Laserfiche WebLink
OCTA I July 2016 1 1� <br />VIASupplement J <br />in a new adverse or significant visual impact, nor would it increase the severity of a visual <br />impact as compared to the originally approved project and as evaluated in the 2015 EA. <br />Conclusions <br />The minor design modifications that have been determined to potentially affect visual <br />resources and were re-evaluated in this memo include the Westminster Avenue Bridge, <br />the Santa Ana River Bridge, and repositioning of TPSS. Realignment of the track and <br />change from one to two -wire catenary in the Pacific Electric right of way (PE ROW) is also <br />proposed; however, the visual impact of the two -wire catenary within the PE ROW is not <br />considered to be adverse/significant in the context of the prior analysis and presence of <br />overhead wires in adjacent areas, therefore no re-evaluation of the prior visual impact <br />analysis was performed for this change. <br />Westminster Avenue Bridge. Based on the analysis, the modified bridge design would <br />not diminish the visual quality of the area. No adverse or significant visual effect was <br />identified in the EA/FONSI; therefore, this project feature would not result in a new <br />adverse or significant visual effect, nor would it increase the severity of a visual effect as <br />compared to the originally approved project and as evaluated in the 2015 EA/FONSI. <br />Santa Ana River Bridge. Based on the analysis, the modified bridge design has not <br />substantially changed since the approval of the LPA in 2015 and the re -positioning of the <br />bridge would result in less visual impact when compared to the approved LPA. Therefore, <br />no substantial changes in the significance determinations identified in the 2015 EA/FONSI <br />would result. No adverse or significant visual effect was identified in the prior EA/EIR; <br />therefore, this project feature would not result in a new adverse or significant visual effect, <br />nor would it increase the severity of a visual effect as compared to the originally approved <br />project and as evaluated in the 2015 EA/FONSI. <br />TPSS Repositioning. The TPSS would be generally located in areas that are multi -family <br />residential, commercial/light industrial and low to mid -rise commercial in nature and of low <br />to moderate in visual quality. No adverse or significant visual effect was identified in the <br />2015 EA/FONSI; therefore, this project feature would not result in a new adverse or <br />significant visual effect, nor would it increase the severity of a visual effect as compared to <br />the originally approved project and as evaluated in the 2015 EA/FONSI. <br />This analysis concludes that there would be no change to the conclusion that visual <br />impacts would not be adverse or significant with the implementation of minor design <br />modifications to the adopted 2015 Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), and therefore, there <br />131 Page <br />