Laserfiche WebLink
5 Comparison of Comparison of Alternatives <br /> however, the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives. The No Project <br /> Alternatives is being analyzed in this Draft EIR because this analysis is required by CEQA. <br /> 5.3.1 Impact Analysis <br /> 5.3.1.1 Aesthetics <br /> Under this alternative, there would be no development of battery energy storage facilities on the <br /> site or other ground-disturbing activities. No changes in the visual setting would occur; therefore, <br /> there would be no impacts to aesthetics. <br /> 5.3.1.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources <br /> Under the No Project Alternative, there would be no need for a Williamson Act contract <br /> cancellation. The Project site would continue to be used for grazing and other agricultural uses. <br /> As a result, this alternative would not result in any impacts to agriculture or forestry resources. <br /> 5.3.1.3 Air Quality <br /> The No Project Alternative would not create new sources of regional air emissions; therefore, <br /> there would be no impact to air quality. <br /> 5.3.1.4 Biological Resources <br /> Since there would be no changes to land uses under this alternative, no impacts to existing <br /> biological resources on or surrounding the proposed Project site would occur. <br /> 5.3.1.5 Cultural Resources <br /> Most of the proposed Project area has been disturbed by past agricultural activities. This <br /> alternative would not include any new type of ground-disturbing activities or involve removal of <br /> any cultural resources. No impacts to cultural resources would occur. <br /> 5.3.1.6 Energy <br /> This alternative would not introduce new land uses that would generate construction or <br /> operational energy demands. No impacts to existing energy resources would occur; however, the <br /> environmental benefits associated with energy resources related to renewable energy generation <br /> would not be realized from solar development of the site. <br /> 5.3.1.7 Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources <br /> This alternative would not include any new development on the site, any new type of ground- <br /> disturbing activities, or involve removal of any paleontological resources. No impacts to geology <br /> and soil resources would occur. <br /> 5.3.1.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions <br /> This alternative does not include uses that would create new sources of regional air emissions <br /> and contribute to global climate change. There would be no impacts due to GHG emissions; <br /> however, the environmental benefits associated with energy efficiency and reliability would not be <br /> realized. <br /> 5.3.1.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials <br /> This alternative would not include any new development on the site or other ground-disturbing <br /> activities. No impacts associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances during <br /> Griffith Energy Storage Project 5-6 Tetra Tech/SCH 2022120675 <br /> Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2023 <br />