My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Vantage to Pomona FEIS Index 34
>
Meetings
>
2018
>
12. December
>
2018-12-18 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
Vantage to Pomona FEIS Index 34
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/13/2018 1:49:29 PM
Creation date
12/13/2018 1:34:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
12/18/2018
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Alpha Order
a
Item
Conduct a Closed Record Meeting to consider the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation for the Vantage to Pomona Transmission Line Conditional Use Permit (CU-18-00001)
Order
1
Placement
Board Discussion and Decision
Row ID
50108
Type
Conduct closed record hearing
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.
/
980
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
Vantage to Pomona Heights Chapter 4 <br />230 kV Transmission Line Project FEIS Environmental Consequences <br /> PAGE 4-187 <br />4.8 VISUAL RESOURCES <br />Visual resource impacts would be created as result of the construction, operation, and maintenance of the <br />proposed Project and would be caused by proposed Project components (e.g., structures, lines, roads, <br />equipment) being seen from sensitive viewpoints; the effects of proposed Project components on the <br />inherent aesthetic values of the landscape or compatibility developed landscape; and from the effects on <br />the Visual Resource Management (VRM) Classes as identified by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management <br />(BLM). The effects on VRM Classes is determined by an assessment of whether or not the proposed <br />Project is in compliance with the stated objectives as defined in the BLM Manual 8400 series and current <br />policy. Compliance with other state, regional, or local applicable policies, goals, and objectives as <br />identified in the land management documents (e.g., county general plans) was also considered as part of <br />the compliance analysis. <br />4.8.1 Methods and Impact Types <br />4.8.1.1 Analysis Methods <br />The impact assessment closely follows the procedures identified in the BLM’s VRM system as detailed in <br />the Contrast Rating Manual 8431-1, with modifications appropriate to the proposed Project and lands not <br />under the jurisdiction of the BLM. The modified process considered the Project’s visual compatibility <br />with the developed landscape as well as the VRM components of scenic quality, viewer sensitivity, <br />distance zones, and contrast. A contrast analysis was conducted along all Action Alternative route <br />segment centerlines using Form 8400-4 and geographic information system (GIS) modeling that utilized <br />the access road disturbance model (see Section 2.4.3.2), vegetation and slope data, and existing <br />transmission line configuration data. <br />The effects analysis utilized a combination of GIS modeling, primary observation, and visual simulation <br />development to evaluate the effects of the proposed Project on visual resources. Viewshed modeling in <br />combination with contrast analysis was used to assess viewer impacts, an assessment from identified Key <br />Observation Points (KOPs) was conducted, mitigation measures were developed for agency consideration <br />and residual impacts were determined. Simulations were produced to assist in the assessment and were <br />used to illustrate the major visual impacts from KOPs (see Appendix C-4). <br />Visibility from sensitive viewpoints was generated by GIS using digital terrain data from the U.S. <br />Geological Survey and the sensitive viewpoints mapped. Because the proposed Project structures have not <br />been sited and engineered for each Action Alternative, landscape visibility was mapped using a 90-foot <br />uniform structure height for the centerline of each route segment and for the overhead-underground <br />transition stations. The 90-foot height is representative of the height expected for the majority of <br />structures. Typical H-frame structure height is expected to be approximately 65 to 90 feet; however, a <br />single pole structure may be up to 110 feet tall. Visibility of the Underground Design Option considered <br />visibility of the ground plane from sensitive viewpoints. <br />Digital imaging, GIS, computer aided design, and global positioning system (GPS) software assisted in <br />the development of the photo-simulations. The software used in photo-simulation includes: <br />• Adobe Photoshop CS5 – Used for photo manipulation and merging. <br />• Bentley MicroStation v8i – Used for modeling transmission line structures photo matching, <br />lighting, materials, and rendering simulations. <br />• Bentley Inroads v8.5 – Used for Digital Terrain Mapping and modeling. <br />• ArcView – Used for geographic information proposed Project data mapping.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.