Lake Stevens planners unveil draft changes that would widen many stream buffers and add site-specific rules
June 17, 2026 | Lake Stevens, Snohomish County, Washington
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Lake Stevens Planning Commission on June 17 reviewed a draft update to the city's critical areas ordinance that would increase many stream buffers, formalize "functionally disconnected" areas where built development severs buffer function, and require site-specific critical-area reports before many redevelopment decisions.
David Levitan, the city's principal planner, told commissioners the draft raises non-fish-bearing stream buffers from 50 to 100 feet and proposes a hybrid approach for fish-bearing (Type F) streams: a standard 150-foot buffer with the ability to expand up to the site'potential-tree-height range in places where site-specific science shows a need. "We had proposed 150 foot buffer ... for Type F or fish bearing streams," Levitan said, describing the staff recommendation developed after reviewing consultant input and basin/tree-canopy data.
Why it matters: staff said larger buffers could materially affect developable lots in parts of the city. Levitan said a planner/GIS preliminary comparison of alternatives showed a difference on the order of hundreds of housing units and tens of acres: "Jill did kind of a preliminary analysis ... approximately 300 units, 278 units. So that was a 31% increase over the WDFW alternative," he said, summarizing early mapping that the commission asked staff to refine and explain.
The hybrid approach reflects a desire to align the city's rules with state guidance from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) while creating a defensible local record under the Growth Management Act. Levitan told the commission that staff have had informal conversations with agencies and plan a formal 60-day agency review: the draft will be circulated to state agencies, tribes and the public before any final decisions.
A major code addition in the draft addresses "functionally disconnected" buffers. Under the proposed language (new 14.88.296), a road, building, or pavement that severs or greatly reduces buffer function would mean the paved or developed area is no longer treated as part of the buffer; staff stressed that a qualified, site-specific critical areas report would be required to demonstrate that loss of buffer function.
Planning manager Christy Schmidt said the functionally disconnected provision is intended to prevent both over-broad application of a citywide map and opportunistic claims that large "pre-developed" lawns should be excluded automatically. "If you have a lot that's completely paved and graded, it's not going to have buffer function," Schmidt said, and a site-specific report will be needed to show where buffer function truly exists.
Commissioners pressed staff on practical consequences for homeowners. Commissioner Morton suggested the city could use the analysis to argue for more urban growth area allocation at county or state levels; staff responded that changing growth targets is difficult, and that the city must document its best-available-science to avoid appeals before the Growth Management hearings board.
Staff also explained how the draft handles non-conforming uses: discontinuance rules (180 days) and demolition can affect vesting, but a cleared area that is functionally disconnected from the critical area may still be available for development under the critical areas chapter if the site-specific report supports it.
Other notable draft changes include increasing the "buffer of the buffer" building setback from five to 10 feet in many circumstances, and codifying a long-standing requirement for permanent fencing and signage to mark critical-area boundaries on private properties. Director Wright and staff said enforcement remains primarily complaint-driven and that recorded site plans and signage are important tools to prevent unlawful fills and development.
Next steps: staff said they will finish basin and canopy mapping, refine the analysis of acreage and unit impacts, complete best-available-science documentation for the hybrid approach, and prepare a clearer public FAQ and visuals that exclude fully developed lots so residents can see realistic impacts. The draft will then be issued for formal agency and public review.
The commission did not take any final action; staff will return with maps and the refined package for further vetting and public outreach.
David Levitan, the city's principal planner, told commissioners the draft raises non-fish-bearing stream buffers from 50 to 100 feet and proposes a hybrid approach for fish-bearing (Type F) streams: a standard 150-foot buffer with the ability to expand up to the site'potential-tree-height range in places where site-specific science shows a need. "We had proposed 150 foot buffer ... for Type F or fish bearing streams," Levitan said, describing the staff recommendation developed after reviewing consultant input and basin/tree-canopy data.
Why it matters: staff said larger buffers could materially affect developable lots in parts of the city. Levitan said a planner/GIS preliminary comparison of alternatives showed a difference on the order of hundreds of housing units and tens of acres: "Jill did kind of a preliminary analysis ... approximately 300 units, 278 units. So that was a 31% increase over the WDFW alternative," he said, summarizing early mapping that the commission asked staff to refine and explain.
The hybrid approach reflects a desire to align the city's rules with state guidance from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) while creating a defensible local record under the Growth Management Act. Levitan told the commission that staff have had informal conversations with agencies and plan a formal 60-day agency review: the draft will be circulated to state agencies, tribes and the public before any final decisions.
A major code addition in the draft addresses "functionally disconnected" buffers. Under the proposed language (new 14.88.296), a road, building, or pavement that severs or greatly reduces buffer function would mean the paved or developed area is no longer treated as part of the buffer; staff stressed that a qualified, site-specific critical areas report would be required to demonstrate that loss of buffer function.
Planning manager Christy Schmidt said the functionally disconnected provision is intended to prevent both over-broad application of a citywide map and opportunistic claims that large "pre-developed" lawns should be excluded automatically. "If you have a lot that's completely paved and graded, it's not going to have buffer function," Schmidt said, and a site-specific report will be needed to show where buffer function truly exists.
Commissioners pressed staff on practical consequences for homeowners. Commissioner Morton suggested the city could use the analysis to argue for more urban growth area allocation at county or state levels; staff responded that changing growth targets is difficult, and that the city must document its best-available-science to avoid appeals before the Growth Management hearings board.
Staff also explained how the draft handles non-conforming uses: discontinuance rules (180 days) and demolition can affect vesting, but a cleared area that is functionally disconnected from the critical area may still be available for development under the critical areas chapter if the site-specific report supports it.
Other notable draft changes include increasing the "buffer of the buffer" building setback from five to 10 feet in many circumstances, and codifying a long-standing requirement for permanent fencing and signage to mark critical-area boundaries on private properties. Director Wright and staff said enforcement remains primarily complaint-driven and that recorded site plans and signage are important tools to prevent unlawful fills and development.
Next steps: staff said they will finish basin and canopy mapping, refine the analysis of acreage and unit impacts, complete best-available-science documentation for the hybrid approach, and prepare a clearer public FAQ and visuals that exclude fully developed lots so residents can see realistic impacts. The draft will then be issued for formal agency and public review.
The commission did not take any final action; staff will return with maps and the refined package for further vetting and public outreach.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
