19.70.125 Mitigation requirements.
Mitigation must be sufficient to restore impacted functions and values, or compensate for the impacted functions and values, of the critical area and to prevent risk from a hazard posed to a critical area by the proposed activity. Mitigation must not be implemented until after the decision-maker has provided approval of a critical area report that includes a mitigation plan.
A. Mitigation Sequencing. This section applies to mitigation required with all critical areas reviews, approvals, and enforcement pursuant to this chapter. This section is supplemented with specific measures under sections for particular critical area types. Mitigation for specific development proposals may include a combination of the measures below and must be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions of this section. Before impacting any critical areas, an applicant must demonstrate that the following actions have been taken in the following sequential order:
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of actions;
2. 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;
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment or by restoring or stabilizing the critical area through natural, engineering, or other methods;
4. Reducing or eliminating the impacts or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action;
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or
6. Monitoring, measuring and reporting the impact to the decision-maker and taking appropriate corrective measures.
B. Applicants must first demonstrate an inability to avoid or reduce impacts before the use of actions to mitigate potential impacts will be allowed. No activity or use may be allowed that results in a net loss of the functions or values of a critical area.
C. Type, Location and Timing of Mitigation. Unless it is demonstrated that higher levels of ecological functioning or greater reduction of hazard risk would result from an alternative approach or as otherwise allowed in this chapter, mitigation for adverse impacts must be based on best available science and must be in-kind, on site, and prior to the activities that will disturb the critical area. Mitigation measures that cannot be implemented prior to the critical area impacts must be completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the action or development. Construction of mitigation projects must be timed to reduce impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
1. The decision-maker may authorize a one-time temporary delay in completing construction or installation of the mitigation when the applicant provides a written explanation from a qualified professional as to the rationale for the delay and satisfactory financial guarantee that the installation will occur. An appropriate rationale would include identification of the environmental conditions that could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction difficulties (e.g., project delay lapses past a fisheries window, or installing plants should be delayed until the dormant season to ensure greater survival of installed materials). The delay must not create or perpetuate hazardous conditions or environmental damage or degradation, and the delay must not be injurious to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public.
2. Alternative Mitigation Approaches. If the applicant can demonstrate that off-site concurrent or advance mitigation would provide a higher level of ecological function or a greater reduction of hazard risk, off-site mitigation that occurs on Fidalgo Island will be considered by the decision-maker. (Ord. 4025 § 2 (Att. A), 2022; Ord. 3064 § 2 (Att. A), 2021)