Sweeping environmental rules proposed in Snohomish County are intended to protect rivers, lakes and important wildlife habitat from development.
But officials promise the rules won’t be a burden to farmers though they plow and plant in Snohomish County’s sensitive flood plains.
“We don’t want to inhibit or interrupt the progress we’re making for recovery of farming in Snohomish County,” county planning director Craig Ladiser said.
The County Council and Planning Commission debated the rules this week.
“In its present form, this is the most farmer-friendly critical areas ordinance of all,” said Max Albert, a former Agricultural Board member who helped come up with the proposed rules.
Most of the county’s farmland is in environmentally sensitive flood plains, Albert said. “This ordinance let’s you go on farming it.”
That’s good news, said crop farmer Joe Heineck, who has 90 acres straddling Weiser Creek in Everett. He was worried that bigger protective buffers proposed for the salmon creek would “take a huge swath of productive farmland out of production.”
The state requires the regulations to be updated every seven years. The update was due Dec. 1. Missing the deadline means the county could face state penalties.
Even as some farmers heap praise, builders say county officials are navigating a minefield.
The rules need to better balance the competing interests of the environment, economic development and affordable housing, they say.
Stricter protections on rivers and wetlands will gobble up land needed for new homes, said Mike Pattison of the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties.
The proposed new rules dictate how far builders would be kept from rivers and wetlands.
“We’ve always been concerned that the science the state is foisting on us doesn’t justify the buffers” protecting streams, Pattison said.
Builders might have to stay 150 feet from rivers and lakes, and as far as 225 feet from some highly sensitive habitat.
One size doesn’t fit all, said Jennifer Jerabek, also of the Master Builders.
“We don’t want big, dumb buffers, we want smart, flexible buffers,” she said.
In the end, “it’s all about water,” Ladiser said. The rules propose comprehensive building restrictions near rivers, lakes and wetlands, landslide areas, river channels and underground aquifers.
Environmental advocates said they want stricter rules.
“The most beautiful critter in the state of Washington is the giant native steelhead,” said Chet Elrod of Darrington. “We have to provide habitat for them. We can’t just build and log everything.”
The county thinks it has struck a balance that will protect the environment but won’t hinder the county’s house-building industry, Ladiser said.
“It isn’t perfect, but we believe it’s close,” Ladiser said.
The rules could “apply to anybody that would kick a pile of dirt over,” said Gene Miller, county planning commissioner and land-use consultant. He said he still has questions and concerns.
“It’s an expansive overhaul,” he said. “It will not be understandable by those who implement it or are subject to it. The county hasn’t shown they can make it work yet.”
He said he is worried property owners aren’t sufficiently involved, and are too trusting of the government rule-making effort.
“I would hope more people come out and give us opinions on both sides,” he said.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
