Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURESand SPCC plans would help minimize impacts to aquatic habitat and the species that they support as a result ofconstruction activities.Gorst UGAUnder all alternatives, development of the remaining privately held open space within the Gorst UGA is planned orlikely to occur. Such development would decrease the amount of vegetated area, including areas with wildlifehabitat value, such as the block of forestland on the mine property. This reduction in wildlife habitat would removepopulations of some common wildlife species, or force them to move to undeveloped areas nearby. In some cases,newly developed areas would support urban wildlife species such as rats, raccoons, and gray squirrels. It isanticipated that some migratory birds would be impacted as a result of loss of undeveloped habitat, particularlyfor activities that occur during the breeding season.In areas that are currently developed, noise associated with future redevelopment activities in the UGA wouldlikely disturb wildlife to some degree, although it is likely that existing populations are acclimated to urban noisesand would be able to tolerate some degree of noise disturbance. These noise effects would be short term, lastingonly for the duration of construction activities in a given location. Some habitat removal could occur, even ondeveloped sites, but in most cases these sites would receive new landscaping that provides the same level ofwildlife habitat value. In certain areas, construction activities could disturb wildlife in nearby undeveloped areas,potentially causing some stress to individuals or interfering with nesting or breeding for a limited number ofanimals. These effects would be minimized to baseline levels once the construction is completed. Terrestrialsensitive species and their habitats within the UGA, such as the bald eagle territory along the shoreline of theSinclair Inlet and the osprey nest near Alexander Lake should be protected from long-term harm, and disturbanceto these species minimized, under applicable CAO regulations. However, some disturbance to these species is likelyto occur as a result of nearby construction work.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 3.4-3 Special Status Species that May Be Found in or Near the Gorst Creek Watershed that support salmonspecies, and Sinclair Inlet, which supports numerous sensitive anadromous and marine species. As discussed forthe watershed, stormwater plans, BMPs, and SPCC plans would help minimize impacts to aquatic habitats tovarying degrees.Alternative 1Under this alternative, undeveloped land on approximately 41 acres in parcels, or less than one percent of thetotal area of the Gorst watershed, would be developed in the future; additionally, existing or future rights of wayand lands for public purposes would be disturbed. All of this development would happen within the UGA, where aminimal amount of high quality wildlife habitat occurs. Over some of this acreage, habitat for certain species, suchas forest dwellers, would be lost permanently, and over some of this acreage, urban wildlife habitat would bereplaced with similar habitat. No open space/recreation is formally designated under this alternative. Existingregulations should be suitable for preventing impacts to sensitive terrestrial habitats and species fromdevelopment activities. In the case of wetlands, appropriate mitigation could be used to compensate for some ofthe unavoidable development impacts.Creation of new impervious surface in the UGA could occur under this alternative, which would exacerbate waterquality issues associated with stormwater. However, adoption of the LID guidance manual would help guide newdevelopment such that the amount of effective impervious surface on a site is reduced. Therefore, redevelopmentwould likely result in an overall reduction in impervious surface. However, the existing stormwater issues wouldnot otherwise be addressed, and associated water quality impacts would continue to affect aquatic species,including listed salmonid species, in the streams within the watershed and UGA.Under this alternative, all existing barriers to fish passage would continue to prevent movement of fish upstreamwithin the watershed.Draft | June 2013 3-66