Planning commission debates Critical Areas code changes, wells regulation and riparian buffer options

Alec (staff/consultant) presented the draft environment element, modifications to the draft Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), and a new, state-required climate resiliency subelement that must be incorporated into La Center's comprehensive plan. He reminded the commission that the city faces statutory deadlines for its periodic update and that a 14-day courtesy review period for these drafts closes Oct. 22.

On affordable housing the commission heard that state law requires jurisdictions to provide a density bonus for affordable housing developments on religious-organization-owned property. Alec said the proposal under consideration would allow a roughly 25% bonus in low-density residential zones (raising an example maximum from 5.8 to 7.3 units per acre) and a 40% bonus in medium-density zones (an example of 14 to 19.6 units per acre). He emphasized the state requires a bonus but does not set the percentage. Commissioners asked whether the city currently has eligible religious properties and requested model visuals showing how different bonus levels translate to units per acre.

The commission spent substantial time on groundwater protection and wells. Alec outlined updates to critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) mapping and a proposed tightening of the "qualified professional" requirement for CARA permits. He raised the question of whether to extend CAO regulation to type B (private) wells, which serve fewer than 25 people, noting the Department of Health encourages protection but does not require local regulation. Commissioner Smith stated, "I would strongly urge that we do not regulate the private wells, the type b wells," citing existing treatment and monitoring requirements and concerns about administrative burden and impacts on property owners. After discussion, commissioners and staff leaned toward regulating type A (public) wells only and not adding a new regulatory layer to the many undocumented type B wells in the city.

A major policy issue was WDFW's site-potential-tree-height guidance, which can expand riparian buffer widths based on the horizontal reach of dominant-tree fall distance. Alec explained three implementation options: apply BAS "off the shelf" (variable buffers tied to soil types), average buffer widths at the parcel or city level to simplify mapping, or limit application to undeveloped parcels only. Commissioners expressed concern that wholesale application could dramatically reduce developable acreage on smaller parcels; some favored averaging or applying the larger buffers only to new developments. WSP recommended averaging the site-potential-tree-height values to produce a single, implementable buffer width for the city or per parcel averaging for developers.

Other CAO updates summarized by Alec included Oregon white oak protections (site and ecological function assessments with multi-decade replacement/maintenance approaches), updated wetland buffer guidance (proposed A/B approach tied to habitat corridors and mitigation measures), geologic hazards mapping updates, and revised mitigation priorities consistent with Ecology (favoring mitigation banks). On climate resiliency, Alec noted the city's technical vulnerability assessment will focus on extreme precipitation impacts to transportation and wastewater; the draft element shows large increases in days above 90'F by 2030 and 2080 and recommends preparedness and asset-based planning.

Next steps: the staff will post draft chapters and graphics, compile tonight's questions and written comments, provide answers to commissioners by Friday, and prepare a second draft for the Nov. 12 Planning Commission meeting with a tentative council draft in December.