My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0015801
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
P
>
PATTERSON PASS
>
20042
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
PA-2200137
>
SU0015801
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2024 1:55:05 PM
Creation date
8/31/2023 1:18:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0015801
PE
2675
FACILITY_NAME
PA-2200137
STREET_NUMBER
20042
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
PATTERSON PASS
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95377-
APN
20910019, 99B-7885-002, 99B-7590-1-3
ENTERED_DATE
8/29/2023 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
20042 W PATTERSON PASS RD
RECEIVED_DATE
11/14/2023 12:00:00 AM
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\gmartinez
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
987
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4 Environmental Analysis <br /> 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources <br /> Importance. As such, conversion of the Project site for battery energy storage is not a significant <br /> adverse impact on agricultural resources. This conclusion is buttressed by a LESA model, a tool <br /> recommended to be used by lead agencies in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines to determine <br /> the significance of the conversion of agricultural land. In this case, the Project-specific LESA <br /> prepared for this Project concludes that "the Project will not have a significant impact on <br /> agricultural land use within the Project area or Zone of Influence" (Appendix B). Therefore, no <br /> impact would occur, and no mitigation would be required because there is no evidence that the <br /> Project would result in a significant impact due to conversion of unirrigated, Grazing Land, <br /> Farmland of Local Importance, Other Land, or Urban Built-up Land to a renewable energy use. <br /> Mitigation: None required. <br /> IMPACT 4.2-2: Would the project conflict with existing zoning foragricultural use, ora Williamson <br /> Act contract? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) <br /> As discussed above in Section 4.2.1, Existing Conditions, the battery energy storage portion of <br /> the Project site located in San Joaquin County is zoned Agricultural General-160. According to <br /> Division 14, Section 9-605.2, of the San Joaquin County Municipal Ordinance Code, any Major <br /> Utility use, including such things as transmission lines, substations, wind farms and related <br /> facilities, such as a BESS, as described County Code Division 6, Section 9-605.2, is permitted on <br /> Agricultural General zoned land through a Site Approval application. Prior to approving an <br /> application for a Site Approval, the Review Authority shall make findings pursuant to Section 9- <br /> 818.6 of the San Joaquin County Code. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with the <br /> existing zoning for agricultural use in San Joaquin County. <br /> Further, the gen-tie line portion of the Project site, located in Alameda County, is zoned <br /> Agricultural (A). Public utility uses, excepting buildings and service yards or storage yards, are <br /> permitted in any zoning district pursuant to Section 17.52.020 of the Alameda County Municipal <br /> Code. Therefore, the gen-tie line portion of the Project, and specifically the portion of the gen-tie <br /> line to be constructed by the Applicant from the battery energy storage facility to the point of <br /> change of ownership (POCO or tie-in), would not conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural <br /> use in Alameda County. The portion of the gen-tie line from the POCO to the PG&E Tesla <br /> Substation would be constructed by PG&E and is discussed in Section 4.2.6 below. However, <br /> this portion of the gen-tie line would similarly not conflict with the existing zoning. <br /> The San Joaquin County portion of the Project site is included in a Williamson Act contract. The <br /> Applicant, in partnership with the property owners, has filed a Petition for Cancellation of Contract <br /> for the Williamson Act contract, seeking a finding from the San Joaquin County Board of <br /> Supervisors that cancellation is either consistent with the purposes of the act or is in the public <br /> interest (see Government Code § 51282(a) through (c). The Alameda County portion of the <br /> Project site is not included in a Williamson Act contract. <br /> Petitions for cancellation of the contracts were submitted to the County pursuant to Government <br /> Code § 51282(a)(1), seeking cancellation under the "public interest' cancellation provisions <br /> (Government Code § 51282(a)). To determine that the cancellation is in the public interest, the <br /> County must find (1) that other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of the <br /> Williamson Act, and (2) that there is no proximate noncontracted land that is both available and <br /> suitable for the proposed use or that development of the contracted land would provide more <br /> contiguous patterns of urban development (Government Code § 51282(c)). <br /> Griffith Battery Energy Storage Project 4.2-10 Tetra Tech/SCH 2022120675 <br /> Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2023 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.