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
Visual Impact Assessment Griffith Energy Storage Project <br /> 6.3.2.4 KOP 4 <br /> The Project would introduce neutral colors,geometric shapes,and horizontal and vertical lines into <br /> the landscape setting.The Project would be barely visible from this location because of the screening <br /> of the Project site by rolling terrain and would not attract the attention of a casual observer,see <br /> Figure 9.The agricultural land with hilly terrain dominates the view.The earth-tone color of the sound <br /> wall would blend in with the landscape,especially during the drier months when the surrounding <br /> vegetation is predominantly tan.As shown in the simulation,the surrounding fields are tan in color <br /> and what little can be seen of the Project blends into the landscape setting. An analysis of potential <br /> visual impacts is summarized in Table 6. <br /> Table 6.Visual Quality Rating Analysis—KOP 4 <br /> Pre-DevelopmentRated Feature Post-Development Score Difference <br /> in Scores <br /> Landform 1 1 71 0 <br /> Explanation Visible land is flat to hilly. Post-development visible land is flat to hilly. <br /> Detail No change to the visible landforms would result from Project implementation. <br /> Vegetation 1 1 0 <br /> Explanation Little variation in low-lying grasses. Little variation in low-lying grasses. <br /> Detail Both the existing and simulated view show little contrast in vegetation. <br /> Water 0 0 0 <br /> No water is present on the Project site or in The Project would not introduce water to the <br /> Explanation the Project area. Project site. <br /> Detail Neither existing nor simulated views include any water features. <br /> Color 1 1 0 <br /> Muted color with little variation:tan Muted color with little variation: tan and <br /> associated with vegetation.Gray and brown green associated with vegetation would <br /> Explanation colors associated with fencing,transmission remain;Gray and brown colors associated <br /> towers and lines,utility poles and lines, with fencing,transmission towers and lines, <br /> roadway. utility poles and lines,roadway.Where visible <br /> Project would add tan and gray structures. <br /> Detail The dominate colors from this viewpoint are tan and green of vegetation and gray and brown of structures. <br /> Where visible,the Project would increase the amount of tan and gray,adding similar muted colors. <br /> Adjacent Scenery 1 1 0 <br /> Explanation Adjacent scenery provides views of hilly Adjacent scenery provides views of hilly <br /> grasslands. grasslands. <br /> Detail Views of adjacent scenery would remain with Project. <br /> Scarcity 1 1 0 <br /> Similar viewsheds throughout the region.No Similar viewsheds throughout the region.No <br /> Explanation unique or unusual aspects however,hilly unique or unusual aspects however,hilly <br /> terrain less common that county's terrain less common that county's <br /> predominately flat terrain. predominately flat terrain. <br /> Detail Existing views of hilly grasslands are typical of the area and are not unique or unusual. <br /> Cultural Modifications -1 -1 0 <br /> OTETRA TECH 40 August 2023 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.