Article 4. Mitigation
14.100.070 Mitigation Requirements.
A. The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of a critical area or areas. Unless otherwise provided in this chapter, if alteration to the critical area is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to or from 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.
B. 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.
C. The director may approve off-site mitigation if the applicant demonstrates that no viable on-site mitigation opportunities exist. Compensatory mitigation proposed off site shall be provided in the location that will provide the greatest ecological benefit and have the greatest likelihood of success. Preference will be given to off-site mitigation as close as possible to the impact area and within the same watershed subbasin as the permitted alteration; provided, that off-site mitigation may occur within the watershed of a stream or river flowing into the Grays Harbor estuary and within WRIA 22 upon demonstration through a watershed- or landscape-based analysis that mitigation within an alternative subbasin of the watershed would have greater ecological benefit. Off-site mitigation sites preference shall be given to sites and restoration activities identified in an adopted shoreline restoration plan pursuant to Chapter 173-26 WAC, a watershed planning document prepared and adopted pursuant to Chapter 90.82 RCW, a watershed restoration project pursuant to RCW 89.08.460, a salmonid recovery plan, the salmon recovery board habitat project list, or identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife as essential for fish and wildlife habitat enhancement pursuant to RCW 77.55.290.
D. The city may approve mitigation banking as a form of compensatory mitigation for wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat conservation area impacts when the provisions of this chapter require mitigation and when it is clearly demonstrated that the use of a mitigation bank will provide equivalent or greater replacement of critical area functions and values when compared to conventional on-site mitigation; provided, that all of the following criteria are met:
1. Mitigation banks shall only be used when they provide significant ecological benefits including long-term conservation of critical areas, important species, habitats and/or habitat linkages, and when they are consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan and create a viable alternative to the piecemeal mitigation for individual project impacts to achieve ecosystem-based conservation goals.
2. The mitigation bank shall be established in accordance with the Washington State Draft Mitigation Banking Rule, Chapter 173-700 WAC or as revised, and Chapter 90.84 RCW and the federal mitigation banking guidelines as outlined in the Federal Register, Volume 60, No. 228, November 28, 1995. These guidelines establish the procedural and technical criteria that banks must meet to obtain state and federal certification.
3. Preference shall be given to mitigation banks that implement restoration actions that have been identified in an adopted shoreline restoration plan, watershed planning document prepared and adopted pursuant to Chapter 90.82 RCW, a salmonid recovery plan or project that has been identified on the salmon recovery board habitat project list or by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife as essential for fish and wildlife habitat enhancement.
E. Mitigation shall not be implemented until (1) after city receipt of a report or other applicable information that includes a mitigation plan, and mitigation shall be in accordance with the provisions of the report or other applicable information and (2) city approval of the underlying permit(s).
F. Mitigation monitoring shall be required for a minimum of five (5) years. If a scrub-shrub or forested vegetation community is proposed, monitoring may be required for ten (10) years or more. The project mitigation plan shall include monitoring elements that ensure certainty of success for the project natural value and functions. If the mitigation goals are not obtained within the initial five (5) year period, the applicant remains responsible for restoration of the natural values and functions until the mitigation goals agreed to in the mitigation plan are achieved.