Staff and consultant outline proposed updates to Port Orchard critical areas ordinance

City staff and consultant Chad Wallen of Grady Associates presented proposed amendments to Port Orchard’s critical areas ordinance (POMC 20.162) during the Jan. 21 study session as part of implementing the city’s 2024 comprehensive plan periodic update. The presentation described proposed buffer changes, a revised mitigation hierarchy, terminology updates and a timeline for planning-commission review and council consideration.

Why it matters: the critical areas ordinance sets development standards for wetlands, streams, aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas and geologic hazards. The city said the amendments are intended to align municipal code with the Growth Management Act and best-available science, and to improve clarity and usability for staff, developers and the public.

What the draft would do (staff summary): - Update wetland buffers to align with Ecology guidance and practices intended to better protect wetland functions and values. - Replace the term “stream buffer” with “riparian management zone (RMZ)” to match state terminology and add standards to meet Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife recommendations. - Offer a revised mitigation hierarchy and more flexible mitigation approaches, including on-site mitigation, project-level mitigation and mitigation banking options. - Adopt citywide, consistent RMZ widths rather than applying a tree-height/site-potential method across the city. Staff said the tree-height option would be site-specific and could produce widely variable buffer widths; the draft therefore uses consistent buffer widths by stream type (staff cited a 100-foot buffer for certain non–fish-bearing streams and 150 feet for fish-bearing streams as the drafted approach). - Add incentives for daylighting culverted or piped streams: the draft provides buffer-reduction incentives where property owners restore piped streams and reestablish habitat.

Process and timeline: staff said the planning commission will continue review in February and likely hold a public hearing in March, after which the commission will forward a recommendation to the council. Staff told the council it expects the ordinance to be presented to the council for consideration later in spring, with an anticipated effective date of Jan. 1, 2026, if adopted.

Public outreach and comment: staff are maintaining a project web page, are compiling a public comment matrix and will publish dispositions and justifications for proposed changes. The presentation noted the city has already received comments from the planning commission and some public parties and that staff will share updated comment matrices with the planning commission and the public.

Technical and legal context: the city acknowledged there are alternative approaches in the best-available-science guidance. Staff described another jurisdiction’s recent appeals over use of a tree-height method; that case may be relevant to future appeals and shows the potential for Growth Management Hearings Board challenges over how science is applied. Staff invited council members to review the packet materials and to ask technical questions of Grady Associates during subsequent meetings.

Staff closed by inviting further questions and by saying the City does not expect an effective date before Jan. 1, 2026.