Laserfiche WebLink
a.l Finding. The loss of agricultural land is <br />unmitigable; however, during the early stages of <br />development, some agricultural use of the site can <br />continue. <br />a.2 Fact. Condition 29 requires the Developer to <br />continue short-term agricultural uses on the site. <br />a.3 Finding. The No Project Alternative, which could <br />partially mitigate the potential significant <br />effect, is feasible. <br />a.4 Fact. See Section XII (infeasibility of the No <br />Project Alternative). <br />X. Energy. <br />A. Significant Effect. Increased energy consumption on <br />site through construction, operation and maintenance of <br />structures. <br />a.l Finding. Mitigation measures incorporated into the <br />Project to mitigate energy use will substantially <br />lessen this effect. <br />a.2 Fact. Condition 4 requires that all buildings in <br />the Project shall employ solar energy to the <br />maximum extent economically feasible. <br />a.3 Fact. Condition 4 requires that each building in <br />the Project be oriented for solar access. <br />a.4 Fact. Economic realities encourage installation of <br />energy efficient machinery. <br />B. Significant Effect. Potential for increased energy <br />consumption as a result of commuting to employment <br />within the Project. <br />b.l Finding. Implementation of traffic mitigation <br />measures incorporated into the Project will <br />substantially lessen the effect. <br />b.2 Fact. TSM measures employed as part of the project <br />and as required by ordinance will reduce vehicle <br />miles travelled and result in lessened use of <br />energy. <br />b.3 Finding. The No Project Alternative and the <br />Reduced Intensity Alternative which could partially <br />mitigate this significant effect, are infeasible <br />and unnecessary because the mitigation measures <br />which have been incorporated into the Project <br />substantially lessen the effect. <br />- 24 - <br />