Panel Makes Another Bid For Stream Protection Rules Proposal For New-Development Buffers Similar To One Commissioners Softened

The Spokane County Planning Commission is recommending a “critical areas” ordinance strikingly similar to one county commissioners softened a year ago.

The commissioners’ version was rejected by the regional Growth Management Act hearings board, which said there was no proof the ordinance was based on science. The state requires counties to write laws protecting streams, wetlands, forests and other sensitive areas.

A key provision of the ordinance is the minimum distance between new development and streams.

After three years of contentious debate, a committee that included environmentalists and developers in 1995 suggested buffers of 25 feet to 200 feet, depending on the size of the stream and other factors. Neither group was happy with the proposal.

That recommendation was sent to the planning commission, which held hearings before recommending buffers of 150 feet to 250 feet. County commissioners instead adopted the recommendations of the citizens committee.

The ordinance was successfully challenged by a Spokane environmentalist. The hearings board didn’t comment on the size of the buffers, but said the county had to show that it based its decision on the “best available science.”

After another hearing and more debate, the planning commission is recommending buffers of 250 feet for the Spokane and Little Spokane rivers, and Latah and Rock Creek, as well as some other streams.

Buffers on smaller streams would be 25 to 100 feet, depending on the size of the stream and other considerations.

Those buffers are based on state Department of Fish and Wildlife recommendations.

County commissioners get the final say on the planning commission’s proposal, although any changes likely would be challenged.

One planning commission member who voted against many of the latest recommendations said the scientific studies used this year are no better than those the citizens committee used to reach its compromise. Tom Hargreaves said he thinks the committee’s work should be honored, even though he would prefer more protection for streams.

“They had as good a reason for the numbers they came up with as anyone has,” said Hargreaves.

In addition to the stream buffers, the planning commission recommends:

Adding penalties of up to $50 a day for violating the ordinance.

Penalties were recommended by the citizens committee and the original planning commission proposal, but were stripped from the ordinance by county commissioners.

The hearings board said the ordinance must include penalties.

Minimum qualifications for the experts developers must hire for wetlands studies. County commissioners had argued there was no need for such qualifications, as long as the studies met county standards.

, DataTimes