My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 22 - Approve Adjustments & CIP Amendment, & Agreements with Mark Thomas, So Cal Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), the U.S. Department of Transportation, & Caltrans for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project (No. 26-6718)
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2026
>
05/05/2026 Regular, HA
>
Item 22 - Approve Adjustments & CIP Amendment, & Agreements with Mark Thomas, So Cal Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), the U.S. Department of Transportation, & Caltrans for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project (No. 26-6718)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/30/2026 1:39:30 PM
Creation date
4/30/2026 8:07:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Agency
Public Works
Item #
22
Date
5/5/2026
Destruction Year
P
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.
/
3275
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
EXHIBIT 2 <br /> Visual Impact Assessment Guide— Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project <br /> Change to the Visual Environment <br /> 1. Will the project result in a noticeable change in the physical characteristics of the existing environment? <br /> (Consider all project components and construction impacts- both permanent and temporary, including <br /> landform changes, structures, noise barriers, vegetation removal, railing, signage, and contractor activities) <br /> High level of change (3) Moderate level of change (2) Low level of change (1) <br /> 2. Will the project complement or contrast with the visual character desired by the community? <br /> (Evaluate the scale and extent of the project features compared to the surrounding scale of the community. Is <br /> the project likely to give an urban appearance to an existing rural or suburban community? Is the change <br /> viewed as positive or negative? Research planning documents, or talk with local planners and community <br /> representatives to get a rough idea of what type of visual environment local residents envision for their <br /> community.) <br /> Highly incompatible (3) Somewhat incompatible (2) Somewhat compatible (1) <br /> 3. What types of project features and construction impacts are proposed? Are bridge structures, large <br /> excavations, sound barriers, or median planting removal proposed? <br /> (Certain project improvements can be of special local interest, causing a heightened level of public concern, <br /> and requiring a more focused visual analysis.) <br /> High concern (3) Moderate concern (2) Low concern (1) <br /> 4. Will the project changes likely be mitigated by normal means such as landscaping and architectural <br /> enhancement or will avoidance measures be necessary to minimize adverse change? <br /> (Consider the type of changes caused by the project, i.e., can undesirable views be screened or will desirable <br /> views be permanently obscured?) <br /> Project alternative may be needed (3) Extensive mitigation likely (2) Normal mitigation (1) <br /> 5. Will this project, when seen collectively with other projects, result in an aggregate adverse change in <br /> overall visual quality or character? <br /> (Identification of contributing projects should include any projects (both departmental and local) in the area <br /> that have been constructed within the last couple of years and those currently envisioned or planned for future <br /> construction. The window of time and the extent of area applicable to possible cumulative impacts should be <br /> based on a reasonable anticipation of the viewing public's perception.) <br /> Impacts likely in 0-5 years (3) Impacts likely in 6-10 years (2) Cumulative Impacts unlikely(1) <br /> Viewer Sensitivity <br /> 1. What is the potential that the project proposal may be controversial within the community, or opposed by <br /> any organized group? <br /> (This can be researched initially by talking with Departmental and local agency management and staff familiar <br /> with the affected community's sentiments as evidenced by past projects and/or current information. Factor in <br /> your own judgment as well.) <br /> High Potential (3) Moderate Potential (2) Low Potential (1) <br /> 2. How sensitive are potential viewer-groups likely to be regarding visible changes proposed by the project? <br /> (Consider among other factors the number of viewers within the group, probable viewer expectations, <br /> activities, viewing duration, and orientation. The expected viewer sensitivity level may be scoped by applying <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.