17.114.180 Mitigation requirements – SMP.
(1) The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of a critical area or areas to the maximum extent feasible. Unless otherwise provided in this chapter, if alteration to the critical area is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to critical areas and buffers resulting from a development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated using the best available science in accordance with an approved critical area report and SEPA documents, so as to result in no net loss of critical area functions and values.
(2) Mitigation shall be in kind and on site, when possible, and sufficient to maintain the functions and values of the critical area, and to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a critical area. Off-site or out-of-kind mitigation may be approved only in cases where it provides significant ecological benefit based in a watershed or catchment approach.
(3) Mitigation shall not be implemented until after city approval of a critical area report that includes a mitigation plan, and mitigation shall be in accordance with the provisions of the approved critical area report.
(4) Mitigation Sequencing. Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas. When an alteration to a critical area is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated for in the following sequential order of preference:
(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts;
(c) Rectifying the impact to critical areas, including wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project;
(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance during the life of the action and where appropriate reducing a hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineered or other methods where preservation would maintain an unacceptable level of risk;
(e) Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments;
(f) Monitoring the required compensation and taking remedial or corrective action when necessary; and
(g) Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures.
(5) The city may encourage, facilitate, and approve innovative mitigation projects that are based on the best available science. Conducting mitigation as part of a cooperative process does not reduce or eliminate the required replacement ratios. Advance mitigation or approved in-lieu fee mitigation sites, or mitigation banking, are examples of alternative mitigation projects allowed under the provisions of this section wherein one or more applicants, or an organization with demonstrated capability, may undertake a mitigation project together if it is demonstrated that all of the following circumstances exist:
(a) Creation or enhancement of a larger system of critical areas and open space is preferable to the preservation of many individual habitat areas;
(b) The group demonstrates the organizational and fiscal capability to act cooperatively;
(c) The group demonstrates that long-term management of the habitat area will be provided;
(d) There is a clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the identified mitigation site; and
(e) Any mitigation bank or approved in-lieu fee mitigation site utilized shall be eligible for use approved in accordance with Chapter 90.84 RCW as applicable.
(6) Timing. Any approved mitigation shall be completed concurrently with project impacts. The community development department may choose to accept a performance bond when seasonal restrictions occur, when availability of the mitigation site is limited, or when on-site construction will impact the critical area.
(7) Mitigation shall be required for all unauthorized impacts. (Ord. 1373 § 29, 2014; Ord. 1164 § 4, 2004).