Chair Perry briefs committee on comprehensive striking amendment to King County critical‑areas regulations

Chair Sarah Perry opened the Local Services and Land Use Committee’s briefing by placing the proposed critical areas ordinance update in the context of the Growth Management Act and the county’s 10‑year comprehensive plan update. She described the striking amendment she circulated after months of stakeholder engagement and said the committee would take up line amendments on July 23 and consider the striking amendment for a committee vote on August 20.

Perry framed the amendment as an effort “to look for areas of agreement to ensure as much as possible that success with one policy objective wouldn't come at the detriment of another equally important objective.” She told colleagues the amendment incorporates feedback from tribes, agricultural groups, environmental advocates, housing stakeholders, and county staff.

Jenny Ngo of Council Central staff summarized a comparison matrix the chair provided that highlights substantive changes from the executive transmittal. Ngo told the committee the matrix focuses on “key changes that are included in the scribe with a comparison of the existing code and the executive's proposal.”

Major policy and code changes described in the striking amendment include:

- Fish habitat definition: The strike broadens the code’s fish‑habitat language beyond salmonids to include all native fish species and revises potential habitat to include upstream areas on the far side of human‑made barriers.

- Riparian and aquatic buffers: The chair’s amendment increases several riparian buffer widths inside and outside the Urban Growth Area and removes some basin distinctions, with illustrative figures discussed (examples in committee materials cited 115/165 feet previously and proposed 180/200 feet in certain categories).

- Revegetation and “climate‑adaptive” plants: The Stryker establishes revegetation standards for restored buffers and requires restoration to achieve equal or better ecological function; the county would develop a list of climate‑adaptive plants and work with tribes on incorporating traditional ecological knowledge into restoration guidance.

- Mitigation and mitigation ratios: The striking amendment prioritizes on‑site mitigation but allows off‑site mitigation when appropriate and adjusts alternative mitigation ratios upward in some riparian categories. For illegal alterations, the Stryker aligns the mitigation requirement to a 3:1 ratio for streams, compared with the executive proposal to increase some ratios to 4:1.

- Agricultural provisions: The Stryker refines commercial agriculture definitions and adjusts how new, existing and expanding farms qualify for critical‑area exceptions. It lowers evidentiary burdens in some cases (for example, reducing a proposed three‑year IRS filing requirement to one year or comparable documentation) and clarifies farm management plan timing and use for buffer reductions. It also includes consideration of the Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP) as an alternative approach for selected watersheds.

- Setbacks and site alterations: The amendment reduces some critical‑area setbacks from 15 feet to 10 feet to give property owners additional maneuvering space while buffers in many categories increase; it revises grading exemptions and lowers some thresholds used to trigger SEPA review for illegal alterations.

Committee members asked for clarification on hazardous substances restrictions for piers and docks, the rationale for broadening fish habitat beyond salmonids, whether agricultural plan approvals would remain administrative, and how channel migration mapping changes may affect farmers. John Taylor, director of King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, thanked council staff and executive staff for reconciling the executive transmittal and the Stryker and said “on balance, this is a great … document” while acknowledging further work is likely before final passage.

Chair Perry emphasized process and next steps: line amendments are due to Council Central staff by July 23, the committee plans to consider the striker and line amendments on August 20, and a second striking amendment will follow for full council consideration later in the year. Perry said additional summer work will refine best‑available‑science references, revegetation requirements, public‑agency exception criteria, grading exemptions, and mapping for channel migration hazard areas. The briefing did not include a committee vote; it was informational and part of the ongoing code adoption process.