Summary: Due to the economic challenges of developing this site during the planning period, as well as <br />other environmental, energy, economic and social concerns, Site P4.6e is discarded from further <br />consideration. <br />Site P4.6f - <br />This site is 9.8 contiguous acres of a 13.8 acre tax lot designated Agricultural. It could potentially be <br />assembled with the adjacent second priority site, which is 4.3 contiguous acres of a 4.8 acre tax lot <br />designated Rural Residential (see analysis of Subarea P2.7, above). Together, these two tax lots meet the <br />minimum size need of 10 acres (at 14.2 acres), where neither tax lot meets this minimum <br />independently. The contiguous, unconstrained area of these two tax lots will therefore be considered as <br />a single site (P4.6f) below. Land to the north and west is designated Rural Residential, while land to the <br />south and east is designated Agricultural and Forest. The site is bordered by Crow Road to the east. <br />Environmental: Expansion onto this site for industrial purposes would create an industrial site adjacent <br />to agricultural and forest land. This adjacency could have potential minor environmental consequences. <br />Overall environmental consequences from expanding onto this site for industrial use would be slightly <br />negative to neutral. <br />Energy: While the addition of industrial employment near residential areas may decrease energy use <br />from commuter traffic, a given employer is just as likely to draw employees from other parts of the <br />region. Overall energy consequences from expanding onto this site for industrial use would be neutral. <br />Economic: A UGB expansion to include Site P4.6f to serve the City's need for industrial employment land <br />is not likely to actually result in a site that is truly available for economic development during the <br />planning period. Site P4.6f is separated from the current UGB by residential and agricultural land. For <br />Site P4.6f to be developed for the needed urban industrial use, it would first need to be annexed into <br />the city limits. The City would be legally prohibited from annexing Site P4.6f until the site is contiguous <br />with the city limits, either through annexation of the intervening residential or agricultural land (which <br />would not serve an identified need for the City), or an (arguably unreasonable) "cherry stem" <br />annexation of Crow Road. Given that it is therefore highly unlikely that Site P4.6f would be annexable <br />during the planning period, expanding the UGB to include it for industrial employment would create <br />"phantom" capacity, failing to meet the goals of the expansion. Additionally, the cost of extending urban <br />services to this area for the few available candidate sites is disproportionate to the benefit. Overall <br />economic consequences of expanding the UGB onto this site for industrial use would be negative. <br />Social: Expanding the UGB for industrial use in this location would have slight potentially negative social <br />consequences for residents exposed to traffic and other impacts of such uses adjacent to their homes. <br />Overall social consequences from expanding onto this site for industrial use would be neutral. <br />Summary: Due to the economic challenges of developing this site into the City during the planning <br />period, as well as other environmental, energy, economic and social concerns, Site P4.6f is discarded <br />from further consideration. <br />Appendix B to Findings May 2017 Page 90 <br />