Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASUREScases the proposed Shoreline Master Program would override the current CAO regulations that pertain to streams.Kitsap County standard buffers for streams are 200 feet, with 15-foot setbacks, building setbacks. Once the UGA isannexed to the City of Bremerton, greater marine shoreline buffers and reduced shoreline stream buffers wouldapply. The Proposed City of Bremerton standard buffers under the Shoreline Master Program range from 50 feetfor commercial uses to 175 feet for Urban Conservancy Land (Table 3.14-3 Bremerton and Kitsap County Shoreline,Stream, and Wetland Buffer Comparison). Some buffer reductions would be allowed, and 15-foot setbacks wouldcontinue to apply. Therefore, for freshwater aquatic habitats within the UGA, regulatory buffers would be reducedfor shoreline-designated streams (i.e., Gorst Creek). For marine habitats (i.e., Sinclair Inlet), regulatory buffers forUrban Conservancy area would increase after annexation, from 100 feet to 175 feet, except where paralleldesignations apply in which case buffer would extend to the edge of the Urban Conservancy designation(approximately 100 feet). It should be noted that both the City and County Shoreline Master Program proposalswere the subject of cumulative impact analyses that demonstrated no-net-loss of shoreline ecological function.The City’s buffers particularly on Gorst Creek recognize current degraded conditions. The County’s buffer onshoreline streams such as Gorst Creek is uniform at 200 feet regardless of conditions, but there are allowances toreduce the buffer with enhancements.The Draft Subarea Plan for the Gorst UGA under Alternatives 2 and 3 includes a policy promoting adequate andequivalent standards for stream and shoreline protection. Appendix D Shoreline Buffer Comparison & Optionsprovides a review of several Gorst Creek shoreline management options, including proposed City standards,proposed County standards, and alternative standards that blend proposed City and County standards withWatershed Characterization results and BMPs.WatershedUnder all alternatives, development would occur throughout the watershed, primarily in the urban and suburbanareas associated with the Gorst UGA (described in its own section below) and the SKIA Subarea Plan. Mostdevelopment outside these areas would be residential dwellings, with an estimate that less than 500 newdwellings would be constructed over the next 20 to 30 years. New construction in rural areas would result inremoval of terrestrial habitats, which could injure and/or displace common species of wildlife. Migratory birdscould be affected, particularly by construction that occurs during the breeding season. Under all alternatives,regulations to protect sensitive species would help prevent impacts to these species during the constructionprocess. Depending on where it occurs, new construction in the watershed could also affect wildlife habitatconnectivity through fragmentation or interruption of existing wildlife corridors.Noise associated with construction activities in the watershed would likely disturb terrestrial wildlife species,particularly in rural areas where baseline noise levels are low. Noise disturbance would constitute a short-termimpact, lasting only as long as the construction activities, with lower levels of noise associated with residential usesonce construction is completed. Wildlife could adapt to the noise or leave the area. The greatest risk for adverseeffects would be during breeding periods, when noise could impact nesting/breeding success.Construction activities adjacent to stream channels, other bodies of water, and wetlands would have the potentialto affect these habitats and the species that occur in them, including listed and sensitive fish species. Additionally,stormwater runoff from the developed sites could potentially impact aquatic habitats, including the creeks listed inTable 3.4-2 Occurrence of Anadromous Fish Species in the Gorst Creek Watershed that support salmon species. Asdiscussed elsewhere in this Draft EIS (primarily Section 3.2 Water Resources), flooding and sedimentation intosurface water systems as a result of inadequate stormwater infiltration are currently impacting aquatic habitatswithin the watershed. Sedimentation and turbidity associated are primary contributors to the degradation ofsalmonid habitat (Bash et al. 2001). High levels of turbidity can reduce feeding efficiency and food availability, cloggillrakers, and erode gill filaments of salmonids (Bruton 1985; Gregory 1993). Clearing of trees and developmentactivities within the watershed could lead to an exacerbation of these issues, potentially further degrading aquatichabitats and reducing the likelihood that these habitats would be able to provide suitable habitat for aquaticspecies, including listed Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, and other anadromous species. Stormwater Plans, BMPs,Draft | June 2013 3-65