Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | SUMMARYTelecommunicationsIncorporated Plan Features• Mixed-use and clustered development is encouraged in select areas under Alternative 3, and both Alternatives2 and 3 would result in increased residential density over existing conditions. Providing wired communicationservices to higher-density and cluster development is often more efficient than provision to low-densitydevelopment.Applicable Regulations and Commitments• Future construction of telecommunications infrastructure would be required to comply with federal and statelaws, including the regulations of the FCC; the provisions of the Cable Television Consumer Protection andCompetition Act, as appropriate; the regulations of the BMC; and the KCC.Other Potential Mitigation Measures• Encourage co-location of telecommunications facilities wherever appropriate and undergrounding ofinfrastructure to minimize aesthetic impacts.• Encourage the use of appropriate site landscaping to screen telecommunications equipment from surroundingproperties and the public realm.Relationship to Plans and PoliciesIncorporated Plan FeaturesThe Watershed Characterization & Framework Plan and Gorst Subarea Plan provide a common set of plans andpolicies to ensure consistent and coordinated planning between the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, and theSuquamish Tribe.Applicable Regulations and Commitments• In order to ensure consistency with GMA requirements, the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County will submitthe Gorst plans to the Washington Department of Commerce or review and comment prior to adoption.• As a preferred plan is prepared, the City of Bremerton and County will prepare a land capacity analysis prior tolegislative adoption.Other Potential Mitigation Measures• The County and City of Bremerton could work with KRCC to reallocate population from undersized UGAs toGorst to match Alternatives 2 or 3 population levels. This could be accomplished prior to the County and Cityof Bremerton’s GMA required 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. Until that time, the mineral resourcesdesignation could remain while the mine is still in active operation, thus not allowing residential growth untilpopulation targets are reallocated.• The final Subarea Plan prepared for the preferred alternative could include coordinated shoreline and criticalarea standards. See EIS Appendix D Shoreline Buffer Comparison & Options for a description of options.1.7 Significant Unavoidable Adverse ImpactsThis section summarizes conclusions for each topic and indicates if there are residual impacts that are significant,unavoidable, and adverse despite the application of mitigation measures.Geology/SoilsUnder all of the alternatives, future development would lead to the loss of currently undeveloped soils within theUGA, which will eliminate their ability to support other uses. The area of land that is currently undeveloped butwould be available for development ranges from 41 to 70 acres, depending on the alternative, plus land modifiedDraft | June 2013 1-40