Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the planning commission meeting for Lake Stevens, Washington, January 21st, 2026. Our first meeting of the new year. Happy new year, my fellow commissioners and staff. I am Chair Hexford and I'd ask you each to stand with me for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you so much. And before we go to roll call, we are going to take a moment and have Caitlyn um come online and we are going to announce and appoint our newest two commissioners. So, if I could turn the time over to Caitlyn. Good evening, planning commission. This is Deputy Clerk um Caitlyn Weaver, and I'm here to do the oath for our two new planning commissioners. Very exciting. So, if you'd like to raise your right hand, we'll go ahead and do your oath together. Should we stand? I mean, you can if you want to. Yeah. Go ahead. Okay. I state your name. I, Amy Zundowski,

do solemnly swear or affirm do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution that I will support the Constitution and laws of the United States and laws of the United States and state of Washington and state of Washington and the ordinances of the city of Lake Stevens and the ordinance of the city of Lake Stevens and that I will faithfully and impartially and I will faithfully and impart partially perform and discharge the duties perform and discharge the duties of planning commissioner of planning commissioner according to the law according to the law and to the best of my ability and understanding

and and to the best of my ability and understanding. All right, congratulations. Thank you. Yay. Thank you. Welcome. And with that, it is my pleasure to do the first roll call. Commissioner Der here. Commissioner Morton here. Commissioner Luwendowski here. Commissioner Connor Davis here. Commissioner James and I don't know your last name off the top of my head. Sauls. Exactly. Commissioner and Commissioner Jennifer Davis here.

And again, Janice Huxford, I am here. We are a full commission. Thank you so much. I wanted to before we get into guest business have a moment with our newest commissioners to introduce themselves. Uh maybe if you take a minute or so to um talk about uh what brought you to us. Uh we would love to get to know you as we will be serving alongside you. Commissioner Sauls, can we begin with you please?

Absolutely. Thank you, Chair. Um as mentioned, my name is James Sauls. I am originally from North Carolina. My family and I moved out here be five years in July. Um I've worked in and out of local government for the last 15 to 20 years. It's kind of blurry at this point. Um currently work for the um city of Everett in the transportation department. Um, I wanted to be on the planning commission because we honestly love Lake Stevens and I hope to bring some of my past skills and stuff that I'm going to learn with other commissioners and with Lake Stevens uh staff to continue to make Lake Stevens the great place that it is. So, thank you for having me. Awesome. We appreciate that. And Commissioner Luwendowski.

Great. Yep. Amy Luwendowski. My husband and I moved here about 10 years ago from Everett and we have two kids, um, Jordan and Grace. Jordan is at Cavalero Mid High and Grace is at North Lake Middle School. Um I volunteered in a lot of different capacities um countywide as well as in this city. So I'm on the board of the Ever YMCA really active um as a Rotarian and we love Lake Stevens. Um we have loved raising our kids here. I enjoy all of the connections and the community and getting to know our neighbors and um I'm kind of learning my way up so to speak as um I'm involved and just want to learn more.

Thank you so much. We appreciate you having here and I will add that I was on the panel that helped to um interview these folks. We had some really good candidates. any one of the candidates that applied could have fit beautifully and what we looked for was what the commission needed. So, these two candidates will fill holes that we had and I think we'll um be um it will be advantageous for us to have them on our commission moving forward. So, thank you for applying and we look forward to working with you. Thank you.

Let's move on to guest business. This is the opportunity for anybody in the audience or online to address anything that is not on the agenda for this evening. Are there any comments that want to be made from the podium hearing? None. Is there anything online? None. Okay. Let's move on then to our action items. This is item number four. 4A is the approval of our minutes, which seems like a long time ago. This was our December 3rd meeting. Uh for those of you that were part of that meeting, do you have have you had the opportunity to review those minutes and are there any changes um that you'd like to make?

I move that we accept the minutes from the uh December 3rd, 2025 meeting. And that was Commissioner Connor Davis that made the motion. Do we have a second? Morton seconds. Uh Commissioner Morton will second. All those in favor? I

I any opposed? Any abstain? So the minutes are approved as written for December 3rd. Now we're moving on to 4B which are is our election of our 2026 officers. As you all know, we um elect both a chair and a vice every year. It is something that we do to make sure that we keep things um not as a monopoly. And also because I'm losing my voice already, so this night's going to be quick for me. Uh, do we have any nominations for chair? Commissioner Connor Davis nominates uh Bruce Morton as chair planning commission. Thank you. Do we have any other nominations? Please.

Um, this is Commissioner Jennifer Davis and I'd like to nominate uh Commissioner Der as vice chair if he'd like to accept the nomination. Uh, do we have any other motions for chair? Oh, just chair. Okay. Yes, I'd actually like to um because I like to have a choice. I'll I'll nominate if accepted Commissioner Der as chair um and then we will have an option.

Oh, there you go. Any other nominations? Okay. Then um uh we will by hand uh do we have um will the commission raise by hand? Should we make a statement? Um would you like to make a statement? Um sure. Sure. I'd love to hear a statement.

Okay. So, uh, I've I've been on the commission for a couple years now, and I it seems like it's, uh, my turn, and, uh, I have not had a nice refresher of the, uh, um, u rules that we had a couple weeks ago. I really appreciate that. And, uh, I've had, um, y'all as examples. Uh, and so I I would be happy to be chair. And thank you for the nominations. Thank you. Commissioner Der, would you like to add anything?

Um, well, I appreciate the nomination for one. Uh, I think as you all know, I've uh been a chair in the past. Um, and just from, you know, my position, I think any any one of us would be uh wonderful selections for this. Uh, if uh elected, I would be happy to uh once again take on that role. And I think that the duo of the two of you would be brilliant in either capacity. So, can we vote on chair and then vote on the whoever is not chair to be vice? Sure.

We can make a nomination for that vice so that we it's official. But I love the duo. All right. So, um, both have been nominated. All those in favor of having Commissioner Morton as chair, raise your right hand. Anybody that chooses Commissioner Der, Commissioner Morton, congratulations. Thank you. Do I have a nomination to um for Commissioner Der as vice?

Uh you already did. Commissioner Jennifer Davis. We will second with Commissioner Con Connor Davis. And just to be official, everybody that wants you to raise your right hand. I love it. and I will turn the microphone over to you, Bruce Morton. Let's not switch seats, but if you would please take over for the rest of the meeting. Sure. Would you like an agenda? Uh, I have an agenda. Uh, it's for it's, uh, on the PDF, so I'll Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. And, uh, thank you so much, uh, Janice, for your wonderful service as chair for the last year. My pleasure.

That's been many times for you. And so, um, all right. So, let's move on to the agenda. Uh, we have um we've already done uh action item 4 A and 4B. Let's move on to the critical areas update. So, uh planner Levitan, please take it from here. All right. Thank you, Chair Morton. Uh, commissioners, David Levitan, principal planner. So, we are back this evening to talk about the critical areas ordinance update. It's something that we haven't talked about for a few months now. Um, so I'm going to give a brief overview of the project and then just touch on a couple of the more prominent uh revisions to the chapter. Um, but happy to answer any additional questions, especially for the newer commissioners, whether it's about specific language or whether it's about just the general role or requirements of our critical areas ordinance. Happy to touch on any of that. Uh so just a little bit of an overview. So um cities in state of Washington are required to basically implement the growth management act through their critical areas ordinance uh basically to address all of the different critical areas that are outlined uh within the WAC the Washington administrative code and then the RCW the revised code of Washington. Uh so the ordinance is uh basically an implementation task. It typically follows the completion of your comprehensive plan periodic update. You then move on to your implementing ordinances such as your critical areas ordinance and you do a what's called a

periodic update of that as well. It's mandated by the state. Um we're running a little bit behind on that. The deadline was officially December 31st, but a number of cities just given the amount of different regulations and different code amendments that we've needed to do over the past couple years are running a little bit behind. So, we're still in a pretty good spot there. um kind of one of the major items and one of the main main drivers is basically aligning the local regulations with state requirements and then with what's called best available science. Basically, you need to have a strong technical scientific foundation in your regulations and you need to demonstrate that uh before you just put them into place as far as implementing ordinance language. Uh just a little bit of clarification especially for those that are new to this. Um things like the lake lake Stevens uh shorelines of the state uh they are subject to their own critical areas regulations which are incorporated into the shoreline master program. So when it comes to things like buffers for Lake Stevens or for Little Pillchuk or for Katherine Creek, those are not being addressed through this project. Those will be addressed through the next periodic update to the shoreline master program. Um, and then just in general, when we're doing either land use applications or building permit review, they're required to demonstrate compliance with chapter 1488, which is our local ordinance. And then when it comes to submitting, especially for periodic updates, we work collaboratively with the Department of Commerce, Department of Ecology, uh we solicit feedback from the Department of Fish and Wildlife, as well as from other local agencies and from local tribes to make sure that we're getting kind of a holistic set of comments and set of

input in developing these regulations. So, just a really quick overview on the five types of critical areas. So we have uh wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas which are primarily streams and then the adjacent kind of repairarian corridors critical aquafer recharge areas which is one of the major additions for this year. That is um state law. It's a type of critical area. It's not we do not currently have that within chapter 1488. So, we're needing to develop new regulations, new maps, basically demonstrating where they are and how we are going to regulate uh their use. Uh basically uses that coincide with these aquafer recharge areas. And they're basically areas with a recharging effect for groundwater. And so they're susceptible to contamination. you need to make sure that your allowed uses as well as your development standards result essentially that you're not adversely impacting these areas. So that's kind of one of the major lifts of this update was actually adopting that language. And so we have some draft language in attachment one. Uh geologically hazardous areas, so steep slopes and other items and then frequently flooded areas. So, just a little bit about chapter 1488. Our last major update was adopted back in 2019. Um, you know, that was now 7 years ago. Um, and really there we're when you look at the best available science and you look at where the regulations are, especially for things like wetlands, we're still almost entirely within compliance with just a couple of exceptions, which are the areas of focus for this evening and really what we've been focusing on with this update. Um, wetland buffers, a bunch of other areas.

We're already meeting best available science. So, this is a relatively limited update that's just focused on a few specific areas. Um, as noted, we have four of the five required critical areas that are currently within the code. And we've developed draft language for critical aqua for recharge areas. Um and then this chapter you know covers a lot of things but you know buffers which is basically the additional areas beyond the delineated critical areas allowed activities mitigation requirements and just a whole slew of other items that's covered in chapter 1488. So, I'm just going to highlight a couple of the major changes that are included within the packet. Um, and happy to answer any questions uh related to these or any other items. But one of the areas that we did need to update to be consistent with best available science was our stream buffers. Um, so basically the areas that extend beyond uh the stream channel. Um, and so we currently have a 50-ft buffer for what are called type NP, which are perennial streams, type NS, which are seasonal streams. So those currently have a 50-ft buffer. Type F streams, which are fish bearing streams, um, that are not shorelines of the state or type S streams. Those have currently have a 100 foot buffer. And then the type s streams which are not subject uh to this update that will be potentially updated with the next S&P shoreline master program update have a 150 foot buffer. Uh so basically the best available science that uh has come out in recent years has shown that there needs to be at least a 100 foot buffer for all stream types. And so when you look at that table 1488-1 uh we are aligning our regulations with that best available science. basically bumping up the perennial and seasonal

streams from 50 ft to 100 ft and the fish bearing streams up to 150 ft uh to account for the presence of fish that they need a slightly larger buffer area. Uh the type F stream would then be consistent with the type S or shoreline of the state streams. Um and for those of you uh that you know for the non-new commissioners, we had a discussion a few months ago uh now about this concept of site potential tree height. Uh the initial recommendation from the department of fish and wildlife was basically to um adopt essentially riparian management zone along your stream corridors. um that would the the width of those would correspond with the maximum potential tree height of species of trees that are either native or can live within those areas in Lake Stevens. That would have resulted in buffers between 200 and 250 ft for pretty much all of our streams. About 85 to 90% of our streams would have been subject. So it would have in some areas quadrupled or almost quintupled them for some of the perennial and seasonal streams. We've since had conversations with our consultants, preliminary conversations with fish and wildlife and looked at uh ordinances that have been adopted for other jurisdictions within Snowomish County. And this approach to have the 100 ft for the perennial and seasonal streams and 150 ft for the fish bearing streams um has been found to be consistent with best available science and alternative approach uh to uh riparian management. And so, um, we think we're in a pretty good spot there. Uh, the other kind of major update, uh, as part of this critical areas ordinance update is adopting new regulations for

our crit critical aquifer recharge areas or CARAS. uh that's included on pages 40 to 45 of the packet is basically a whole new section uh that basically um goes in the place of a a since repealed section um of 1488. So there's a variety of items within this uh section of chapter 148 and it 1488 and includes designation mapping and rating requirements for cars. Um so cars are basically you know these areas with a recharging effect. Um there's concepts such as travel zones. So when you're dealing with uh groundwater basically you need to account for how that groundwater travels and you need to be able to regulate and manage your uses within that area. So that if you say have an industrial use that has the potential for contamination and you have either a sole source aquifer or some other type of aquafer recharge area, you want to make sure that your regulations are aligned so that you don't have the potential adverse environmental impacts related to say spills or something along those lines. And so you want to make sure that you're managing uses that you're establishing performance standards that are consistent with best available science. And so that's what uh that the pages 40 to 45 of the packet are basically developing those uh recommended uh regulations there within the car section. Uh it includes also a list of prohibited and regulated uses and then also specific critical area report requirements when you have a potential impact on a car. Um so that just includes a map uh there in the upper right of just some of the uh wellhead protection areas. Uh that could be uh social or so ackifers, it could be

private wells, community wells. basically need to establish um kind of a hierarchy of of how you regulate within these different cars and these wellhead protection areas and then what um you know appropriate performance standards and permissible uses are within there. So there are a number of other minor changes uh such as updated and new definitions. Um really making sure that we're emphasizing when you're dealing with critical areas. Obviously avoidance. Um there's what's called mitigation sequencing and establishing a hierarchy on how you should be dealing with critical areas. Obviously at the top of the food chain is avoidance. If you can avoid a critical area, you know, it's best to avoid it so that you don't have impacts on the critical area. It's buffer. Um, then you have minimization. Uh, then you have potential mitigation. So, just, you know, throughout the document, we just kind of sprinkled it in here and there just making sure that we're emphasizing that. um as I'll go into on on kind of the last slide is we still have some work to do on the chapter overall given that there are five different types of critical areas we still have a good amount of redundancy within within each subsection that kind of repeats a lot of the same language. So the changes that we've proposed to date that are shown in attachment one have really focused on the technical components. We still need to go back in and restructure the chapter a little bit and that's what we're going to be working on in the coming weeks. Uh before we make this available for public review, we want to strip out a lot of that redundancy. Um basically create kind of one section at the beginning that spells it out that this applies to every type of critical area. So you don't have to repeat these things in each individual section. So that's some things that we still need to do. But as far as some of the other

minor changes that are reflected in attachment one, um wanted to make sure that we clarified submittal requirements, uh when a project is subject to chapter 1488. Um simplifying and streamlining references to state law and definitions so that every time there's a minor tweak at the RCW or WAC level, we don't have to go in and make the change locally. It's a lot easier just to reference those sections. Um, and then to uh there were a couple other items besides the stream buffers. One of the other areas that we needed to update to reflect best available science was on wetland mitigation ratios. Um, primarily on the preservation side, we didn't have a preservation ratio, which is still kind of an interesting concept as far as creating a ratio for something that you're just essentially preserving. Um, but this is something that's, you know, spelled out uh at the state level. And so we're um trying to align our local regulations with that. So as I noted, kind of the the major item that we still need to do is really restructure it. Um kind of set establish one set of general provisions at the beginning of the document so that we can eliminate a lot of that redundancy. Um I had included a a reference in the staff report um the concept of functionally disconnected buffer. So, if you have a wetland and it's relatively close, but you have a long established road that basically splits that wetland from your development site, um there's guidance at the state level and then things that we can do at the local level through our critical areas ordinance that basically establishes how we deal with that. Um so that we're um you know recognizing that if there is essentially a functional barrier that basically eliminates all buffer function um that it should be treated as such. So we're continuing to work on some of that

language. Going to be uh working with commerce, ecology, fish and wildlife, local tribes and the public to you know once we have a review draft to get that out to get public comments on that. um and been working on just some ways to take what can be a relatively dry topic or something that seems very technical in nature. Uh one of our planners, Jill, has developed a a really good introductory story map that's basically a combination of graphics and maps. We had done one for the comp plan update as well. If you all remember, we had created a story map for that where you can just kind of scroll down the page and it brings up different graphics and maps and just kind of very short blurbs of narrative so that you don't get overwhelmed by um you know too much text. And so that's what we're going to be working on over the next couple months um in advance of public hearings later in the winter or or early in the spring. Um we're going to go into a little bit more at your joint meeting with the city council um as far as the role of the planning commission and the role of the city council. But for the new members, if you're not aware, this is a type six legislative amendment. So it requires a public hearing before both the planning commission and the city council. The planning commission holds their public hearing, makes a recommendation to the city council, and then the city council acts upon that recommendation before holding their public they hold their public hearing and then ultimately adopt the changes via city council ordinance. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions related to this or any other items that are included in the packet. Um and yeah, look forward to uh the discussion. So, commissioners, ask away or Yeah, go ahead.

Thank you. This is Commissioner Jennifer Davis. I had a question that um involves the purpose and intent section which I believe is on page 12 of the packet. Um and this has to do with the sequencing hierarchy, the mitigation sequencing hierarchy. There's a sixth component. So this would be subsection A6 that um is going to be added uh monitoring and I was curious about that but about who performs that task. What's the vision for the monitoring component?

So we have monitoring requirements that are included within chapter 1488 as far as depending on the type of critical area um and the classification and the rating as far as how long you need to do monitoring. So, um, I'd have to look back through what this the specific requirements are, but we typically have like a 3 to 5 year period. And so, on the permitting side of things, we set up basically reminders within our permitting software that, hey, there's a monitoring report that is due. Um, say somebody had delineated a wetland and they were proposing to use buffer averaging and there was potential impacts to that wetland and they were required to do mitigation. we basically through through the permitting side of things for um development proposals um they're required to prepare these monitoring reports. And so we just wanted to establish that and that make that consistent with the best available science is that you have all of your steps to avoid impacts to minimize impacts to mitigate impacts and then you have to monitor impacts and the proposed mitigation to account for those impacts. So that's that's the thought process behind that monitoring component. So, Commissioner Der just um you know, in reading through this, this appears to um uh be a a good attempt to strike a balance between the kind of statutorial need for development versus uh you know, protections of of wetlands. And um and one of the things that we keep coming back to is the concept of best available science. Um who is the arbiter of what that is? And when we make a good faith effort to use that, what's you know, what's to say that uh Department of Commerce might say, well, this is our best available science versus fish and wildlife, which may have something entirely different.

Yeah. So, best available science as a concept. I mean, it encompasses a lot of different sources. I mean there's typically for wetlands and streams and geologically hazardous areas you'll get some general best available science from the pertinent or applicable state agency. So whether that's DNR, whether that's fish and wildlife, whether that's ecology, basically who has the primary regulatory role um in managing these critical areas or at least establishing kind of the criteria at the state level and the regulations and standards at the state level. Um basically what we need to do and what we did um you know what our consultants did was prepare a best available science document where they assess all of this different information say kind of try to synthesize it down to a relatively high level and say this is how we're addressing you know all of these different sources and you know why we're proposing you know a good example would be for the uh stream buffers is that, you know, Fish and Wildlife came out with essentially a best available science document as far as why you should be adopting these riparian management zones based on site potential tree height, but it also did allow for cities to do alternative analysis. And so, we've done that and worked with our consultants on that. So as long as you do your best available science analysis at the local level uh which we'll have as a standalone technical document to kind of supplement this is that um you still need to get it reviewed um by commerce and you submit it to ecology. Um but I think that we're in a pretty good spot as far as as as far as the best available science analysis that we've done for this project.

Thank you. So, this is Commissioner Morton. I have a few co questions and comments. So, uh when we first discussed this, uh you showed a map of how with the the full buffers that wildlife fish and wildlife are, uh are suggesting it was it would knock out massive chunks of the city um uh with these super wide buffers. Uh but still uh I'm I'm glad that it looks like we'll be able to get that reduced down or so not or not increased as much as we feared. Um but even at that uh with the expansion of these buffers, there's a lot of structures that are already inside those expanded buffers. And so how does this affect the the the current property owners that already have structures and and and such that are within these renewed buffers?

Yeah. So existing structures and I mean this is a good kind of educational opportunity for those that kind of haven't dealt with this. Um would essentially if they were legally built, they're vested to the regulations that were in place at the time of the construction. And so if somebody built a house 50 years ago and it's 5 ft back from a stream, it would be considered conforming to our regulations because it would be what's called legal non-conforming. And so when you change your regulations and basically create a non-conforming situation, um, you know, the because they're vested, I mean, you're not you're not bringing them out of compliance. They're just a little bit more limited in what they can do. So, it's important to have within your regulations maintenance and, you know, renovation and all sorts of different topics within there so that you can still get use of your property. You know, if you have a 100-year-old house and it's 5 ft from a stream, um, you know, your house, you're going to need to do maintenance to it. And so there's still going to be activities you generally allowed to m you know remain within the existing building footprint or within the existing imperous surface footprint. Um so kind of the the long and the short of it is that they would be considered legal non-conforming. There are certain things and maintenance that they can do. There is some language related to say you had a you know a complete foundation or you were wanting to do kind of a major renovation. And as long as you're not expanding beyond that, you would typically be able to do that. Um, we're just required to adopt local regulations for how we deal with non-conforming situations like that.

So, it doesn't affect landscaping or or uh yard work or things like that. No, I mean unless you're doing a certain amount of grading or other land disturbance within there where you may be subject to it. But if you have say an established lawn, um yeah, I mean mowing your lawn within there. Uh what about sheds if there's existing sheds or or new?

Well, what if I want to build a shed? What if uh yeah, someone who's in that in that buffer and they want to put a shed in their backyard? I mean, if it's a new development, it would be subject, you know, a new structure, it would be subject to the new regulations. If there was an existing shed, um, then it would essentially be, you know, vested or grandfathered in. But if somebody's wanting to put something in, um, new, then it would be subject unless there's some sort of exemption for, you know, there there are allowed activities, there are exemptions, but generally that doesn't apply to structures. Um, the other question I had, you pretty much answered it and that was about if you got a stream and you got a road and there's an empty piece of property on the other side and now the expanded buffer now extends into that yard which is physically separated from the stream by the road. Looks like you're already uh uh working on the language to clarify that that that expanded buffer does not include land on the other side of of an existing uh separating barrier.

Yeah. And Russ had comm director Wright had prepared kind of a code interpretation last year addressing this just you know in advance of of doing that. So, we have most of that language that's kind of developed. We just need to incorporate it into this chapter. And I think I provided a hyperlink to the code interpretation within the staff report, but it basically it addresses situations just like that. Um, we've had development projects that have been graveled for a hundred years and there's no, you know, wetland vegetation, but it, you know, directly adjacent to them, it might show, you know, a wetland or a wetland buffer that comes into it, but it's basically lost all of its habitat and ecological function because it's been disturbed by gravel for so long or by a road. And so essentially you're establishing an effective buffer on a case-byase basis. When it comes to that, you're saying normally the buffer would be 100 ft or 150 ft, but because it's been permanently disturbed, the buffer essentially ends at the edge of the wetland boundary basically.

Good. Good. Um the the only the other thing I have is not a question, more like a a comment or a suggestion. So, um, the Department of Fish and Wildlife has essentially taken urban land away from the city because they've expanded these buffers that are that if and when you brought it up on the map, it's it's a huge if you added it all up, it's a huge chunk of land. And I I saw the comment that uh with these with the limited expansion, we'll still be able to meet our growth targets for numbers, but I'm sure there is a number of that that were reduced uh because of the expansion that we're that we are going to try to get or reduction of the expansion that we're trying to get, whatever. Uh my my suggestion is that uh we've been trying to work with the county another department of the government uh to expand our UG uh and we've been continually told no. And then we have another department of the government saying uh we're taking away your urban growth area. We're turning it into riparian area. Uh it seems like to to me that the next time we apply for expansion of our UG, we should take the numbers uh and say to the county and say, "Hey, look, Fish and Wildlife has taken away this amount of land and it has taken away this many number of people that can come into the city, this amount of uh territory or or or land area that is that we're giving up uh for riparian area. we at least deserve to get that additional amount of territory or land uh expanded in our our UG. That's just a thought on on my

thought on my area. I don't know what what's do you have a comment about that? No, and I and I appreciate that that perspective and it is something it has an impact on development potential and it it can be hard to really quantify it especially with smaller lots that are now eligible for duplexes which then can then be zero you know zero lot line subdivided. It's hard to come up with a specific number as far as the number of units. So we had to make some assumptions. We had our intern Cameron um Proud Lake Stevens resident um helped us with a lot of that back in the fall and got some really good information from from that. And it's yeah it's it's something that you know was a major reason why we kind of went with the alternative approach and tried to you know there's basically the best available science showed that you can get 95% of your ecological function by establishing a 100 foot buffer. So from that we took well you need to balance that you know what's the benefit of adding another 125 ft buffer if it's only going to add another 5% of ecological function when the growth management act doesn't just cover critical areas it covers housing it covers land use it covers transportation all these things all of these conflicting priorities so that factored in I think that the science was was pretty set as far as that you really needed that at least that 100 ft so that was kind of the bas baseline. And so both our baseline and our proposed standard for the type uh for the seasonal and perennial streams were at that 100 ft as opposed to trying to bump that up any farther. And I think, you know, I think fish and wildlife, we've kind of had some initial discussions and they obviously would prefer more because they're looking at it just from the lens of, you know, fish protection and, you know, fish habitat and I and I totally get that. And but, you know, there are other agencies that understand that as well, including the Department of

Commerce having just gone through the comp plan update and that cities had difficult times like meeting their growth targets, you know, required some reszones and and all of that. And so for us, you know, on the single family side, we had such a large surplus of single family residential capacity and that's, you know, where a lot of these streams are. And so, you know, we could potentially lose a couple hundred units of single family residential capacity and we still have a 1500 unit surplus. if it were to adversely impact the multifamily residential, there's a couple areas on on 99th that, you know, potentially would have an impact. But, you know, we've done the math and kind of shown that it that we can still meet our growth targets cuz, you know, it's it's the it's the push and pull, the tugging of the growth management act is like you start bumping up your stream buffers and it brings you out of compliance with your growth targets and you got to open back up your comp plan. And so

that's why we that's why I'm I'm suggesting that we we pit the fish and wildlife against commerce and say hey look you guys have put us in this bad position and uh or at least get fish and wildlife on our side to say hey look we need to get more more urban growth area

and I think that's why fish and wild I mean I think you know to you know not beating up on fish and wildlife I think that's why they have allowed for this alternative analysis and if you can demonstrate through your best available science that 100 foot buffer is enough that they would have preferred to have the, you know, 238t buffer for a seasonal stream down off of Stitch Lake. But it's like that's not really feasible when we also have these growth targets and when the best available science shows that you can get almost all of that ecological and habitat function at 100 ft instead of 238 ft.

Well, that's my comments and questions. What uh with the rest of you? I was just going to ask if you could restate your um comment. At 100 feet you get 85% about 95% is what the best available science shows when it comes to like pollutant removal and general habitat function uh both on the you know on the plant side of things and then on the animal side of things. So

gotcha. And then that's where you came up with 100 ft for um the tree. So the the 100 feet is a kind of a more standard, you know, traditional 100 foot buffer from the edge of the stream. Um whereas the kind of what Fish and Wildlife has been proposing is essentially to create instead of like a delineated stream and then a buffer that extends beyond that. You're essentially creating what's called like a riparian management zone um where it kind of just encompasses this much larger area. Um, and so we're proposing the more traditional approach based on the alternative analysis done as part of our best available science review that shows that that 100 foot buffer accomplishes almost all of the same as what this larger riparian management zone does, but it also allows us to, you know, um, balance with all these other competing priorities better than having these huge RMZs.

Thanks, Anybody else? I only have one quick qu and it's not even a question. I'll be curious to see how this marries with what is being proposed for the Hartford Industrial. Um that is an area that has critical areas surrounding it. We flood often and the use of the buildings that is there have been entirely taken over by one industry. So I'm going to be very curious to see how that's going to be married. Great. Thank you.

I This is Amy Luwendowski. I do have one more question I guess or topic just to bring up while we're talking about the critical areas and growth targets and growth targets as linear versus like the rises and the plateaus. Um it's my assumption or what I what I am seeing is like I feel like the growth target or what we've been growing very quickly very linearly and I wonder like how that's going to rise more or if it's going to start to plateau and it won't feel like we're growing so fast.

Yeah. And I mean the growth targets are a very inexact science. I mean they're basically there's um you know a population and employment growth target that's set for the state. It's then allocated to the counties. The counties then work collaboratively within you know their local jurisdictions with work with the counties. So here it's through Snowomish County tomorrow which is has membership from all the member cities as well as staff um from Snowomish County. And so to be honest I mean we historically have outperformed our growth targets. Um, you know, we've we had all of this, you know, the last 15 years, we had a bunch of green field development. And so, you know, all the smart builders that acquired things during the recession and then came out of that and between, you know, 2012 and 2015. And especially the south side of the city kind of fundamentally changed just cuz subdivision popped up everywhere. We're we're starting to see less of that. We're more and more reliant on duplexes and town homes just because we do not have those large swaths of green field development anymore. Um but you know the the growth targets are revisited as part of each comprehensive plan periodic update. You know cities are required to report to the department of commerce as far as how many units they're developing. And um historically, you know, cities like Everett have kind of underperformed just cuz there still has been a market preference for detached single family residential. Um you know, and that was available in places like, you know, Lake Stevens and Mary'sville and some of the the north county areas and east county areas that maybe didn't exist in in Lynwood or both um or Admins or Everett. And so it's kind of something that we need to revisit and it's something that we factor in as far as you know when we made a request to expand our UG way back

in gez that was like 2020 even though it was for the 2024 periodic for the county comprehensive plan. We basically had to submit our UG request almost four years in advance and you know they recommended basically against all of it. Um, so it's something that we factor in is like, hey, we've done a great job. We've adopted all of these infill housing regulations. We've done all of these things and we're still, you know, having growing pains. And so that is then factored into some of our requests to expand the UG in kind of smart ways, you know, like let us go a little bit above 92 or let us go a little bit down SR9. I mean, these are areas that are generally already urban or at least suburban in nature. And so we factor all of those things in and kind of long story short, the growth targets are are not exact and you know they're going to be changing and we just need to document our efforts.

Gotcha. Thank you. It's Commissioner Connor Davis. I just pulled up the article Ever Herald that I read before we moved here in 2018. It's from 2015 and at the time Lake Stevens was planning for 39,340 people by 2035. Mhm. Um obviously we're what 42,000ish right now. So um yeah to put it simply yeah that that keeps getting pushed and pushed and pushed.

Yeah. And I mean that incorporates our UG but even incorporating the UG and we've annexed most of that since you know that number including the UG used to be 39 then it was in the low 40s then it was in the mid-40s and now it's in kind of the low 50s. Uh cuz just our city proper is up in the high 40s now as far as the growth target. And so um yeah, it's gone up and it's as as the city and as the state continues to attract more and more people, it has to be distributed and you know, these are all discussions and the sh the the city has shown an ability to accommodate that growth and there's still going to be growing pains, but it's yeah, it's happening all throughout the state. Um, and it's just something that especially when we have when we're dealing with things like critical areas and shorelines and all of that, there's just there's a whole bunch of layers of information that we just have to drop on top of each other and it it makes it, you know, interesting to plan. So,

can I add just one thing? This is Commissioner Jennifer Davis. I this is a a thought I've had many times over the years, which is the term target. Um, it sounds like a goal and I wish that the term was quota or requirement. Um, because I think sometimes the public hears us talk about our growth targets as if we're, you know, really hopeful that we'll Yay.

Yeah. Yeah. And, um, I think it detracts a little bit from the very careful planning that goes on with the staff and with the work that we do on the city council, too, because that that word, I'm sure, at the state level, they love that word. They're like, great, everybody, you've got your target, go do it. But from our perspective, we're more like trying to, you know, do it in a thoughtful way. So I always think such a strange term of art for this. But great discussion county level for as long as I've been doing everybody doesn't mind that. Uh we've heard from everyone except for Commissioner Sals. Any questions or comments about uh this um section?

Uh Commissioner SS? No, not at this point. I'm just doing a lot of listening and learning. Thank you. Okay, great. All right. Well, um there's no action for this required. So, uh we look forward to seeing more pro progress on this in the early spring as you said and um given that we will continue on to the joint meeting discussion. Director Wright.

Okay. Um this is director Wright for the record. So, I just wanted to chat with the commission a little bit tonight about your thoughts on the joint meeting. Um, last year we took an approach where all of the commissioners had submitted some comments and really looking for robust dialogue. Um, this year I don't know that that would work as well with the major change to the city council and um, you have a couple of new faces on the planning commission as well and a couple of folks on the planning commission that are only a couple of years in. So my proposal would be to do a training session um that would benefit both the planning commission and the city council and really set you on the same trajectory with the same sort of knowledge base. So what I propose is going over some planning 101. You know why do we do comprehensive plans? What are the impact of the development regulations that come out of those? What are the roles and responsibilities of both groups? planning commission being that um down in the trenches advisory group and the city council is the legislative authority that you know has the final call and budgetary kind of say in these things. So anyway, that's um my thought and I wanted to get some feedback from the planning commission and I have um put together a draft slideshow already that really covers all of those topics broadly. So anyway, just wanted to hear from the planning commission on your thoughts or if there's anything else you would like to include. Uh, Commissioner Huxford, you you have thoughts. I can see it and so does Commissioner Derer as I'm looking at my peripheral vision. So, who wants to go first?

As the microphones swing around.

Uh, I I like that approach. I think it would be very helpful because we have a lot of new faces. Um, I think one thing that would be very helpful not only for the commissioners and the new council members but also the public to hear would be what is the limitations of the authority of both council and commission? Um, one of the things I hear a lot is, you know, why are we getting another one of these type of stores? Why can't we have that type of store? And, you know, it's it's beyond the purview of of either body. Um, so I think it would be really good for uh for the public at least if not us uh to understand that that restriction. Not another teriyak place.

That's exactly that's exactly another taco shop. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. We can We have the power of zoning. Yeah. An abomination. Yeah. I mean the power of zoning is one thing. The ability to select who goes into that zone is is another. Yeah. That that is just the comment that I was going to say. There's there's a there's a huge misconception and uh and and I think there were some some um members of the city uh council lost their seats because of that misconception and

okay. Uh but the one thing that I would add this Commissioner Connor Davis is uh there have been there have been times particularly around the the uh city owned property um off of

oh my gosh by the Target that's Chapel Hill. Thank you. uh where that was under like the cloak of darkness being auctioned off and we had a pretty vipiferous, you know, not even debate. We were unanimous in kind of like and appalled at how that was being handled and the city was the the council goes on to the council and the council just continues to move forward with it. um that there is for the the the current council to understand like for me at least I still have like a little bit of scar tissue from that one. Um that was a tough that that yeah that was really challenging to know where the community stood, where the commission stood and where the council clearly was so far off the reservation from where everybody else was. um for them to understand that history of lack of communication and being on the same page that the uh the planning commission has been w with the council and I would say with the the city is populace has been on with the council as well

and and I would say with that particular example that is actually a good one of making a distinction between the roles of the planning commission and the city council where that is a city council purely city council discretionary action even though the planning commission may have opinions. But yeah, so that's another example of clearly people understanding the roles and why those decisions are are made and acted upon by different Sure. different parties. Yeah. Commissioner Huxford, you had a comment. You

Well, since I keep getting called out on this, um I don't know how this can be addressed, but I have been now called out um uh which became public record because the person that did it um for cronyism um in some decisions that were made. Um I also watched the last city council meeting where there was some decorum um checks during that and we always come in as sort of the the little sister of city council and yet I have long since thought that our discussions are more robust that we're much more respectful that we delve into things further than some have and can. And right now especially I would um personally ask because you know I love a good training

but I would personally ask that um we come in as not an also ran that we come in as side by side and um that perhaps they defer not they don't have to take our decisions that's not our role roles are roles um but there's some experience here that I think they could learn from and that they sorely need if I could be so bold and that I refuse to be um sitting in a training with people that are going to make me feel bad for being there. Okay. Appreciate that perspective.

So So did I hear you right that um maybe some of this has to do with the the um what's the what's the name of the the where we talked about the um the what's it called? the the the the four no the four types of uh I forget the acronym. It's the uh the four types of like the shelters, the step housing, the step housing, the step Yeah. the step discussion. You know, we went over that for many hours and and months and uh and then the city council says no. And uh I think

we should maybe confront that up front because that was a that was a point of contention between the two of us and it's for us for us to just brush over maybe. Would do do you think that would be valid to discuss? I I think you've lost most of the people that change the direction of that discussion. Well, then we could at least establish that as a uh case study as a as a case study. Yes. Of uh so I'm still hearing we talk about roles a lot in different ways from everyone.

Yeah. I would just say that I mean this isn't definitely is not unique to Lake Stevens. I've worked in a number of different cities and there's always differing opinions and yeah when it comes down to it the council has that legislative role and gets to adopt by ordinance and they can tweak the recommendations and unfortunately that's just the reality. We know what a amazing work you guys do and how much effort you put into your thing. So I can we can understand where that would be frustrating and I think it would be be productive to have those conversations

and I think yeah we can absolutely um provide context that the planning commission does do the hard work and you debate these you send staff out to bring you examples from other jurisdictions to do further research so you can really understand it. So I think that's absolutely valid to to bring up the work that you and the pride you put in the product that you send along. So I'm happy to have that in the the slide deck. Thank you.

Um this is Amy Luwendowski. In my observation for sitting in the audience at city council meetings and having witnessed these interactions because I don't know the rules and and such is opportunity for us to ever make those citizen comments to talk directly to council for 3 minutes about the work that's being done or is it being trans is the work being done here translated by you by the city official? do anything you want as a citizen. Sure. That's really the role of your liaison is to carry forward the flavor of

these discussions, but if there are things you're passionate about, okay, to attend as a public as a citizen and make your comments as appropriate. Sure. And our liaison is um Ryan. Ryan Donn. Is he online? Yes, I'm here. There he is. Okay. I I would disclose that you are a planning commissioner, that you're a seated planning commissioner, but I would absolutely um I I feel like many times.

Yeah, I feel like that would be very valuable or I could have I can look back and say if one of y'all had the microphone for three minutes that that would have been very interesting and impactful or I wonder if it would have been. That's my comment. I believe in the past uh there have been uh at times statements or joint statements made um with mixed results uh that we were not speaking on behalf of the planning commission but that several planning commissioners felt a particular way on a topic um and like any public comment that can be done with any number of ways. Sure.

Any other thoughts about the joint meeting for next week? Right. What's uh do we have a schedule of when that is again? It's uh I'm sorry. It's next the meeting's next week, right? Correct. The 27th. Okay, great. And it will be towards the beginning of the meeting. Okay, great. Okay, thank you. All right, so um we'll now go on to commissioner reports and let's start with Commissioner Huxford.

I have a good one this um week. I am very pleased to announce that for the first time ever, my husband and I are sponsoring a scholarship for a Lake Stevens High School senior. Um it is called the Huxford Work Investing in Skl Trades Scholarship and we are awarding monies towards someone or someone's that have a plan to um get certified as apprentice or in a trade. Um and we are looking forward to supporting that. So very exciting. We went through the Lake Semens um education foundation. It has been um accepted and presented at both here and snow is, uh we can't wait to review and pick our recipients.

I know. All right. Oh, uh let me step back and just uh clarify for those new to the commission. Um the commissioner's report time is where we do a round table and where everyone gets a chance to either bring up an issue uh uh uh that's not on the agenda or uh to talk about things that are related or have questions or concerns uh with related to planning commission business. So just to let you know. Thanks. All right. Uh Jennifer Davis.

Uh I have two things. Um one I wanted to mention that I this is a kudos to the city. I ran from I live over on the west side of Seattle and I ran to Jay's Market um crossway 9 and um and then came along the low is it the lower road not the one by the high school but anyway I did not die because there is a dedicated pedestrian bike area now that I don't remember from years ago when I tried to do it and so that was so exciting to me to be able to make it from the west side of Lake Stevens into downtown on foot. Okay. So you said you ran from West Seattle

to Jade and I was like I am just like dude you are amazing. I met Westside West Side Lake. No, not West Seattle. We started last week. Yes. I would definitely die if I did that. Wow. Um I my point with that was that for years we've talked about being able to traverse the lake and it was so exciting to be able to make it five miles without being um and the second thing was I just wanted to welcome Commissioner SS and Commissioner Luwendowski. We're so excited to have you with us and looking forward to the year. Thank you. Excellent. Commissioner SS.

Um obviously I have no report first meeting but uh again thank you everybody for having me here. I look forward to working with fellow commissioners, city council, and with city staff. So, thank you very much, Honor Davis.

Yeah. Um the the only things uh I've several by neighbors, everybody's just wondering what's going on on 20th Street here with the this has been going on for 18 19 months now. Um the the work on the pump station. uh if there's any update at all possible on what's going on with that. Um it was supposed to be done sometime like last year. I think it was only supposed to be a few months. Um and and separately, uh when it comes to the the crosswalks downtown, I know it's I mentioned this a million times. Um they did get repainted and now they are not visible once again. Um, and I I take a group of kids from North Lake Middle School out a couple days a week and that is like playing Frogger. Um, I think that as a city it would go a long way for us to have some kind of education around how like that citizens like pedestrians have the right of way. Um it's uh yeah it's it's really challenging especially going with a group of 11 12 13year-old kids and they are yeah they're scared to cross the street and they can see how distracted people are um further if there's um work that we can do with Snowish County to connect the Centennial Trail um and 16th Street to have a crosswalk that gets us over to Lake Stevens Community Park to truly connect these these like these conduits of recreation. Um that's another area where particularly when it gets to,

you know, 4:15, 4:30 on a, you know, during the weekday, uh this time of year, it's getting to that um it's starting to get dark out. Um so that would be awesome for the city to take that on to communicate with the um with the uh the county because I'm sure that that is all county, you know, their purview. Um, but otherwise, uh, you know, family and I, we love coming down. We're super excited about the project here, uh, downtown. We'll be there for the ribbon cutting on the 27th. Appreciate it.

Great. Amy Luwendowski, I'm new and I keep talking a lot. Sorry. Um, I wrote this down like last week actually for the thing I wanted to bring up and it's really interesting that it's very similar to what the Davises are saying. Um, I wrote down how non-drivers navigate around the lake and whether that's a map to kind of help show folks like what was your route, how did you do it safely, you know, and and how Yeah. and where where is community park and where some people don't know where North Cove Park is and such and um and I don't know if the parks rec department is doing this already, but just highlighting these outdoor open spaces, these wreck areas, and then maybe Yep. how do we get from places to place safely? I think it would be really helpful for our community and I think that there there are routes and there are a lot of open spaces to utilize and we need to talk about them and promote them and use them.

Great. Um Commissioner Der um wanted to uh just extend a welcome to our two new commissioners. Um you know the strength of this uh board is in the discourse that we have together. We all come from different uh walks of life, different experiences, and us bringing those together and having conversations allows us to put um you know the best possible plans forward for Lake Stevens and welcome to you. I'm glad you're here. Um also, uh congratulations to our new president, uh President Morton. Okay, that's all I've got. I think chair I'm not president. I believe benevolent dictator. I'll fit you for a sash and get you some sunglasses.

There you go. Welcome aboard. Great.

Okay. So, uh for me, um I was I came across an article um in I've never been to this website before, but it's called governmenttechnology.com and it is um uh it talks about Honolulu is among cities bringing AI to planning and permitting. This is probably something that that you've already known about, but I'm just just bring it up just in case you haven't. So it basically talks about how uh the city of Honolulu and in also Belleview and Louisville, Kentucky are uh have just begun adopting uh these AI platforms that do pre-screening of uh of of uh per permit applications and uh they've found that it uh greatly reduces the back and forth with applicants and reduces the workload and uh most importantly shortens the permit time. Uh and uh I know that you've done a lot to shorten the the time that it takes to get permits, but uh I was wondering if uh you had you were aware of this. One of the platforms is called civ check.ai and the other one is called govstream.ai. And um so just wonder if you thought you don't have to talk about it, but just thought I'd bring it up. Great.

Um, and so that is all. So now the next is commission uh director's report. Okay. I had a couple of scheduled reports. It looks like one of them at least the the text part didn't make it into your packet, but before that I will address some of the questions posed tonight. What's going on on 20th Street? That's a Lake Stevens sewer district project. They've run into lots of construction issues along the way. Poor soils. Uh I believe freezing

some of the uh contractors out there. So they've just had a slew of problems with that construction and I can't give you an anticipated um uh completion date. Do you have any more details on that? I don't, but I can certainly find out and we can report back at the next meeting. Great.

Um, as far as walkways, use Citizens Connect. If you have issues that need corrected, submit a work order and that's the best way to bring that to attention. Otherwise, we have an annual pavement preservation program that includes a striping program. Um and so that is part of public works some annual work program. As to your question about resources, um we do have on our website a list of maps of all parks. We have our parks and trails plan that I would assume is on our website. So we do have a lot of these resources. It's just um finding them um a lot of the time

um but a lot of them are out there. As to your comment on AI, that's something the mayor's very interested in and I've been researching for a couple of years and we're doing some baby steps um using some AI and some of our work product um and that's definitely on my list and the mayor's wish list is to identify an appropriate AI platform to use as like a chatbot or rescreen for the permitting world. So, that is something we're looking at and hopefully that's an investment we can bring forward in 2027.

Russ, could I ask a quick question? Um, just piggybacking off of Commissioner Luwendowski's question. I So, I just pulled up the park locations, the map. Um, I'm going to Fort Collins in a few months. One of the first things that I do is I go and I look up the the trails and bike trails. I want to figure out, okay, do I need to even rent a car when I go to this place? Sure.

And is I know that I can just I can get a bike and I can get everywhere that I need to go and it shows me where bike paths are. It shows me where, you know, standalone these are dedicated bike paths, where it's going to be shared, etc. That I'm assuming is probably maybe closer to what Commissioner Luendowski is referring to. Where are sidewalks that people can use? Um, where is are there bike paths? I don't know that there are bike paths in did you you said there was a

there are and so again that's in our our trails plan and there's also a ped plan so parks has put out a trails master plan and public works has published a pedestrian plan and I can't tell you what the full okay content of those documents are but I know they clearly show linkages and locations of a variet iety of active transportation facilities. Okay.

Just interesting being like the end user, right? And have and um I know Connor Davis is quite savvy and you're having a little so it's a little bit challenging. Yeah.

Okay. And then on to a couple of other reports. Um, as was mentioned earlier, the city has awarded a contract to build the museum and retail building. It's going to be known as Milspur Yard, and we're super excited about that project. Been working on that for a couple of years, and we are going to have a groundbreaking next Tuesday at 300 p.m. So then there's a rendering of what the museum building will look like. So, we're super excited and wanted to bring that to the planning commission because there are at least two of you that were here through the planning process of downtown and really contributed to that vision. And having a cornerstone building down here was always part of one of the five big um things we wanted to get out of the downtown plan. And that's like number five. So, we've pretty much accomplished all of the big goals that came out of that plan that were um a city city initiated improvement. So, pretty exciting stuff.

Awesome. And you also can go out there and see the banners that was also envisioned um with the beautifification plan and the buildout of Main Street, another project from that plan. So, the next report I have for you tonight, Russ, are are you able to possibly speak to the uh the occupants of the building? We don't have tenants lined up yet. No tenants are lined up. Okay. And I think we're going to have nails down below and teriyak up above. You're heard of your first.

Yeah. Actually, it's a Trader Joe's. Oh my god. Don't believe anything I've said in the last one minute. Yes. Okay. Strike that from the record as I see everybody's Twitter account. It's on YouTube now.

Okay. So just the last thing I wanted to touch base on just for the good of the entire commission before we went um after we went through the selection process for the new commissioners uh commissioner Huxford had sort of asked do we have a training program what does that look like and answer was yes we do and I just wanted to share with the entire commission what the information is that we bring forward to the new commissioners. So again, it's a sort of a refresher for you. So I won't go over all of that, but that is what the training session that we had with Commissioner Sauls and Luendowski. And again, just for the rest of the board, it's there as a refresher. Again, the roles, responsibilities, crash course on some of the different um laws that we adhere to, open public meetings act, legislative priority or parliamentary procedures. So just all of those basic things we do and there's sort of a summary graphic created by AI plugged in the report and said can you spit out a graphic and

it did. There you go. So there you go. That's all I wanted to say about that. Excellent. Any questions for for me this evening? Seeing none uh I think that we are through our agenda. If there is anyone who would like to make a motion to adjurnn, that would be great. We have a second. Second. Thank you. We are Oh, see we vote. All those in favor, please say I. I. All right. We arejourned.