King County Councilmembers praise court victory against rural clearing limits in the Critical Areas Ordinance

March 4, 2009

Summary

Members will work on new policy that addresses both environment and property rights

Story

Rural and suburban members of the Metropolitan King County Council today reacted favorably to a state Supreme Court decision Tuesday that denied King County’s petition for review of an appeals court decision that struck down part of the County’s Critical Areas package.

The restrictions in the Clearing and Grading Ordinance were adopted to comply with requirements in the state Growth Management Act to protect streams and wildlife habitat, and would have required rural property owners to keep native vegetation on 50 to 65 percent of their land, depending on its size.

“It is clear that an overly restrictive, one-size-fits-all approach to land use regulation is bad policy,” said Councilmember Reagan Dunn. “I opposed the legislation before, and I look forward to the opportunity to create new policy addressing critical areas that acknowledges unique situations.”

“This ruling recognizes that our rural property owners are responsible stewards of their own land,” said Councilmember Kathy Lambert, who represents Northeast King County, including the Snoqualmie Valley. “The state Supreme Court is to be commended for acknowledging that one size does not fit all properties when it comes to environmental issues. With this resolution, we now can get down to work on regulations that are flexible enough to protect the environment and also respect private property rights. I believe that people and salmon can survive together when the rights of all are respected and protected.”

“I am pleased to see the Court sided with property owners on this issue,” said Council Vice Chair Jane Hague, chair of the Council’s Physical Environment Committee that oversees policy on growth management. “We can and must strike a balance between landowners’ rights and protecting streams and wildlife. This decision moves us in that direction.”

The rural clearing limits were based upon a ‘65/10’ model that required 65 percent of a development site to remain in native vegetation and limited coverage by impervious surfaces to 10 percent. That standard was developed specifically for the Issaquah Basin and is most applicable to areas with similar rainfall, vegetation, soil and topography.

The 2004 Clearing and Grading Ordinance expanded that 65/10 model to apply to all rural-zoned parcels, but modified it to allow smaller parcels to qualify for 50 percent clearing. Nevertheless, it severed the direct connection between the protection of watershed basins and clearing of native vegetation in those basins. In essence, it made the entire rural area subject to clearing limits developed from a model for a particular basin.

Under a proposed ordinance introduced last year by Councilmembers Lambert, Dunn, Hague and von Reichbauer, repeal by the courts would return county regulations to previously existing standards, and the 65/10 model would be retained for the Bear Creek Basin, Issaquah Creek Basin, Soos Creek Basin, May Creek Basin, and East Sammamish and Bear Creek Community Planning Areas. Basin plans would still be allowed to modify clearing limits in their respective areas.