm 25 feet away from my enclosed culvert. And what Kendall told me was that it's 100 feet, regardless of what's in there. So there's storm drainage systems in there. we're not taking that kind of stuff into consideration. So this, you know, and I've asked the storm drainage folks, the Comprehend Storm Plan, they don't even have basin flows for a lot of the basins, including up in my area, so how much water that's coming down there that's collecting these hazardous materials. And I've got an unimproved hillside, basically, that would clean those waters, but guess what? I don't need to do anything with it, but it just, It bugs me that the city can take this overall- 30 seconds. And make a blanket statement, it's 100 feet, no consideration for the improvements on the property, no consideration for... what the actual upper wetlands is. There are fish on the very bottom of the valley, but there are nothing that comes up in our area. So that's what I ask you to consider. This is carte blanche, and it's a taking.

Madam Chair, the speaker's reached three minutes.

And a cost to the citizens to even do any work on our own property.

Thank you so much. Does anyone else have a public comment?

Okay. Hi, Donna Potter. I am in District 8, and I'm located at Stonegate, and I'm the center or the bottom right circle there. I'm at 2101 22nd Street Southeast, Puyallup, Washington. I am located on the wetland buffers there, located on 22nd Street, as long as there's actually three other houses that are going to be affected, and then around the corner, there's four other houses. My question is, we have a wetland buffer. I have obeyed for the last since 2001. I purchased my house. I'm getting ready to finalize my last payment in the next six months. My that buffer to go from 50 feet to 100 feet is going to go into my property. All the trees that are on that which way if they fall, most of them fall into the wetland buffer. But if they fell, they fell all the way to my house, all the way to the street. So my question is, is. With this proposed, are you purchasing my home? If I have structures on that home, am I going to have to be removing them? Also, with that being said, you have the Sands Point project. Is this going to affect that project, which is 18 lots that are on the opposite side of that buffer as well, that that's going to stop or push back that project? 18 lot buffer that goes around the whole side of that and then on to the deer creek side so those are my questions those are my concerns i'm all for a buffer and keeping that buffer in the boundaries but what is going to happen if the boundaries exceed my property limits and all the things because i've already are you grandfathering the people's lots that already have houses on it already have trees that might not be the same trees and if we have sheds and things like that in the fences thank you next comment

Hi, my name is Dan Velwalk. I live at 1201 15th Avenue Southwest, and it's near Silver Creek. I'm just trying to help out the council here. I've been a septic designer in Pierce County for probably about 44 years now. I understand soils. I grew up in the Midwest. My parents were farmers. They understood soils. When it comes to these buffers that they're calling out, I think what you folks need to understand is that water underground has a lot like electricity. It follows the path of least resistance. So as the stream starts up, say, up on South Hill, and it starts coming down the hill, There'll be, like, one gentleman over here says that he doesn't have any water in his stream, but yet you go down 100, 200 feet, and all of a sudden the water's there. So what happens is the water's coming down the hill, and it hits a soil type that'll allow it to go down into some sand and gravel, and then what'll happen is it'll pop back up again. So I'm listening to this comments about here about wetlands are the place that water does aquifer recharge. Just think about it a little bit. If you go to Silver Creek and you look for any place that's level, if that was really where the water is going in the ground, then why is the ground still wet? You walk anywhere, me and my wife walk down the creek all the time, every day. And there's just wet spots and they just never dry up. That's because the water isn't going in the ground in the wetlands. What it's doing is it's perched on the top of a restrictive layer. Now, remember, I'm a soils guy. I understand dirt. So what I'm trying to say is that there's not a magic number. If I can give you an example, when we drill a well, what we have to do is have a 100-foot buffer around it. The rest of the story, the Washington State Department of Health asked Wisconsin State what is a safe buffer to have around wells. And they said 100 feet, just like we're talking about on these streams, right? What happened is Washington State said every well that's drilled has to have a protective radius around it by 100 feet. Guess what Wisconsin uses for the buffer or the setback to wells? 50 feet. Why is that? Because they have very tight soils, and it's very unlikely for the water to get down that long. 30 seconds. So I just wanted you to understand a little bit about soils as you're making these decisions. There's not a magic number of a hundred feet or 200 feet, wherever it is. You need to look at the soil types. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. We have the next comment.

Oh, there we go. Okay. Hi, my name is Sandy Monahan. I live at 2505 25th Street Southeast, which is at the top of the picture that's on the screen. The Deer Creek stream starts in my backyard. I have lived in my house for 30 years. I have seen many different things. I actually go out and take down the invasive blackberries that are behind my fence that are in the creek so that the creek can still flow and that it doesn't get overgrown. My concern is again with the trees, which I absolutely love the trees of Puyallup. I absolutely do. I have over 20 fir trees in my yard that abut the stream, as well as the alder trees that are on the stream bed that during ice storms fall into my yard and take down my fence. I have never once on the two occasions that that has occurred, gone to the city and asked them to replace my fence. Never once. I've always actually been the person who went out, got the tree off of my fence, put my fence back up and made sure that there was nothing again, damaging the stream. So if we are being concerned about the trees that are on our property, I would just like you to also know that even though the riparian section of the stream showed low growth. That's not the case on the south hill portion of Deer Creek. There are ginormous trees that are over 100 feet tall that are currently growing on that stream bed that are fed by the stream. So just making sure you're understanding that if you're saying trees, there's already trees there that are part of the city's property. that are abutting this stream already and are being protective of providing the shade. So I'm making sure that you're well aware that it's not just the trees on our property, but there's already trees on the city's property that completely align the actual stream itself. Thank you.

We'll have the next comment.

Yeah, my name is Jim Roberts. I live at 2212 11th Street Place Southwest, which is along Silver Creek. And my question is, what are your expectations about what we're allowed to do within the 100-foot buffer? Part of my property, there's a, what do you call it, a native growth protective easement that I'm not supposed to do anything along the creek in that area. But the 100-foot buffer would extend well beyond my house and my yard. So what are the expectations about what we're allowed to do? What do you propose to restrict what we can do within that buffer area? Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have additional comments?

I just have to put my two cents in. My name is Alfred Smith. I live at 805 15th Avenue Southeast. And there's one of those streams on your map that comes out of a spring that just north of 15th Avenue Southeast. and it goes through my property down that hill, down a ravine. I've owned the property for several years, quite a few years, and it's been a battle all the time to try to get storm management. There's a control valve under 15th Avenue. And to keep that control valve open because it plugs up, there's no water. piece of mud on the north side of 15th Avenue. And so that you got it on the map is I think it's 660 feet or so that's all mine down through there. There's no water in it. And it's because of the city not managing that control valve. And they even put a pipe into where the water from the stream goes from the spring on the east side of 15th Avenue. They put a pipe in from a catchment pond, and I think that plugged up the valve worse, I call them. And they just, one of my files was, it's not my priority. That's disgusting to me. Oh, I don't care. If you say that my stream has, I really don't want to go 100 feet. But if they do, I've lost value in my property. You know, what's my compensation? When you say I can't yummy, here's 100 feet. It, you know, it impacts me. It costs me money. And what is the city going to do to compensate that? I guess that's my main question. Thank you.

Additional comments?

I'm Curt Mueller. I live on the other side of 36th Street. We have a slightly different problem. We have no indication of a deer creek. I bought the property in 79. I built there in 90. I've never had any indication that there was a creek. I have numerous bird trees at over 150 feet tall in that area back there. I've never seen a creek to the north or to the south. I'm just wondering what kind of restrictions do I have if I don't have a creek? Can somebody come out and tell me where the creek is back there? Because I can't see it. Thank you.

Hey, James Boucher, 247 36th Street, Southeast.

I had a chance to review the information online, and I looked at the creek types, and I take issue with the type F specifically on my property. There has to be certain characteristics for something to be fish-bearing. It's got to be depth, flow, substrate. I can show you pictures of dry grass and just nothing. It's trees that they say that this creek is running through my yard, so... i would uh ask kendall if she could probably reevaluate in person with her team and just you know make sure that the types of creeks are actually accurate thank you additional comments

Hi, I'm Glenn Space. I have a piece of property. It's about five acres off of Fruitland in the area north of 31st and south of 96th. And Clark Creek's headwater runs in that area. It's right now labeled as a type F fish bearing. But it's really only in wintertime does it have water in it. Otherwise, it runs through three driveway culverts. And the map, the 100-foot buffer, goes right through a home that I have on my property and the home on either side of the property. So my question is, what are you doing about having the homes encompassed in the buffer? What is the ramifications of declaring that your home is in the middle of a buffer when it's just a dry creek and there's never any fish? I'm lucky if I find a frog on my property, but certainly not fish. And so I want to make sure you're taking that into consideration. And 96th Street is where it takes a deep dive into the park, into the Clark Street Park, and no fish is going to make its way up. So it's not certainly a migration creek at all. And you're lucky to get some frogs maybe in the wintertime floating down that into Clark's Creek. So that's my concern. Thank you.

Thank you.

Torrent Stacey. I live on Shaw Road. I'm curious if the questions that people are asking, if they're going to get answered and where we could read those online or if it's going to be posted or something. And then, yeah, if we're going to lose, like, is there going to be clarification what we can and cannot do in the buffered zones? And... yeah um since i live on shaw road um i'm assuming pollution from car cars driving up down shaw road is potentially a concern um that i just have a question about that i don't know how to ask it um and then yeah if we do potentially lose um property that we use to potentially park cars or trailers or whatever on are we going to get compensated or reduction in property tax so thank you for time

I've lived in my house. I live on 11th Street Southwest for 47 years. And when you put in Silver Creek, you bought, I think, 30 feet, 60 feet from the creek on part of our property all the way down to the silver parking lot for the fair. Now, I have a couple comments. One is trees. when they put in the trees in the wetland you have put giant well now they're giant cottonwoods and they're probably 60 feet from my house so when a nice good north wind comes are you going to hit my grandchildren do you come and cut them out when they get too high or do you have to wait till they hit my house and back to the creek i watched that creek go in And it was deep. You took a big escalator or whatever they're called. And it was a good three, four feet deep. Now might be a foot because the sludge or whatever comes down, which you haven't maintained. And now it runs the banks and it's dry now. The kids go back there, throw big limbs where, The trees have fallen and they go and they make bridges. So I go back there and clean it out. But my comment is too that once it's a stream, you can't touch it because of the salmon. I don't see a lot of salmon. And it used to be a nice stream. Now it has forked off and you've got all kinds of crap. And it, I mean, we've had beavers and you took forever to clean the beavers out. and which you should have done it when it was little, but no, you had to wait and get all this permission. And so it costs the city more money, but you need to take care of the stream. So it flows decent and take a walk down Silver's Creek. I wish you'd go back and look at pictures when it was first built. They put in the wetland there because they 30 seconds, the night, the fifth and ninth street to connect. And they had to move that wetland somewhere else. So the city could put in their street. So they moved it over by my house connected to the silver Creek at that time. So I want to know, and you don't take care of the wetland. And my one side of my property is like, 8 feet, so I used to have blackberries coming over and I'm sure the speaker has received minutes come take care of them, so now I know there, so you don't because to get the city to do anything it's very difficult. Thank you so much.

Any other comments.

Paul Romich, District 1. Thanks, Commission. So in case you don't know, I'm probably one of the bigger environmentalists around. I don't own a car out of principle. And yeah, so for me, the people in this room are mainly collateral damage from what I followed. for the past couple of years of the comprehensive plan. The city council has been, or at least segments of the city council are very determined to remove property rights for specific reasons. And ultimately that will result in more traffic, service cuts and higher taxes. It's also going to be hypocritical in implementation. The Shaw Road project, which is the city's number one transportation project, will widen the road of Shaw Road by three lanes right along the creek there. And so I don't see why the city feels the need to do that while suppressing the property rights of the people when it comes to development within the creek buffer. you Tire microplastics, 6 PPDQ there is one of the biggest killers of salmon. And that creek is salmon, is important to salmon. So I don't see why the city feels the need to do this to the people while also at the same time talking about the other side of the mouth and widening the road. So just a little bit of equality in how the rules apply, I think would make a lot more sense. So thank you for your time.

thank you um additional comments lisa hey i live in deer creek 2709 16th avenue southeast the creek actually runs parallel to my house it's part of the easement of my lot and i have a water retention pond behind me My is more of a question. Several people have asked. Are we going to get answers? I don't know how this works, so I'm really curious. Like, are we going to get answers tonight? Because I maintain the land around the creek for all the reasons that you're talking about. I have my folks take care of all of that property. And I just want to understand what is going to happen with these new ordinances. So I understand what is expected of me or what is not expected of me in the property. So I'm going to ask the question again. Are you going to answer the questions tonight or how does this work? Thank you. Is there an answer to that?

So when... After we close the public hearing, we will go into a deliberation about the proposed changes and the recommendations. We don't debate over the dais to citizen comments. So you guys can give us lots of information and we will take that into account during our discussion.

there's usually not a back and forth over the dais yeah i don't know that i'm looking for a debate i'm just looking for if these are going to go into effect then what are the expectations of these property owners that are on those parts of the creek okay thank you so we won't get that information is what i'm asking we will be able to ask questions between the planning department and um and

the commission and Claire, who is also on the call.

Okay, that's gonna happen tonight. I'm truly just asking so I don't understand the process.

Go ahead.

is it okay if i speak to the process thank you so typically as um chair jones lowell was saying we typically don't have a back and forth it's not a q a session during the public hearing it's an opportunity for the public to provide their public comments then the commission will have their discussion and they can raise those questions that they've heard for staff to respond to And we will respond to those as much as possible with the information that we know or have available. If we're not able to respond to all of those questions, the public is welcome to follow up with me. My information is on the project website or I can provide it to you or Yesenia can help provide that information. And I'm happy to help with one-on-one questions about a specific property offline.

I did not mean to interrupt your time. I believe she still had two minutes and 13 seconds. If there's anything else you want to ask. Thank you. Are there any other comments?

Kevin, I live in 23rd Stonegate area. I'm just kind of curious. I'm not an expert at any of this, but there's zero fish in that retaining pond that I think it is in the middle of all those houses. And then it runs across the street into kind of just a runoff. And I don't know if I misheard, but I didn't know if you said if it goes across the street, is it no longer a runoff? Um, I might have misheard that, but if it goes across the roadway, which it does, it goes, I don't know the exact road, but 22nd maybe, into the areas where the other houses are that are probably about five or six that they affect, which I'm on that end of it. And there's nothing of water in there in the summertime. It's mostly in the wintertime. And like you said, the water follows where it's going to go, but it's across the street. And then other just to follow up with the rest of them is, are we gonna get compensation for losing property, property taxes impacts? Cause that's gonna affect my value if I wanna sell in this environment. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any other comments?

Hello, my name's Dan Nix. I'm in district two. I have property 20 acres down there by farm 12. I have a creek that originates just outside of my property. It's the creek with no name. It's never had a name. And I noticed on the proposal that only residential areas have this zone. Where the new proposal ends, that's where Absher put in the new apartments. And when it goes through past Absher, no new restrictions, goes past Safeway, no new restrictions. This is down on Pioneer and Subshaw Road. So I got to ask, why are you only sticking it to the residential people and not the commercial? That's a real, I don't think anybody else noticed that, but I noticed that. I'm very nervous about land grabs. There used to be a gigantic wetland next to my property. About 20, 30 years ago, Absher filled it in, and now my property became wetlands. And so now it's a wetland. It wasn't a wetland before Absher filled in his wetland, but so I'm concerned that You're going to keep screwing my property, taking it and taking it and taking it. And. You know, people just can't can't handle that. And right now it is part of its farmland. It's actually still farmed. There's still Christmas trees on that property. Can I still do commercial? Can I? grow more crops? Can I change crops? Can I raise cattle? What are the restrictions? So it just sounds like you're just getting this. And the brick runs the full length of my property. It's got to be, I don't know, 1,000 feet. It's huge. And then I'm just nervous about the land grab of people without any compensation. So I encourage you guys to ask the planning, hey, why is it only affecting residential areas? Now, that may be just because there's another map for the commercial stuff, but I don't know. And it's funny, when AFSHA put in the apartments right next to my property, they had to fix the creek, and they had to put rocks in, which there are no rocks in the valley in the creeks, but they had to put rocks in. The city charged him $36,000 to inspect it Not to do it, that probably cost a quarter million, maybe a million dollars to modify 300 feet of creek. And they put all kinds of stumps that were never there, rocks that were never there. You know, they didn't restore it. They created some artistic version of a creek.

Madam Chair, the speaker's reached three minutes. Thank you so much.

Any other comments?

Like the lower portion of the screen?

Or this portion? Oh, I can't see it. It might be easier up there. The screen's gone. Yeah.

I'm Jeff Kendall. I live at 219 21st Street Northwest in a cul-de-sac that all of the homes in my cul-de-sac is on the creek. And when I hear this gentleman back here talk about the city sticking somebody 36 grand to do an inspection, that means a lot to me because that means that the city must have money. If you're going to come and start on my cul-de-sac and buy out 14 homes between where I'm at on 21st and Pioneer. We're all within this buffer zone. And what I just caught on one of your maps when I was looking at this, Dave Kuntz, Is the proposed width for the zone where i'm at which is up if you go to that little white box up there it's 20 225 feet well that that almost gets to the cul de sac where we're at on 21st. Dave Kuntz, So I mean i'm all ears. if you're gonna buy me out, but if you go down that road and you choose to buy me out and you're gonna offer me some ridiculous low ball price, be ready because I'm not gonna kowtow down to you, okay? You're gonna pay me what my property and my home is worth as well as my neighbors that are sitting in here that have homes that are just as valuable as mine. So I cannot even imagine you're gonna go that route, but I just want you to know just that little piece of the map right there from 21st down to Pioneer, there's 14 really nice homes along that stretch. So I look forward to whatever your response is gonna be as to how you're gonna handle this. because I need to do planning on my end if the response isn't one that meets my needs.

Thank you. Yep, you can go ahead.

Lloyd Tebow, 1802 Brookmont Drive. I'm in the Deer Creek neighborhood along Deer Creek. A request for a better definition of fish bearing because on Deer Creek in the 18 years that I've lived there, I've never seen a fish. in Deer Creek. So maybe to the person doesn't understand all the terminologies, does fish bearing mean there's actually fish in the creek or does it feed somewhere else? That's my comment.

Thank you. Additional comments? I don't think so.

So procedural, if you yield your time, we do not do a second go. It's one speaker per person or one allotted time per person.

I'm Paul Wicklander, 820 17th Avenue Southwest. On the map, there's an area that's My brother and I have two and a half acres, and there's an area there that's designated an unnamed tributary. But if you go up to 19th, Silver Creek was diverted, I don't know how many decades ago, with a culvert that runs it through Brown's property that's the community garden. But the lay of the land, now the... The water runs where the land goes, so it ends up down on this unnamed tributary. What happens is it turns into a lake. So half my property is, I maintain a retention pond for the city. So 20 years ago, you guys wanted to buy it and put in a retention pond. That's when my mom owned it, and she wasn't interested in that. But my brother and I, it's a different story. So if you're getting into the realm of stormwaters, we'd be happy to hear from you. Thanks.

Thank you. Additional comments?

Hi, Carrie Label. I live on 9th Street Southwest. We have one of these creek streams in our backyard. And the 100 feet, I have questions as to how that will affect what I'll be able to do on my property. If my fence were to go down, which is back by the creek, am I going to be able to replace it to keep my dog in? How is that going to affect all the neighbors in my neighborhood with similar situations? I would like to know what we would be able to and not do on our own property that I've lived there for over 20 years. So that's a big concern. I'm going to have things that need to be replaced and maintained as we move forward. And so I would just like to know how that affects us.

Thank you. Additional comments.

My name is Deborah Morehouse and I live on ninth street Southwest and I'm a neighbor of hers. My question really is, you guys said you would have conversations with the city of, with the council and the planning commission. but that doesn't include the residents. This is a really short amount of time and a really not a lot of information that people can give to you. So when you're having the conversations, none of you live in any of these areas that we have to live in. So I hope that when you have the conversations, you actually think about the citizens that you are actually affecting who do have to live in those zones and who have paid good money for their property and it's their home. So I hope you consider that. Thank you. Thank you.

Additional comments?

I don't believe that we have any way to keep track of that. So at this time, you can't. Maybe you can find a friend in the audience.

For the record as well, Madam Chair, if any of the citizens would like to have written comments and hand them to me at the end of the meeting, I can distribute that to the members as well or provide them your information if you need further clarification.

Hasn't spoken. Yield your time to somebody that has spoken. Can we amend that a rule to change? Okay.

our time is

Hi there. Krista Rosebrook. I'm at 27th Avenue Southeast. There is a supposed creek that originates at the house behind me. It is not a fish bearing creek, but it is classified as one. There's definitely not a creek there. There's no water. It also would have to cross 27th Avenue to then go into neighboring houses and And then down through all these other houses, across Shaw Road, through two schools, you know, fields. So I would like to propose that an investigation is done, discussion on fish bearing, classifications of creeks in our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you.

Additional comments?

Hello, my name is James Allfriend, and I live at 1918 Fifth Avenue Southwest. And our backyard goes right down to Clark's Creek, right across from DeCourcy Park. And Clark's Creek is not a fish bearing creek. There's no trout in that creek. There used to be. There's not anymore. It's pretty much dead. The only salmon that come up that creek is when the Indians open up the weir on their hatchery downstream. Then some salmon come up so they can have the return of the salmon festival at the hatchery. That's the only way that the salmon get there. That creek is so polluted and full of mud and silt and vegetation. There's no fish. The city used, or the hatchery used to, the trout hatchery used to release fish into that pond at Clark's Creek Park for juveniles to fish in. They were stopped from doing that because the trout would get out of the pond and eat the salmon fry. When there was salmon that actually came up the creek that far. I mean, I'm... I don't know how far, maybe a hundred yards, the back of our house from, from the Creek, if that far, maybe 60, 70 yards. Um, yeah, it's, it's a Clark's Creek is dead. Absolutely dead. for any fish whatsoever and it shouldn't be listed as a fish bearing creek not until the city actually goes in there and restores that creek to its original condition thank you thank you additional comments

Madam chair, your microphones.

Sorry, you guys, seeing that there are no further comments, I'm going to close the public hearing. So do you have a comment, sir? Okay, seeing that there are no more, I'm going to close the public hearing at 749pm. And I am going to open the floor for commissioners to have a discussion. Commissioner Taylor.

I apologize in advance. I have a lot. So first, I have a question for either Claire or the city. When was the last time that the streets were actually evaluated to determine their stages? That is question one. Then I also wanted to address some of the language in the comments and thank you all for coming. This is how we do our work best is by listening to you. There's a few people present and not present commented on land grab. Nobody is taking your land. These changes that are being made are not based on what we want to do, certainly, though we do make recommendations based on the community, who is you. But I do recognize that if you can't use a good portion of your land suddenly that you could have used last year, that potentially that is a question for the assessor's office. And that's at the county level, not the city. The city can't determine your property value. But I think that's an incredibly valid point. The other thing I wanted to address is a number of people said, well, what about my home if it's in a buffer? That doesn't change. You don't have to take your home down. If you have a fence that needs a repair, and Claire or Kendall, please correct me if I'm wrong, But normally what happens is that repair goes on as needed. As long as you're not adding a gate and more width and heavier material, you can replace like for like without a penalty, whether that's your house has a wall that came down because a tree hit it. The city is certainly not going to ask you to not repair your house. You can do like for like. As long as something is not more out of code, there is no issue whatsoever. Then there was the conversation, and we addressed this the last time this whole conversation came up. What is a broken buffer? If you have a stream on the east side of your house, and you want to build on the west side of your house, within the shadow of your house, within the same trajectory, the buffer is effectively broken by your house or your driveway or a street or something of that nature. So you still have the right to develop the property on the other side of the broken buffer. And I hope that makes sense. If you have a driveway that is entering sort of dead center in your house and the stream is on the east, you can develop almost anything on the west side of your driveway because that has already broken the buffer effectively for planning and permitting. So I hope all of that is helpful. I still would love to know when the last time streams were evaluated because I think that's incredibly valid if somebody's saying it's a fish-bearing treatment, nobody's seen a fish in 30 years. I also think that some of the comments made about maintenance, especially in culverts and things that were affected by development or by the city, we need to take a look at that and see where things really lie now, not based on, um, national wetlands that have been mapped or County wetlands. Thank you all for your time.

Commissioner Taylor, did you have a question for Claire?

The question is, with the data on the maps, when is the last time those streams were verified for classification and actual for existence?

Yeah, it's a really good question. And the city uses publicly available so that both the national hydraulic data as well as state hydraulic data for those maps, and they are not new. And it's based on a high level evaluation. So a lot of these streams, nobody has gone onto private property to verify whether that stream is there. They've used, it's like a model to determine what these streams are. And it's based on distance from the main stem. So distance from the QL, it's based on elevation. It's based on the width of the stream, but you are, you guys know what those streams look like. And so you would know whether or not it really is fish bearing or not. I also wanted to, I guess, clarify the definition of a fish bearing stream. So a type F stream, yes, does include streams that includes fish, but it also includes streams that meet these physical criteria to be potentially used by fish and a fish bearing stream Um, may not have flowing water year round. Um, the evaluation, this kind of high level evaluation takes into consideration natural barriers to stream. So waterfall or really steep gradient, but it doesn't take into consideration constructed barriers such as pipes or culverts. So, um, There may be barriers to that potentially potential potential stream. You also may say there's no stream actually there. Again, this is a high level database. And so the stream may not be in exactly that location. And if the stream is there, there would, you would have to have someone, you could have somebody come out and say the stream isn't there. And they, you know, if the stream isn't there, it's not there. You wouldn't have to, you know, set a buffer off of something that really wasn't there. I the other point I guess I wanted to on the how old that data is the state is in the process in the next five years of updating that data set that is you that the city is using and the these are potential locations for those streams and so. It's not like that is where the stream is and it must be there. If you have a stream nearby and you want to do a development, you would hire somebody to come out and say, this is where the stream is and what the buffer is. So there isn't, it's not quite as black and white as it, or pink and blue as it appears on this map. So I don't know if that, I don't know exactly how old those, that data is, but it's not new.

Thank you, Claire. Commissioner DeGroote.

Thank you. Like so many things, I think that when we're talking about streams here, well, one thing that crosses my mind is the definition of a riparian zone is where a body of water meets the land. So it seems to me that the first thing you need is a body of water. So the other thing is a matter of degree And that when we talk about non-fish bearing seasonal, what is actually seasonal as opposed to an occasional stormwater runoff area?

In other words, this is a matter of degree.

So I think we have to be careful there. And I think that any person who feels that this is wrong, I would like to see that we would have a system for field verification. I wish we had a system that would say if there's a conflict about something, because this is someone's personal property. that that would, if you want to keep that buffer, the city wants to keep the buffer, that that would require, with the permission of the landowner, at three-month intervals for a 12-month period, a field inspection to see, is this actually a stream? Is this actually even a temporary stream so that people have a feeling that justice has been done? Thank you.

Thank you.

We are not the city council. We're a commission. And so anything that we do goes upstairs, actually these chairs, and they make the decisions for you. Who should be here is the city staff that needs to answer the questions that you have. Unfortunately, you've got us. All we do is listen and make our recommendations to the city council based on what we're told and what we see as citizens. And many of us have been here a long, long time. We're not newbies to Puyallup. We know our way around. And some of us have got wet property and some of us don't. But we understand your flight here. But I just want you to understand that we're listening, and we really care. And I guess I can't tell you how I'm going to vote on this, but I was hoping that when I reviewed 100 and some odd pages of this stuff that there'd have been a section in the code that said, oh, by the way, if you already have a structure, a fence, a barn, or something, you're grandfathered in. I was hoping I'd read that somewhere, but I never did. And I have some questions that I'm going to ask staff, and we all do. And hopefully you'll stick around and maybe you'll hear some answers that you want to hear. Years ago, we used to have district meetings where the city council members would come out and they'd hold a meeting and let everybody talk to them about what's going on in their district. That's gone by the way of the dodo years ago. And the question is why. To me, it seems like they don't want to hear you anymore. Otherwise, they'd have these district meetings. So if you have a chance to talk to a city council member, ask them about having a district meeting so they can be talked to and answer your questions. Because even if you go to a city council meeting, they're not going to answer your questions. They're going to do the same thing we are. We're going to listen. We're going to deliberate with staff, and then we're going to come out with something. So please... Try to convince your city council into having district meetings again and getting to the people you need to talk to. A lot of them are on the second floor of this building. So if you have questions, they will help you find the answers. I promise you they will. Thank you.

Vice Chair Kelsgaard, you said that you have questions for staff. Kendall and Katie are available if you'd like to talk.

I'll speak their piece first before I ask a question if they don't mind.

Okay, that's fine.

Okay, you can go ahead and start. Thank you. The lines were changed based utilizing the GIS system, right? Geographic Information System. What was the criteria that was used to determine which lines would be moved out to a the full extent of the proposed buffers, which lines are going to stay where they exist as of today. So like on the east side of Clark's Creek, once you got past the park there, that line stayed the same. It did not move, did not expand. But on the west side, it did expand. And that happened through all over the map. What criteria was used to determine which line was going to be kept at its old buffer line, which lines are going to be improved or increased.

So for the areas that were expanded or proposed to be expanded, we looked at existing development and improve, you know, utility improvements, things like that, that were in those areas. And we tried to look at areas that were less developed currently so that there would be less impacts that way. And then for areas, you know, For instance, on the east side of Clark's Creek, it was already built out. So that's why we're not proposing to expand the buffer because we really wouldn't see any benefit by expanding it because the buffer would stop where that existing development is. Okay.

It does raise a question then. So those that had built before, gets to have a more limited buffer. Anyone now that has property that wants to try to build is gonna be impacted dramatically by the potential increase of buffers. I'm looking at, I kayaked Clark's Creek the other day, and there's some property there that borders it. If we expand that out 100 feet, the property looked like it was about 400 feet long. That's 40,000 square feet that that farmer loses. That's an acre. So if we're looking at these proposed buffers, is there a way, because I think it says the director can look at some of these and do a 25% decrease, can he do more? Can we let them do more? Because individual cases like, you know, I know some of the individuals in here, there is no water coming down that creek. There has been water coming down that creek for 50 years because it's a dry area. And to make them fall in line and go out to 100 feet, whereas before I think it was probably 35 feet, that's a dramatic increase on what they can do on their property. So hopefully there's a way that these citizens can come forth and say, here's some information about mine without having to go through, hire a professional at hundreds and hundreds of dollars per hour to come in with a report and say, yes, this is not truly a creek. No matter what we do over on Shaw Road to try to help Deer Creek out, This area up here is not going to work. So why would we expand the buffer on an area that really doesn't meet any of the criteria when you actually look at it on an individual basis that we're trying to put forth? So hopefully you guys can come up with a way that people can come in and challenge some of this with information because these maps are old. The data is old. The state says they're going to come out and inspect. I don't necessarily think they're going to come out and do a walk-by inspection. Again, it's going to be something by drone, by an airplane. It's going to be something that I don't see it being a walk-by inspection to go through these creeks to find out where is there actually water running and where there's not. And so I challenge you to come up with a methodology that can help help solve some of these issues and to help out the people who are still looking at building because we just passed affordable care we're trying to get people to build and then we throw this on top and say we're taking all this land away you can't build on it and so i'm not sure how these two coincide with one another and what we're trying to accomplish in the city um The other thing, the biggest question, and I hope you will do a cheat sheet that you can put up on the website. You know, the biggest question we keep hearing is, what am I going to be able to do with my property now that these buffers are in place? You know, and so hopefully that will answer, I would say, three-fourths of the questions that we had tonight. That if we can come up with something out there that says, here's what's going to happen. A lady was talking about she's out mowing along inside the buffer. Well, I'm not sure that's legal underneath the new buffer requirements that you can have people going out there and removing trees that fall down out of those things without going back through the city because it's now infecting some of your critical area other regulations that you have out there. So I think we really need to get that cleared up on what can happen now so that they don't have to be calling you guys. I mean, you don't have time to answer the phone calls. So if you do a cheat sheet, that may help resolve a lot of these questions for people. And then they'll come back with very, very specific questions for you. And that's until we get out of this section of it. I'm done. Thank you.

Commissioner Taylor.

So I think that was one of mine also is I would love to know what is allowed in a buffer. in very clear terms. I think that would help tremendously. And then the other question I have, or perhaps it's a suggestion, I know Pierce County has an option where you can either hire like a wetlands biologist or the county says that they have a service where they can do that. And we worked with many people in the county where they actually will just go out and check. They don't do a full report. They're just saying whether or not it needs to be something of concern. is there a way for the city to provide that instead of putting the onus on the homeowners to have somebody come out and triple check or double check? It just seems like if you're already telling a homeowner that they can only use two-thirds of their property instead of a third, when maybe they could use the whole thing if somebody would just look at it, asking them again to spend thousands of dollars on a report and a specialist to come out to prove you wrong seems a little ludicrous to me.

Are you going to answer that one?

I can't tell if you're asking questions or want to respond later.

I don't know either.

If you'd like me to respond as far as a report and having someone come out, we currently don't have anyone on staff that is able to do that type of site visit. We just don't have someone with those qualifications to be able to do that. We do have third-party consultants that review reports that come in, but we would need council to provide funding for us to have our consultants go out and do that as an option for property owners. But that's currently not something that we're able to do at this time.

I'm just gonna interject on her point. Okay. Hi, you guys, thank you for coming. It's really good to hear all of your feedback and the questions that you guys have as citizens.

It's actually extremely helpful.

And I definitely wanna say thank you to the individuals who wrote in their questions prior to the meeting. I have spent the majority of the first half of this week looking at the areas of which they mentioned in their letters. I have spent my lunch breaks walking some streets along some of these culverts and some of these creeks. And I have put in a lot of phone calls based on some of the information that you guys gave us. So I don't want you guys to think that just because the process in which this meeting happens doesn't mean that we're not responsive or we're not listening to what you guys are saying. We are. Where do I want to start? Maybe with fish bearing stream types is where I will start. The destination of fish bearing streams is not contingent upon drought conditions or whether or not there is water or isn't water in a specific spot for any given amount of time. And Sort of the first email that we got when we had someone asking questions and they delivered a letter that was signed by several of their neighbors, they were really asking about the designation of fish bearing streams. And I just want to be clear, that's not actually something that we do here. Those are designations that are handed down to us. We're just talking about buffer zones here, the fish bearing stream designations that actually comes from higher up. So That will come from the state. And if you believe that your water type is not correct, so if there's a stream or something that you believe is not correctly typed on your property, there is a process in which you can ask for a review of that. I called the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and it's actually a process that goes through the Department of Natural Resources for Washington State. Um, and they will, you will fill out a form online. You can figure out where this form is by either going on their website or they have YouTube videos telling you how you can fill out the form. This is all for your water type designation. Um, and it is a water type modification form. And once you fill that out, you can ask for a water type review team. And the state will put together a water type review team that will actually come with and see your property and see your water type if you think that you have the incorrect water type on your property. So I know that we've been talking a lot about like, are they going to do it with drones? Are they going to do it? Are they going to charge you? That doesn't seem to be the process that's laid out on the state's website. So I would encourage everyone to go look there for water typing because we're talking about buffer zones up here. But if you're concerned about the water type and you don't think that your water type or something on your property is water typed correctly, you should probably go to that resource and see if you can get a water type review team. The biologists for our area, which includes Clark's Creek, Silver Creek, in Deer Creek, his name is Miles. And if you go to call the Department of Fish and Wildlife, they'll give you his contact information. So I just wanted to put that out there so that you guys understood that there is a process, and you can find lots of paperwork on the internet about how to go through that process if you would like the water type on your property changed. Vice Sheriff Hasgard.

See, we've got some smart people around here. I mean, look at them. Several questions I really don't need an answer to for the city, but I just want you to think about it. Is there any best science that addresses streams that are on record but are almost non-existent? Why do we worry about lahar maps when the city can't pass the test for a lahar evacuation because of poor infrastructure? And how many 200-year-old trees are in our area? Then we can go to our daily read here, page 77, 2106.970. It has wetland mitigation replacement ratios. 77 in the dark number on the right.

I'm sorry.

We're reading from the city's municipal code chapter 21.06 critical area codes draft amendments. Got a whole bunch of them. Okay. On page 77, it has ratios for reestablishment or creation. And if you go to page 80, section 4, It's it contradicts that by saying all impacts of wetland buffer shall be mitigated at a 1 to 1 ratio. Just something that you guys could look at for us you don't have to comment if you don't want to. And last but not least. If those of you that. Think that your property is not being evaluated properly by the county. when you get your card that shows your taxes, go to the Board of Equalization. And if you don't know how to do that or you have questions about it, I'd be happy to talk to you about it after the meeting because I was on that board for a couple years. And I'd be more than glad to answer any questions you have about appealing your property taxes. Thank you.

Commissioner Lantham.

Yeah, there was a lot of questions tonight on uses within the buffer zone. And I'm sure some of us could try to answer that. But would Miss Hoffman or Miss Baker, Miss Walls feel to provide a summary to the group here so they could get some sort of clarification tonight and not have to wait?

Yes, sorry for the dong there. Yes, so maintenance and repair of existing structures that includes fences, buildings within buffer areas are allowed to take place i think similar i think commissioner taylor touched on this you know we're not saying that those structures have to come down by any means they're allowed to continue um there are some, I believe some minor development allowances, there are some specific criteria, but there are some minor allowances for small additions to existing structures. And I believe existing structures can be replaced through those standards as well. So there are allowances already built into the code that way. I think I covered most of those.

I would, can I add one point, Kendall? Go for it. Okay. I can't see before speaking. Yeah. So existing, and I also just want to add that existing activities, there's, if you, those things would not require a permit. So you can continue to use your property in the manner that you have existing it there with for that fence repair, or yard maintenance, all that that sort of thing, there's no change, it would be if you're coming into the city to do for something that would trigger a permit of some sort, you know, whatever, an addition on your home or that sort of thing, that's when this would be triggered to have a look at it. Also, somebody mentioned farming and farming is there's the right to farm, so you will always be able to farm, even if it's within a buffer so there's. there's the right the right to farm act, it also has farming activities as exempt. and I also felt that the commissioner, one of the commissioners did a very good job of explaining the broken buffer of that not, the buffer does not cross over your house or a sidewalk, a road, or your driveway and those sort of things. It doesn't extend.

Thank you.

I'm sure it goes forward. Oh, that was a no? Okay. Commissioner Seeley.

Just a couple of quick items. Throughout the document where you're referring to some state and studies and you give dates of some of those, I'm wondering if we should just add, because you did it in one section, that whenever a new study comes out, you don't have to modify the regulations. You just say the newest approved. Can we add that to those other ones that are like that? Example would be page 35, 105, 106. And that way, as a new study comes out, we don't have to go back and go through a process to amend the... Could you give us that again, please? Pardon? Oh. Page 35, 105, 106.

And you're just asking that when the new study comes out that we reflect it here rather than changing the actual definition? Is that what you're saying? Correct. OK. Thank you.

Sorry. And that way, when the next time we do a full review or when the county or city does a full review, then they can go ahead and do the update with the newest dates on there. The other question I have is that, and this is more for the state to think about, as they're going through and doing all of these state suggestions, requirements, they're talking about trying to improve all the water quality and that type of thing. One thing that's not in there at all is how to incentivize those people that have the lawn running all the way down to the creeks. You know, that type of thing. Give them some sort of incentive to say, okay, we need to have a buffer to screen out the pollutants. We need to have trees planted along the streamway to provide that kind of stuff. But there's nothing that I found in the state, and so it doesn't appear anywhere in any of our regs, on saying we need to try to get proactively involved in those areas where we are seeing damage done to the water because it's a straight runoff going directly into those water features. So I'm not sure what would be the best approach. I'd just like you guys to take a look at that and see if there's some way that There can be incentives within the city to try to make sure that we try to improve our stream quality or water quality by encouraging those that love this lovely lawn putting grass going straight on down so the fertilizer and everything else just keeps washing off into the streams.

Um, this is Chair Jones. Claire, I have a question in the text on page 73. And I think that you sort of already answered it. But I have a specific question about legally established streets. And that's a legally established street, no matter sort of what it's made out of. And does that include driveways or Are driveways not technically legally established streets? Are those right-of-ways or east?

Yeah, I'd have to look in your land use code how you've defined street. So we could clarify this language if it doesn't include driveways. Sorry, I'm just on the wrong page.

Number five on. Yeah, I found it.

I was just on the wrong page. Um, sorry. Here we are. The yeah. So your land use somewhere in your land use code would define what a legally established street is. It's not within the critical areas code. The definition of that, uh, we could modify this to make it more clear that it, that does include, um, HAB-Masyn Moyer- In other types of impervious surfaces, such as roads are such as driveways and houses and just this is. HAB-Masyn Moyer- This is codifying the way that this type of code has always been conducted so even five years ago, if I was to do a wetland delineation in Puyallup or sorry a stream delineation Puyallup we would cut the buffer at these impervious surface, so this is.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- yeah.

codifying that existing kind of practice. Yeah, I don't know the answer to that question, apology.

Okay, yeah, I was just more towards the end of it with the resulting buffer distance. I wanted, I think that there should be a little bit more clarification on the legally established street. Sure. Also, again, with clarifying language. On page 48... We added in utility. And I wanted to make sure that when you define utility, we are talking about electric gas and water versus just electric. Our code has two different definitions of utility. One of them includes PDUs and privately owned companies, and the other doesn't. RCW 80.410 defines utilities as electric gas and water, or RCW 5448.10 defines public utilities. as only electric. So I just wanted a clarification on which one you meant, because it says a public agency or utility provider.

Yeah, so this would be, yeah, it would be the more inclusive, any type of utility, water, sewer, electrical, all of those are exemptions. And a lot of those utilities are actually already within stream corridors.

Okay, thank you. Commissioner DeGroote.

I have a couple questions here. Some of it is meaning. So on page 33, this is 95. So go to big page 33, 95. And... In the last sentence, it says the department and it, I don't know what department we're referring to here. It's not made clear earlier. This is a question for anyone.

Okay. That looks like a robot look requires to be looked at a little bit more carefully because it isn't clear. So it's a good point.

Okay. The next one is, well, there are some wordsmithing things that need to go on in here, but I have another question on page 51. It's number 212.06.522C. And it names that an option is another credible source without defining, do we have any idea what another credible source would be for that?

Can you tell me where on page 51 we are? Again, I wasn't quite tracking.

Yeah, okay. Give me a second here. It's on the element is... 212.06.522c.

Right. So, okay. Documentation from a scientific or other credible source of a possible presence of a critical area.

Yeah, usually things have been defined fairly clearly as who is responsible for what. And in this case, it's not clear to me at least. What's another credible source?

Yeah, I was going to say a qualified professional, but that's in D. We could strike or another credible source. I mean, all of them would be scientific for critical areas. And so it does seem a little bit redundant.

Yeah, I think that could be amended. Then the other the issue that I have, again, in regards to buffers, if we went to page 120, which is a math. We have Woodland Creek that is in a culvert. And nevertheless, not only is there A riparian zone marked around it when it's in a culvert, but it's been expanded. And so I have a kind of a question about that. What is, what is the rationale for that, please? There's no buffer on a culverted stream. Well, it shows it on the map.

Yes, it does. That's not correct.

Oh, okay. So that's an error.

Hmm.

Well, the buffer would then be blocked. But I think they maintain it just for the mapping purposes. But it wouldn't apply. I think that's the thought process is they show it. But under further investigation, it would count as a blocked buffer, if I'm thinking of that right.

OK. Also, I don't believe that maps are included in our codes. These are visual aids to help.

Okay.

Yeah. So the definition of the covert and the blocking would automatically sort of take that portion out based on what has been said with codes and not connected things. Okay.

Very good. Thank you. The other things that I have are actually sort of housekeeping things for staff that I can turn over later. There's only one other thing that would be well, this is sort of housekeeping too. Let's see if I can find it now. The page 5521 No, excuse me. 21.06.562, number two. That appears to be a repetition of paragraph one. Yeah. Yeah. That appears to be simply a repetition of the previous paragraph. Am I wrong? It looks the same to me.

Which section again? Sorry, I can't flip that quickly.

Okay, it is 21 0.06.560 parentheses two. And it's a repetition of. It looks to me like it's a repetition of one.

Of one.

Yeah.

Okay. I will look at that. This is existing code. So I would appreciate your markup. That would be very helpful.

Okay. Thank you. That's all.

Commissioner DeGroote, I didn't see where it was a repetition, but your comment on page 33 about the department, before it mentions the department, it says in accordance with the permits issued by local governments. So I believe that that infers that the department that they're talking about is the department that issues permits, which would be our planning department.

Okay, very good. It happens a long ways beyond that. It's not okay. I found it not clear, but that's okay.

Okay. Yeah. May I interject, please? Sure. Yeah, go ahead. Not to do rail from this conversation, but I did just as kind of a point of order for the meeting tonight. Wanted to remind the Commission that you do not have to make a recommendation tonight. It's fine to ask these questions, deliberate, and if it is the desire of the Commission, then we'll come back with more information, revisions to the code for your final recommendation. So first wanted to state that. And then I did want to want to acknowledge that there is another agenda item on the agenda. We are at about 830 and I wanted to just check and see if there is a desire from the commission to make that decision now to defer that agenda item to a future meeting. We do have a consultant that is assisting with that item. So I want to let them go now if The Commission prefers to defer that item. Thank you.

Thank you. Katie, I will entertain a motion.

Motion to differ.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Katie, you can let your consultant go. Commissioner Landon.

Yeah, I'm just kind of going off of my own hunch here. But if either Miss Hoffman or our planners could clarify, my understanding is that when it comes to these streams, there's a lot of residents who seem to want to make the point that the stream isn't in perhaps the best condition or fish bearing condition. But with my experience with a lot of these kind of restorative regulations, the The point isn't so much of existing habitat value as much as it is potential and the features to be improved. So an argument that there's potentially a culvert or some other barrier doesn't potentially make the point that our residents think they are making. Can you provide clarification to that? And if that is indeed correct, and the thinking behind these regulations and that saying that you have a poor habitat creek somehow might exclude you from a larger buffer.

Kendall, do you want me to speak to that one?

Sure, go ahead, Claire.

Yeah, that is a very good summary, I think, of the point of this. And as some people have acknowledged that there used to be fish in an area and there isn't anymore, or the stream has got pollution in it. And that's probably true that it isn't as nice as it used to be. And the reasoning for that is because of the development and past regulations that did not protect the stream habitat. And so it's kind of trying to undo some damage that's done in the past by looking to potentially potential areas for streams. And the city is taking consideration those recommendations from the state, from WDFW, which would increase the buffers quite a lot more so that we could perhaps restore these streams to a better condition.

And kind of a follow-up. And well, not really a follow up. But I also heard expressed that the city wasn't in some way subject to these impacts to streams and wetlands. But can someone on the city confirmed that that is in fact not the case. And you are also subject to mitigation ratios and stream buffers as well.

City Council Chambers, Yes, that's correct and we also as part of our proposal are proposing that for city properties so city parks and open space properties actually have more expanded buffer because they follow the fish and wildlife recommended riparian management zone buffers, so they are increased for those properties.

City Council Chambers, Okay, thank you.

Um, other comments from the commission, the questions or points or emotions. Well, thanks.

Excuse me. Do we need, um, a motion to, uh, uh, not make a recommendation tonight, but to defer this for, um, another look, I don't think you need a motion to not do something.

No.

Okay, well, the motion would be to defer action, because at the end of our the the question that was put before us at the beginning was, do we wish to make a recommendation to counsel?

So just to clarify, If you wanted to make a motion to defer and give staff direction to bring back some information, that is a motion that is potentially that could be made if you would want to make that motion. But if you also give staff direction as an overall uh, via the chair, um, for them to come back, overlook this meeting, come back with more information that they have been provided, uh, by both the citizen comments along with the commissioner's comments as well. Uh, we can do that as well. And that would not need a motion.

In that case, I defer to the chair.

Thanks. I actually do have a motion, um, for the commission. I know it's awkward for me to make a motion, but I'm gonna make it anyway. I am motioning that we amend the the codes to include the comment letter that was presented to us, including the wildlife and The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife comments. I'm motioning that those be included in our draft critical ordinance update.

I'll second.

People are looking confused. That's the second comment letter that we received attached to today's agenda. Okay. Okay, thank you. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Nay. I believe the eyes have it. Okay, it looks like we have ended any conversation on this. this critical ordinance update and I do not have a motion on the floor right now to make a recommendation. We have also motion to defer our work session topics to our next meeting. So that leads us to staff report is next on the agenda.

clarification for the critical areas ordinance. I understand you want us to make sure that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife comments are incorporated. What else are you expecting of us when we return? I have heard preparing a Q&A for residents, which we can work on that. Is that something that you would want for the next time we return to you on this item?

From what I heard from the dais is that we would like that and we would like to review it. Is that sort of where you guys were going, Michelle Landon and Commissioner Seelig? Yes, that seems to be the direction that they were going for. And Commissioner DeGroote would like to add, oh, sorry, Commissioner Taylor would like to add something.

I think one of the other things we've asked for is some kind of clear delineation of what is allowed in a buffer.

Right. Is it possible to sort of put together like a one-page fact sheet sort of showing where things are? If you were to put that together for the public, I would also ask that you include the table showing the difference in what is changing and what is not changing. So like if there's already a hundred foot buffer and we're just maintaining that, I would like that to be sort of clear lined and whatever that little one pager is that you guys are able to put together to inform the public.

Yeah. And I think you've heard a lot of the hangups tonight. I think there's a big hangup on fish bearing and whether I understand that language might have to stay, but I mean, perhaps some clarification in this document, So our residents aren't getting hung up on the fact that they haven't seen a fish in 30 years. I think there's some other topics that you probably have noted that were common themes tonight.

And we can look into those particular areas where there are questions in the specific code sections.

One other thing that I would like included, I didn't take a poll on this yet, but if it could be included, the sort of language around the right to farm not being impeded by the buffer zone. That would also be helpful so that people understand along the creeks.

Thank you.

Next agenda item up is the staff report.

I think, for my comments, I will just say we'll obviously we look at the schedule in terms of what we were intending to come to your next meeting and the other item that we had scheduled for tonight, the emergency housing um. I know, I guess I don't want to step on Vice Chair Kilsgard's toes, but I know he had expressed concerns about the volume of information on your agenda, which is certainly acknowledged by us. We are putting together all of that information, so we are well aware of how much it is. We are in a really difficult spot. The state legislative deadlines have put us in a tough spot, as well as the delay in the adoption of the comprehensive plan. We have code we have regulations that were required to be adopted at this point a couple of months ago and we are nowhere near getting those through the planning commission and to city council for adoption so that is part of the reason for the volume of agenda items that you're seeing and the information that's coming with that um There are some things that if those code amendments don't get adopted, we as city staff will simply have to figure out how to implement them because they are now state law and we're required to comply with that. It's possible that it's challenging and that's time consuming in and of itself when we should be focusing on the actual code work. So I just want to acknowledge the kind of tough spot we're all in with these things that are quite a bit outside of any of our control. It's very frustrating. It feels like we're forced to rush through things that are very meaty and very impactful in development regulations. And that's as frustrating for us as it is for you all. um so i don't really have a solution um exactly and i'm i'm interested in any input from you all um during your common opportunity but i do want to say that we acknowledge that we will be re-evaluating the schedule um we'll be meeting with our um city manager slash director um at the moment and um just figuring out how to move things forward that are required to be moved forward but do it in a way that's manageable for all of us so that's all i have thank you katie um i'm are these all questions for katie's staff report or are these commissioner reports okay i'm gonna start at this end

Don't mind if I share.

Hey, is there a way to get, you know, these packets broken down as soon as you get a section of it done to send it out to us so we don't get it all on, like for me, like on Friday or that type of thing, so we have more time to try to read through them all instead of just being here it is, go for it?

Yeah. Part of that is optimistic that we have it done before it's published. But I will say we're doing a pretty good job of we've got web pages created for each individual code amendment topic. And we're getting things uploaded to the website as soon as it's ready, the draft code. So we can certainly, I think we can send you all a link to that or a notification email with the link as soon as it is updated on the website. If that's happening a day or two before, hopefully more. But even if it's just a day before the agenda is published, we can try to do that. So you have it literally as soon as it's ready.

We can't be the only municipality that's running into time. So what are they going to do, shut us down? No.

I'm sorry. Would you like me to just address that?

Well, I don't think the state's being realistic. And we haven't got any phone calls from them saying that you guys are doing it wrong, have we?

Not yet. OK, I will just say the risk is that I don't actually think the risk is from the state. The risk is an applicant who knows that something is allowed, but we're not implementing it or allowing it yet that we're challenged, appealed. from an applicant. And so that's why I'm saying, it's on us as staff to identify anything that is effective, but not adopted into our code yet, that we regulate it properly until such time as the code reflects it properly.

And if they do call, you can explain. And one of our committee members told me today on the elevator, Just because some of us are retired, you know, and we don't want to spend three hours. Some people are still working and they've got other jobs and other commitments and children and grandchildren. We're doing the best we can.

I do appreciate that.

Katie, for you, I will say that maybe it might be time to sort of implement looking at one of those non-traditional timed meetings for us. to see if we can get everyone together for an additional meeting this month. We do have the power to do that. I would suggest that we look at that, see if there's a way that we can at least get a quorum up here to push some of these things along that aren't going quite fast enough. I know that through email, there was a comment on the amount of information that we had for this meeting. I mean, just... Those of you who are out in the audience, we read 181 pages for tonight's meeting outside of your comments and your emails and everything else that you guys have given us. It was a lot. And it would be good to get that information as soon as possible. I know that it's also a time of, I mean, I do work too. I will say that... This might be more for the clerk. I was disappointed when I saw at least one of the comments come through because it was made really several days before, almost a week or a week and a half before, and we didn't get it until it was clumped with another comment. And that comment was extremely thorough and it would have required us to Well, it certainly required me to actually make time to go out and see what someone was talking about and make phone calls. And that felt extremely rushed when I got it at 4 p.m. on a Friday. And then I had to figure out how to do all that between Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, because I do have a job. So if there, you all have this information before we do. If you see a comment come through that is, 10 pages long. That's from 10 residents grouped together. And it has maps and things that are pointing places. That's not a comment that on the dais we take lightly. That's something that we're going to follow up on and see and do some research on. And for us to be able to do that, it really is, we just need to use a little bit more discernment to get that to us quicker. So that we can do our due diligence for the people who are coming to speak to us.

Yes, of course. I can definitely do that. I do apologize that was sent out a little bit later. Unfortunately, I was out ill in the beginning of this week, which is as soon as I came back from the office, I did make sure to get that out to you guys, which I do apologize. I will make sure in the future that if we do get a citizen comment to send that over to the entirety of the commission right away.

Okay. Thank you. And yeah, I would love to see us look at some additional dates if we can fit them in for a quorum. I'm going to put my flag down. Does anybody else want to raise their flag or any more comments to staff report? If not, I'm going to move on to section eight of our agenda, which is commissioner comments. Seeing none, I'm moving on. Commissioner Seeley, you're up first.

Staff, thank you very much for trying to put a packet together for us to read. And a lot of information, a lot of this is driven by what the state is doing, not necessarily what we're doing. And so we just have to try to adopt some of those state standards. Some of those concerns, you may want to just reach out to your state reps and talk to them about them.

Commissioner DeGroote, you're up next.

Nothing this week. Thank you.

Commissioner Martin.

Thank you. And thank you in the audience for attending tonight. A lot of good information and a lot of good comments. And most of what you've told us, we have talked about internally before this. And I do believe that there are some weaknesses within the current plan, although well-intentioned. I do have major concerns with bureaucratic creep and the idea that extending these riparian zones beyond our current buffer zones, I'm not sure that gets us anything without, as Commissioner Landon said, without the plan to clean up what we have. And I look forward to seeing what we have Next time, talking to some of the people affected by this, the best description I had was an administrative backstab, and that's not something I want to be part of.

Thank you. Commissioner Landon.

I'm sure I'm speaking on behalf of more of us, but I just wanted to mention that We're really happy the chair is here, and we appreciate what she brings to this and to our community, and we're lucky to have you.

Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Taylor?

Nothing today.

Vice Chair Kilsgard?

We've been here long enough. Let's go home.

I just, I really want to thank everyone who came today to share their feedback. And again, thank you so much for those of you who do write to us. We do get the comments. We do read the comments. We do review the comments. It's extremely helpful to have things in writing because we can really dig into them. As far as things going on in the planning world, We are about one week away from deadlines to submit proposals for MPC 26. And that's happening in Detroit this year. And last month, the National Museum on Public Housing was opened in Chicago. We don't usually have a lot of museums that cover planning extensively. I was able to go to that. And I just wanted to let you guys know that they also have online exhibitions. So if you're interested in that, as we come up on our conversations about housing and open plans and middle housing and all of that good stuff, they do have exhibits available online. I wanna thank everyone who came and sat with us and stayed with us to the end. I know that you guys are probably looking for a decision today, but sometimes delaying something so that we can take a little bit more time and care is the best course of action. So I thank you for that. And I hope that you guys stick with us as we continue to look at these things. This is the planning commission meeting and we are going to adjourn at 8 57 PM. Thank you.