Flexibility in Environmental Regulation
Contents
- Introduction
- Increased Visibility for Flexible Options Offered
- Reasonable Use Exceptions and Other Critical Area Exemptions
- Exemptions, Alterations and Flexible Uses/Activities within Critical Areas
- Onsite Density Transfer for Critical Areas
- Flexible Buffer Widths
- Small Project Waivers
- Individual Stewardship Plans
- Mitigation Banking
- General
- Local Programs and Code Examples
- Incentives - Green Build & Low Impact Development
- Incentive Programs - Critical Areas
- Land Exchange to Preserve Critical Areas
Introduction
All Washington cities and counties are required to adopt critical areas (environmentally sensitive areas) regulations (RCW 36.70A.060). Critical areas include wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas. The GMA was amended in 1995 to require counties and cities to include the best available science in developing policies and development regulations. That amendment was intended to ensure that cities and counties consider reliable scientific information when adopting critical areas policies and regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas (RCW 36.70A.172). Under the same statute, counties and cities are required to give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries, including salmon, steelhead and bull trout fisheries. In addition, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has listed 16 populations of Washington salmon and bull trout populations as "endangered" or "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. A variety of mechanisms including erosion and stormwater controls, and setbacks or buffers around streams, wetlands and shorelines can protect anadromous fish habitat from activities that contribute to erosion, surface water runoff, and pollution.
Because setbacks and other protective measures can significantly restrict new land uses and activities on constrained lands, critical areas ordinances implementing the new requirements have been controversial in some communities. Wide stream setbacks and buffer requirements, often bolstered by best available science documents, have been particularly difficult to accommodate on small urban lots or for farming operations that require access to water for cattle and irrigation. The following information and examples illustrate approaches for using incentives or adding flexibility to regulations to ease difficulties for property owners, while continuing to protect important resources.
Increased Visibility for Flexible Options Offered
Many local governments have incorporated added flexibility into critical areas codes, but these provisions do not always stand out, especially in lengthier codes. Some jurisdictions have added sections that highlight the many incentives and opportunities for increased flexibility and choice available within the code.
- Spokane County Code, Sec. 11.20.080 - Incentives
- Clark County Code, Sec. 40.440.020 - Standards and Nonregulatory Measures (See especially sections C, D & E for incentives and nonregulatory measures. These sections organize together and point the user to code sections where flexible options are offered)
- Cowlitz County Code, Sec. 19.15.080 - Optional incentives for nondevelopment of critical areas (or see this easier to read version)
- Yakima County Non-Regulatory Critical Areas and Natural Resources Program
Reasonable Use Exceptions and Other Critical Area Exemptions
Reasonable use exceptions are a mechanism by which a local jurisdiction may grant relief from code requirements where compliance leaves no reasonable use of the property. Reasonable use exceptions are a legal concept that has been articulated by federal and state courts in regulatory takings cases. In a takings case, the decision-maker must balance the public's interests against the owner's interests by considering the nature of the harm the regulation is intended to prevent, the availability and effectiveness of alternative measures, and the economic loss borne by the owner. Public interest factors include the seriousness of the public problem, the extent to which the land involved contributes to the problem, the degree to which the regulation solves the problem, and the feasibility of less oppressive solutions. In addition to exceptions that assure that a restricted property retains some reasonable economic use, some communities have gone beyond this legal standard. These communities are incorporating other exemptions and provisions to assure that codes are not unduly burdensome and that property owners are treated fairly.
- Snoqualmie Municipal Code, Sec. 19.12.030(D) - Reasonable use criteria based on model code developed for several King County cities. In addition see other exemptions in Sections A - E for removal of vegetation that is potential fuel in a wildfire-prone area, removal of invasive and noxious weeds, certain agricultural activities, improvements to existing uses, routine maintenance and others
- Reasonable Use Ordinance Table prepared by Kirkland (summary comparison of decision criteria, requirements and processes of 27 Washington cities)
- Mukilteo Municipal Code, Sec. 17.52.025 approval criteria and standards address single family, multi-family and subdivisions
- Everett Municipal Code, Sec. 19.37.050(B), (C), & (D) - includes on-site and off-site transfer of development right provision as a part of reasonable use provisions. See also Section A with exemptions for existing uses, certain agricultural uses and activities
- Clallam County Code, Sec. 27.12.740 (Reasonable Use Exception)
- Gig Harbor Municipal Code, Sec. 18.08.206 - Reasonable use exceptions
- Richland Municipal Code, Sec. 22.10.360 General Savings Provision - Reasonable Use
- Issaquah Municipal Code, Sec. 18.10.390 - Reasonable use definition, and 18.10.430(D) - Variances
- Enumclaw Municipal Code, Sec. 19.02.030 - Avoiding wetlands impacts
- Auburn Municipal Code, 16.10.150 - Reasonable use provision
- Bothell Municipal Code, Sec. 14.04.140 - Exception - Reasonable use
- Des Moines Municipal Code, Sec. 18.86.110 - Reasonable use exceptions in wetlands, streams, ravine, sidewalls and bluffs
- Edmonds Municipal Code, Sec. 23.40.210 - Variances
- Federal Way Municipal Code, Sec. 22-1244 - Reasonable use of the subject property
- Vancouver Municipal Code, Sec. 20.740.080 - Reasonable use exceptions
- Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Sec. 16.20.080
- Whatcom County Code, Sec. 16.16.270
Exemptions, Alterations and Flexible Uses/Activities within Critical Areas
Many communities have anticipated a number of specific situations under which strict application of new environment regulations may create difficulties for existing property owners, agricultural and forest operations or other uses and related activities. The following codes exempt some uses and activities from critical areas regulation, and often specify conditions under which these activities may be conducted. Many communities have provisions that allow minor alterations within critical areas provide that the values and functions of the critical areas are protected. Many communities have provisions that allow minor alterations within critical areas provide that the values and functions of the critical areas are protected.
- Rural Economic Strategies, King County (Program to increase viable economic uses in rural areas, including home-based businesses. The changes also facilitate animal specialty services and farm-worker housing)
- Snoqualmie Municipal Code, Sec. 19.12.030(A) - (E) Exemptions for removal of vegetation that is potential fuel in a wildfire-prone area, removal of invasive and noxious weeds, certain agricultural activities, improvements to existing uses, routine maintenance and others
- Langley Municipal Code, Sec. 16.20.070 - Wetlands and Streams - Exemptions
- Medina Municipal Code, Sec. 18.12.110
- Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Sec. 16.20.090(F) & (G)
- Clallam County Critical Areas Code, Title 27.12 (see sec. 27.12.035 & 27.12.040)
- Kitsap County Code, Sec. 19.100.125 - Exemptions
- Renton Municipal Code, Sec. 4-3-050(C)(5), (6), & (7) - Scroll to section tables with exemptions of a variety of uses and activities
- Bellingham Municipal Code, Sec. 16.55.080
- Seattle Client Assistance Memo No. 327 - Environmentally Critical Area Exemptions and Modifications
- King County Code, Sec. 21A.24.045, 21A.24.070 (also see criteria for limitations in sec. 21A.24.210 - .383)
- King County Code, Sec. 21A.24.055 and Sec. 21A.24.061 re: Rural Stewardship Plan)
- King County Department of Development and Environmental Services, Customer Information Bulletin No. 21, "Critical Areas Review."
- Everett Municipal Code, Sec. 19.37.110 & 19.37.150
Onsite Density Transfer for Critical Areas
Many Washington communities have adopted provisions that allow density to be transferred from a constrained portion of a site to an unconstrained area on the same site. Such density transfers achieve protection of critical areas while permitting the property owner to retain some or all development rights. These provisions generally include some criteria to assure that density in receiving area doesn't exceed what that area can accommodate. Some jurisdictions use a sliding scale that specifies how much density may be transferred, based on the percentage of the site that is constrained.
- Spokane County Code, Sec. 11.20.080 - Incentives - Offers on-site and off-site transfer of density or development rights
- Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Sec. 16.20.090 (limited density calculation for wetlands and streams)
- Vancouver Municipal Code, Sec. 20.940 - On-Site Density Transfers
- Enumclaw Municipal Code, Sec. 19.02.230 (Limited density transfer - follows Department of Ecology Model Wetlands Protection Ordinance)
- Richland Municipal Code, Sec. 22.10.340 - On-Site Density Transfer for Sensitive Areas
- Des Moines Municipal Code, Sec. 18.86.090 - Limited density transfer
- Puyallup Municipal Code, Sec. 21.06.1430 - Limited density transfer
- Cowlitz County Code, Sec. 19.15.080(D) & (E)
- Maple Valley Municipal Code, Sec. 18.110.050(D)(3) (regarding transfer of density from land planned for open spaces or community services)
- Lynnwood Municipal Code, Sec. 17.10.100 - Buffer credit
- Gig Harbor Municipal Code, Ch. 17.59
Flexible Buffer Widths
Buffers are designated areas around the perimeter of critical areas that provide a margin of safety or buffer critical areas from the impacts of adjacent uses. Because of variations in slopes, soils, vegetative cover, mitigation measures or other conditions, buffers may sometimes be reduced without compromising the buffer functions. Variations in buffer widths may also be possible. These provisions address buffer modifications, including averaging of buffer widths, and reduction of standard buffer widths when buffer functions are maintained and certain criteria are met.
- Sammamish Municipal Code, Sec. 21A.50.330(6) and Sec. 21A.50.290(8) - the options to reduce or average buffers is offered in exchange for other measures that maintain or improve buffer functions including removal of impervious surfaces or installation of biofiltration/infiltration mechanisms
- Mukilteo Ordinance No. 1147 - ordinance amending buffer reduction and averaging sections of CAO in response to Growth Management Hearings Board decision, 2005 -
- Redmond Community Development Guide, Sec. 20D.140.30-020(5) & (6) clear description of conditions under which buffer averaging or reduction is permitted
- Clark County Code, Sec. 40.450.040(C)(3)
- Snoqualmie Municipal Code, Sec. 19.12.080
- Pierce County Code, Sec. 18E.30.060(B) (Buffer modification and buffer averaging
- Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Sec. 16.20.090(H)(3) & (4)
- King County Code, Sec. 21A.24.520 - and Sec. 21A.24.055 - .061, and via Rural Stewardship plan (See Sec. 21A.24.055 and Sec. 21A.24.061)
- Tacoma Municipal Code, Sec. 13.11.330 & Sec. 13.11.430(B)
- Everett - Wetland or Stream Buffer Width Reduction Application Packet and Wetland or Stream Alteration Application Packet
- Seattle Municipal Code, Sec. 25.09.160(D), 25.09.260, 25.09.280, 25.09.300
- Richland Municipal Code, Sec. 22.10.110(D)
Small Project Waivers
Some communities allow some construction of small projects within critical areas, particularly on pre-existing lots.
- Seattle Municipal Code, Sec. 25.09.055
Individual Stewardship Plans
Some communities provide property owners with the option to develop an individual stewardship or conservation plan in place of standard critical area requirements when developing their property. Similarly, farm or forest management plans allow the flexibility to choose critical areas protection techniques that work well for individual farming and forestry operations.
- Clark County Code, Sec. 40.440.020(D)
- King County Code, Sec. 21A.24.055, Rural Stewardship Plan
- Rural Stewardship Plan, King County Fact Sheet
- King County Farm Management Plans
- King County Forest Management Plan Fact Sheet
Mitigation Banking
Some communities allow a developer to create or restore wetlands off-site on another property to compensate for unavoidable lost or damage of wetlands on the site that will be developed. To better assure that the created wetland is viable for the long term, some local jurisdictions have purchased property which is then converted to a wetland mitigation bank, under the jurisdiction's management. A private developer or another agency may then purchase credits from the jurisdiction (or "buy in" to the created wetland bank) to compensate for wetland damage when a property is developed.
General
- Ecology Wetland Mitigation Banking Home page
- Wetlands Mitigation Banking, by Andy McMillan, Department of Ecology, 1992
- Chapter 6, "The Science and Effectiveness of Wetland Mitigation," in Freshwater Wetlands in Washington State -Volume 1, Draft, by Dyanne Sheldon et al., Department of Ecology, August 2003 (download chapter 6 or the entire document)
- Guidance on Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2: Guidelines for Developing Wetland Mitigation Plans and Proposal, Department of Ecology, April 2004
Local Programs and Code Examples
- Renton Development Regulations, Sec. 4-3-050 (M)(9)- (11), (14), (15) and (16) - Wetlands Regulations (Renton was one of the first communities to establish wetlands mitigation banking and has Wetland Mitigation Bank agreement with Glacier Park.)
- King County Code, Sec. 21A.06.751 and 21A.06.752 and Sec. 21A.24.345 and 21A.24.133
- King County Wetland Mitigation Banking Program - Summary
- Clark County Code, Ch. 40.450(D)(3) - Wetland Protection - Wetland Banking
- Bellingham Municipal Code, Sec. 16.55.350
- Pacific County Critical Areas and Resource Lands Ordinance No.147B
- Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance - Best Available Science Review and Recommendations for Code Update, Feb. 2005 (see Ch. 8 on "Mitigation Banking," p. 206)
- Bainbridge Island Draft Critical Areas Ordinance, 2005 (see section 10 on "Mitigation Banking," p.61)
- Grant County Code, Sec. 24.08.260
Incentives - Green Build & Low Impact Development
Some communities offer code modifications in exchange for projects that incorporate green and low impact development features.
- Financial Incentives for Green Build
- News Release: Executive Sims launches new Smart Growth Initiative Low Impact Development/Built Green Ordinance, King County, April 9, 2003
- King County Department of Development and Environmental Services, Customer Information Bulletin No. 55 - Green Building & Low Impact Development
Incentive Programs - Critical Areas
- Incentive Programs - Wildlife Protection - Conservation Incentive Programs in Washington State: Trends, Gaps, and Opportunities, Prepared for the Washington Biodiversity Council by Evergreen Funding Consultants - Incentive programs to protect wildlife and biodiversity
- Incentives for Conservation, Biodiversity Partnership - A Defenders of Wildlife initiative dedicated to promoting and supporting regional and statewide strategies to conserve biodiversity
- Appendix G: Non-Regulatory Programs, Critical Areas Assistance Handbook, Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED)
- Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service - Voluntary program for people who want to develop and improve wildlife habitat primarily on private land
- "Conservation Connections: Tools for the 21st Century," speech by King County Executive Ron Sims, April 2006
- Cowlitz County Code, Sec. 19.15.080 - Optional incentives for nondevelopment of critical areas (or see this easier to read version)
- Clark County Code, Sec. 40.440.020 - Standards and Nonregulatory Measures (See especially sections C, D & E for incentives and nonregulatory measures. These sections organize together and point the user to code sections where flexible options are offered)
- Clark County Code, Sec. 40.410.040 - Incentives, Education, and Technical
Land Exchange to Preserve Critical Areas
- Cowlitz County Code, Sec. 19.15.080(F) - Optional Incentives for Non-Development of Critical Areas (Land exchange by state and/or local government)

