Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | SUMMARYany effect on the demand for parks, recreation, and open space. Therefore, no significant impacts to these servicesare anticipated under any of the alternatives.Gorst UGACounty Impacts. If the Gorst UGA remains in the County, all alternatives would result in a marginal increase indemand for County park and recreation facilities. The specific facilities impacted or the geographic need for newfacilities would depend in part on the location of growth, which will vary by alternative.Per Kitsap County Code (KCC) Chapters 410.110.020 and 410.110.210, the County collects a parks impact fee foreach new housing unit developed in unincorporated areas. Impact fee revenues are directed toward park planning,land acquisition, site improvements, construction and engineering, mitigation costs, and capital equipment. Newdevelopment under the alternatives would also generate revenue from Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), which can beused for any type of capital project in the County. A portion of increased tax revenues could be used to fundacquisition and development of new parks and recreation facilities, as well as operation and maintenance of newand existing facilities under all alternatives.City of Bremerton Impacts. If the City of Bremerton were to annex the Gorst UGA, the current population andprojected population growth within the UGA would drive some additional demand for Parks services. While theCity of Bremerton does not charge a parks impact fee to offset the demand from new development, the City ofBremerton could require that any master planned development include park or open space land for its residents.LibrariesUnder all alternatives, population growth in the Gorst Creek watershed and within the Gorst UGA would increasedemand for library services in proportion to the population growth anticipated. Impacts of each alternative aresummarized in Table 1-2 Comparison Matrix of Impacts.PowerUnder all alternatives, population growth in the Gorst Creek watershed and within the Gorst UGA would increasedemand for power in proportion to the population growth anticipated. Impacts of each alternative aresummarized in Table 1-2 Comparison Matrix of Impacts.Solid WasteWatershed. No land use changes are proposed for the Gorst Creek watershed outside the Gorst UGA. Updatedstormwater and habitat regulations in this area are not anticipated to have significant effects on solid wastemanagement needs in this area.Gorst UGA. Since solid waste service is provided on a regional level, impacts to the service provider (WasteManagement) and management organization are nearly identical whether or not Gorst is annexed by the City ofBremerton.The additional population capacity generated under the three alternatives would marginally increase demand forsolid waste capacity. The County, through contracts with private haulers, will continue to be able to provide solidwaste management for an increased population regardless of the alternative ultimately chosen. The County wouldhave adequate time to plan for landfill capacity for solid waste generation under all alternatives, and the County’scurrent contracted landfill location is expected to have sufficient capacity through 2025 and beyond if a new orextended contact is enacted.Water, Wastewater, and StormwaterWatershed. Over the next 20 to 30 year jobs would substantially increase from 264 to 2,305 primarily due toeconomic development in the SKIA. The added jobs in the SKIA area would be subject the SKIA Subarea Plan.Population growth is projected to increase from 1,810 to 2,659. These changes in the watershed would increaseDraft | June 2013 1-11