Laserfiche WebLink
The use of a 50-mm lens would have produced the same images; however, the end <br />product would have been a patchwork of photographs, breaking the view rather than <br />creating the seamless photographs provided in the EIR, which present the scale and <br />appearance of the project within the panorama of the largest landscape setting. <br />From the testimony, a major criticism is that the visual representations provide a <br />simulation that makes the homes appear smaller at the viewpoint locations than they <br />will actually be. The comment needs to be weighed in the context of the CEQA- <br />mandated analysis -the purpose of the simulations is to provide the public and <br />decision-makers a tool that defines whether or not the homes may be seen, to what <br />degree, and how the visual impacts can be mitigated if the developed sites are visible. <br />The proposed home sites would be located primarily at the uppermost interface of the <br />ridges that extend the development from the existing Kottinger Ranch development <br />easterly into the Oak Grove site. These areas have been identified by the Draft EIR as <br />the most stable areas for construction, which would also reduce potentially significant <br />impacts to wetlands and valleys located on down slope areas. This development <br />pattern would echo the visual character and impacts of the Kottinger Ranch project. <br />Staff notes that many developments that have taken place within the City are initially <br />visible, but, over time, as vegetation takes hold and matures, those visual impacts are <br />significantly or sometimes wholly mitigated. The Grey Eagle Estates development is but <br />one example of homes sites located closer to the tops of ridges where visual impacts <br />are minor. <br />The questions to be answered by the visual analysis are: <br />Will home sites be visible? The answer is yes, to some degree. <br />• Is there a reduction in the number of home sites that are now visible, due to a <br />reduction in the number of homes proposed from 98 to 51? The answer is yes. <br />• Can the visibility of the home sites be reduced with the use of landscaping <br />materials? The answer again is yes, and, to that end, the visual simulations <br />provided views of the site at construction, at five years and at 15 years. <br />• Are there further measures that can be used to reduce visibility? The answer <br />again is yes, and, as discussed further, these would be accomplished through <br />the lot-specific design review conducted with each lot. <br />During the Planning Commission's public hearing, members of the public asked if the <br />visual simulations adequately represented the size of the homes to be built, given the <br />proposed FAR's. Staff notes that the intent of the simulations was to show whether or <br />not a structure would be visible, not to represent precisely the size of the house on the <br />lot. As analyzed and stated, there will be some visual impact; however, that impact can <br />be mitigated by landscaping and custom lot design review, when additional visual <br />simulations will be required. Furthermore, additional lots have been added to the list of <br />"highly visible lots" such that these lots would be required to follow the site design <br />landscaping criteria for highly visible lots rather than the less rigorous criteria for lots not <br />Page 14 of 27 <br />