Skip to main content
Loading…
This section is included in your selections.

A. If a development is tested for transportation concurrency, and does not pass, the developer may:

1. Reduce the size of the proposed development until the MU demand is equal to or less than the MU supply that is available;

2. Delay the proposed development until the city or others increase the MU supply;

3. Obtain supplemental mitigation by purchasing sufficient MUs to serve the MU demand of the proposed development or constructing an improvement approved by the director that increases the MU supply; or

4. Upon approval by the director, a developer may implement transportation demand management (TDM) strategies as supplemental mitigation; provided, that the MU demand from a proposed development is reduced due to the elimination of trips, and the TDM strategies become a legal project approval condition of the development and shall meet the following requirements:

a. These strategies must be in addition to the TDM requirements for the development in BCC 14.60.070;

b. These strategies shall be pre-negotiated and approved by the director;

c. There shall be methods to monitor and enforce TDM performance, and a plan to adjust or supplement TDM measures if the development fails to meet TDM goals;

d. The TDM strategies become a condition tied to all future owners of the development and property; and

e. The TDM strategies meet the criteria of subsection (C) of this section.

B. Payment for and Timing of Supplemental Mitigation. If allowed by the director, a developer may provide funding in an amount equal to the city’s estimated cost of the MUs needed for the development to achieve concurrency. The cost per MU supplied shall be determined by the director. The director, with the concurrence of other affected city departments, may provide for latecomer agreements as provided by state law or for other reimbursement from properties benefited by the improvements unless the city council finds reimbursement to be inappropriate. The director may require that a developer build or implement a transportation improvement, rather than provide funding.

Funds for MUs must be paid by the developer to the city prior to issuance of a building permit, final plat approval, or other approval requiring a concurrency certificate under this section. A developer providing supplemental mitigation may receive credit towards payment of required transportation impact fees. Credit determination shall be made pursuant to BCC 22.16.087.

C. Supplemental Mitigation Decision Criteria. Acceptable supplemental mitigation requires a finding by the director that:

1. The supplemental mitigation is identified in the city’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) or if a developer proposes as supplemental mitigation a transportation improvement that is not identified in the TIP, the transportation improvement must first be considered and approved to be added to the TIP before the supplemental mitigation is approved.

2. The MU supply provided by the supplemental mitigation is available concurrent with the development or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvement that provides the MU supply within six years.

3. The effect of the improvement would not result in a reduction or the loss of another transportation objective, including but not limited to maintaining high occupancy vehicle lanes, sidewalks, paths, trails, or bicycle lanes.

4. Any adverse environmental impacts of the proposed transportation improvement can be reasonably mitigated.

5. The improvement is consistent with accepted engineering and planning standards and practices.

6. Where practical, transportation improvements required as part of supplemental mitigation should be made at locations most impacted by the development.

D. Supplemental Mitigation Denial Process. If the director determines that the proposed supplemental mitigation does not meet the requirements of this section, the director may deny the issuance of a certificate of concurrency. (Ord. 6667 § 2, 2022.)