Bothell planning commission forwards critical areas and SEPA threshold updates after public hearing

The City of Bothell Planning Commission on Oct. 15 unanimously voted to forward to City Council proposed updates to the city’s critical areas ordinance (CAO) and SEPA categorical exemption thresholds, after a staff presentation and a single public comment.

Planner Jacqueline Sampson, presenting the draft updates, told the commission that state law under the Growth Management Act requires Bothell to complete its next critical areas update by Dec. 31, 2025, and that staff and consultants had prepared the draft code after multiple study sessions with the commission and council. “Public works currently does not require a CAO permit or a critical areas report for erosion hazard areas,” Sampson said, explaining staff’s recommendation to remove lands with 15% or greater slope (labeled as erosion hazard areas) from the requirement to obtain a CAO permit or critical areas report; areas meeting landslide-hazard thresholds (about 40% slope) would continue to require a permit and report.

The draft also adjusts riparian management zones for F-class streams. Staff proposed increasing the default riparian buffer from 125 feet (adjustable to 100 feet with a vegetative buffer) to 175 feet (adjustable to 150 feet with a vegetative buffer), a change staff said was prompted by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife comments and a review of peer jurisdictions. Sampson noted that Bothell contains 12 F-class streams and that many areas where the new stream buffers would apply already have associated wetland buffers, reducing the net change in encumbered parcels.

A representative for a nearby property owner, Todd Johnson of LMG Enterprises, raised a concern during the public comment period about how a table in the draft code (referred to in the hearing as Table 140410 b1 h, “maximum disturbance area”) could limit development options for a lot he represents at 18700 120th Avenue NE. “We are very much about keeping that wetland intact,” Johnson said, but added that the way the table reads could conflict with zoning minimum densities and effectively prevent development on his site. He asked staff to follow up to clarify how the table would apply to his property and said he was seeking options such as purchasing wetland mitigation credits and off‑site mitigation.

A staff member explained the reasonable‑use exception in the draft code as a tool for sites that are wholly encumbered by wetlands and associated buffers: the exception establishes a maximum disturbance area and is designed to allow limited development in heavily encumbered sites while limiting permanent impacts and requiring mitigation. The staff member said that the commission’s hearing is an early step and that staff would meet with Johnson offline to clarify how the draft standards would apply to his parcel.

After questions from commissioners about the WDFW input and the overlap between stream buffers and wetland buffers, the commission indicated support for the two substantive edits staff highlighted (the erosion‑hazard permit removal and the adjusted riparian widths). Commissioner Jones moved to adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendations as modified, Commissioner Sills seconded, and commissioners Jones, Lever, Robson, Sills, and the chair voted aye; the motion carried unanimously.

The Planning Commission packet and staff presentation show the draft findings, conclusions, and recommendations that will be forwarded to City Council; staff said a City Council public hearing is tentatively scheduled for Oct. 21 but may be moved to December to allow more time for review. Staff also committed to follow up with the public commenter about his specific parcel.

Planning staff and the commission emphasized that this action forwards a recommendation to council and does not itself adopt the final ordinance. City Council will receive the commission’s recommendation and hold its own public hearing before any ordinance adoption.