13.09.020 Environmental protection.
A. All project proposals, including those for which a shoreline substantial development permit is not required, shall comply with Chapter 43.21C RCW, the Washington State Environmental Policy Act.
B. Applicants shall apply the following sequence of steps in order of priority to avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts, with 1. being top priority:
1. Avoiding the adverse impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
2. Minimizing adverse impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts;
3. Rectifying the adverse impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project;
4. Reducing or eliminating the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations;
5. Compensating for the adverse impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and
6. Monitoring the adverse impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate corrective measures.
C. Projects that cause significant adverse ecological impacts, as defined in Chapter 13.03 BMC, Definitions, are not allowed unless necessary to achieve other objectives of the SMA, such as accommodation of water-oriented and other preferred uses, and only when the impacts are mitigated according to subsection B of this section, to avoid reduction or damage to ecosystem-wide processes and ecological functions.
D. If specific standards, such as buffers, vegetation requirements, or dock dimensions, are provided in this chapter, then the city shall not require additional mitigation sequencing analysis under these provisions.
E. The city shall require mitigation measures and/or permit conditions based on the provisions of this SMP in order to mitigate adverse impacts. In order to determine acceptable mitigation or permit conditions, the shoreline administrator may require the applicant to provide the necessary environmental information and analysis, including a description of existing conditions/ecological functions and anticipated shoreline impacts, along with a mitigation plan outlining how proposed mitigation measures would result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
F. When compensatory measures are appropriate pursuant to the mitigation priority sequence in subsection B of this section, preferential consideration shall be given to measures that replace the adversely impacted functions directly and in the immediate vicinity of the adverse impact. However, alternative compensatory mitigation within the watershed that addresses limiting factors or identified critical needs for shoreline resource conservation based on watershed or comprehensive resource management plans, including the shoreline restoration plan, applicable to the area of adverse impact may be authorized. Authorization of compensatory mitigation measures may require appropriate safeguards, terms or conditions as necessary to ensure no net loss of ecological functions.
G. In addition to any requirements for specific critical areas found below, mitigation plans for any adverse impacts to ecological functions resulting from use, activity or development in shoreline jurisdiction, both inside and outside of critical areas, shall address the following:
1. Inventory existing shoreline environment including the physical, chemical and biological elements and provide an assessment of their condition;
2. A discussion of the project’s compliance with mitigation sequencing requirements and remaining unavoidable adverse impacts on the ecological functions;
3. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management recommendations which have been developed for critical areas or other species or habitats located on the site;
4. A discussion of measures to preserve existing habitats and opportunities to restore habitats that were degraded prior to the proposed land use activity;
5. A discussion of proposed measures which mitigate the adverse impacts of the project to ensure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions;
6. Scaled drawings of existing and proposed conditions, materials specifications, and a five-year maintenance and monitoring plan, including performance standards;
7. A discussion of proposed management practices which will protect fish and wildlife habitat both during construction, and after the project site has been fully developed;
8. Contingency plan if the mitigation fails to meet established success criteria; and
9. Any additional information necessary to determine the adverse impacts of a proposal and mitigation of the impacts. (Ord. 2112 § 3 (Exh. C), 2013).