Laserfiche WebLink
affordable housing units or funds, funding traffic calming measures in Kottinger Ranch <br />and citywide, and construction of needed infrastructure improvements including a City <br />water tank. <br />Visual Analysis <br />The principal vehicle for evaluating the impacts of the project on aesthetics and visual <br />resources is the representation of future visual conditions provided by the computer <br />simulations that have been provided. These simulations represent what would be seen <br />from within the site as well as from outside the site. These simulations represent views <br />as realistically as possible, and were prepared by a visual consultant with considerable <br />expertise in this area, working as part of the City's EIR team. <br />There has been considerable public testimony related to the adequacy of the visual <br />analysis in the EIR. These issues relate to: <br />• whether the photographs on which the visual simulations are based utilized an <br />appropriate lens, <br />• whether the choice of viewpoints was appropriately chosen, and <br />• whether the size of the buildings presented in the visual simulations adequately <br />represents what is likely to be viewed when the project is developed. <br />Attached is an email communication from Alan Roberts on these issues and the <br />response to Mr. Roberts email from Mundie and Associates, the City EIR consultant. <br />The Mundie response was incorporated in the following discussion. <br />CEQA Criteria <br />The visual analysis is a part of the analysis of aesthetics and visual resources per <br />CEQA and is found in the Draft EIR which outlines significance criteria for the analysis <br />of the proposed project. CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Items Xll (a), (b), (c), and (d) <br />states the significance criteria and can be found on pp. 7 - 8 of the June 27th Planning <br />Commission staff report. Additionally, project consistency with public policies regarding <br />visual quality, as described in the Pleasanton General Plan, was also taken into <br />account. <br />Lens Choice <br />The issue of the use of a 28-mm lens versus a 50-mm lens has had significant <br />discussion related to how realistic the representation is. A 28-mm lens was used <br />because such a lens enabled a larger area to be photographed at one time, duplicating <br />the seamless manner in which people view a panorama, scanning the view from side to <br />side. The 50-mm lens duplicates the manner in which people view a scene when <br />standing stationary. This perception of a wider view than that provided by a 50-mm lens <br />occurs routinely in landscape observation. Staff and the consultant believe that the 28- <br />mm lens would duplicate this perception by portraying the project within the visual <br />context that conveys its appearance relative to existing landscape features. <br />Page 13 of 27 <br />