Visual Impact: Durst DEIS Photosimulations Seriously Flawed
March 20, 2008
George Janes has provided a visual impact assessment that addresses some significant flaws in the Durst DEIS. The simulation above, for instance, matches the grading plan with the building locations to provide an accurate representation of disturbed land. In the DEIS, according to Janes, Durst makes unsubstantiated assumptions in order to show little to no visual impact.
→ George Janes’ Photosimulation Critique of Durst DEIS”
George Janes of the Environmental Simulation Center has studied and critiqued the photosimulations provided in Durst Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The link to the entire document is below followed by Janes’ summary of conclusions.
“The photosimulations presented in the DEIS do not accurately disclose the proposal’s impact on visual resources. They have not been performed according to the accepted standards for photosimulation in the environmental review process. They should NOT be used as evidence as to the project’s impacts on visual resources, as they do not accurately depict the action proposed. Since the Scoping Document called for photosimulations, and since the photosimulations produced do not accurately depict the proposed development’s impact on visual resources, the Lead Agency should require the Applicant to produce additional materials that fully disclose those impacts.”
Comments
One Response to “Visual Impact: Durst DEIS Photosimulations Seriously Flawed”
Got something to say?
Clarity not misrepresentation is needed for proper process.
Photosimulations presented thus far are misleading. Please have Durst submit accurate materials that do not gloss over true impact.