Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURESGMA Goal1) Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areaswhere adequate public facilities and services exist orcan be provided in an efficient manner.2) Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversionof undeveloped land into sprawling, low-densitydevelopment.3) Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodaltransportation systems that are based on regionalpriorities and coordinated with county and City ofBremerton comprehensive plans.4) Housing. Encourage the availability of affordablehousing to all economic segments of the population ofthis state, promote a variety of residential densitiesand housing types, and encourage preservation ofexisting housing stock.5) Economic development. Encourage economicdevelopment throughout the state that is consistentwith adopted comprehensive plans, promoteeconomic opportunity for all citizens of this state,especially for unemployed and for disadvantagedpersons, promote the retention and expansion ofexisting businesses and recruitment of newbusinesses, recognize regional differences impactingeconomic development opportunities, and encouragegrowth in areas experiencing insufficient economicgrowth, all within the capacities of the state's naturalresources, public services, and public facilities.6) Property rights. Private property shall not be taken forpublic use without just compensation having beenmade. The property rights of landowners shall beprotected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions.7) Permits. Applications for both state and localgovernment permits should be processed in a timelyand fair manner to ensure predictability.Table 3.14-4GMA Goal ConsistencyDiscussionAll alternatives encourage development in urban areas,particularly the Gorst UGA, where added commercial andresidential growth is anticipated. Public facilities and services willbe provided consistent with analysis in Section 3.12 PublicServices of this Draft EIS. The recent installation of sewers willmake urban growth more possible. No changes are proposed tothe SKIA UGA which was the subject of its own plan in 2012.Under all alternatives, densities in the rural area will remain atone units per five 10a acres, a rural density that avoids sprawl.The Watershed Characterization & Framework Plan proposedunder Alternatives 2 and 3 will help the County and cities makeinformed choices about the best locations for development andavoid inappropriate conversion of land.Through proposed subarea plan policies, Alternatives 2 and 3promote added transit and non-motorized systems in Gorst (e.g.transit service at a park and ride). The mixed use pattern andlower commercial growth in Alternative 3 provides lesscongestion and may in the future provide more support to transituse. Alternative 2 does not worsen congestion beyond thatalready anticipated in Alternative 1 No Action.While all alternatives allow for housing, Alternatives 2 and 3provide significant new opportunities for housing on the minesite. Further, Alternative 3 would promote a horizontal or verticalmixed use pattern, and would provide a new live-work housingchoice.All alternatives support economic development in Gorst.Alternative 1 would promote highway-oriented commercial andsome industrial uses. Alternative 2 focuses on a well-designedcommercial corridor. Alternatives 1 and 2 would convert somepresent residential areas to more commercial uses, and assumethe highest employment growth levels. Alternative 3 provides formixed use economic opportunities with regional commercial usesas well as local serving commercial uses combined with mixeduses, such as in a horizontal format. With allowances for mixedresidential uses, the job growth under Alternative 3 would not beas high as Alternatives 1 and 2.Under all alternatives, all properties are given a reasonable use ofland, with at least a single family residence allowed. Incentivesare offered to achieve greater density and heights andenvironmental enhancement under Alternatives 2 and 3.All alternatives would ensure development applications areprocessed under rules that are transparent. Alternatives 2 and 3would implement a planned action for the Gorst UGA, whichwould streamline environmental review. Alternative 2 would havea planned action boundary west of the highways on Sinclair Inletwhile Alternative 3 would have a planned action boundaryincluding the whole Gorst UGA.Draft | June 2013 3-254