Appendix 17A Scenic Quality Rating Forms

Similar documents
Visual Impact Assessment 830 Pratt Avenue St Helena, CA

5.11 AESTHETICS ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Nob Hill Pipeline Improvements Project EIR

Visual Resource. July 2017

Project Analysis and Evaluation. UNIT 10 Project Analysis and Evaluation

6.8 SCENIC HIGHWAYS Introduction

Northland Regional Landscape Assessment Worksheet

Verde Valley Landscape Character Type

Preservation of Scenery National Historic Trails. Rob Sweeten BLM Kevin Rauhe EPG

Long Distance Landscapes

Galiuro Drilling EA Scenery Debby Kriegel 12/9/16

Visual Impact Rating Form - Instructions

CHAPTER 10 AESTHETICS

Enjoy the View Visual Resources Inventory Report

Appendix One. Landscape. Areas of Outstanding Landscape Value: Criteria for Selection. Landscape Character

Northland Regional Landscape Assessment Worksheet

VISUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE TRI-STATE MONTROSE-NUCLA-CAHONE TRANSMISSION LINE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SOUTHWEST COLORADO

Analysis of Landscape Character for Visual Resource Management 1

6.3 VISUAL RESOURCES. Landscape Character

APPENDIX C: HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (prev. Ordinance #2008-1)

Section 3.16 Visual Quality

Glenn Highway MP DSR. Landscape Narrative

Scenic Resources Revised 7/19/2011

Northland Regional Landscape Assessment Worksheet

3.2 AESTHETICS/VISUAL QUALITY

3.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources

Landscape considerations in Forests & Woodlands. Jill Bullen, Senior Landscape Specialist

3.16 Visual Affected Environment. Sterling Highway MP Project Draft SEIS Chapter 3, Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

MANAGEMENT. Table 7. Forest Scenery Goal and Objectives: Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Project

The analysis area for the scenic resource is the project area described in Chapter 1. Affected Environment/Existing Condition

Northland Regional Landscape Assessment Worksheet

5.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES Physical Setting

MEMORANDUM OF BOG TURTLE HABITAT INVESTIGATION

3.7 Aesthetics. A. Setting. 1. Existing Views of the Quarry

4.1 AESTHETICS. Table Impact and Mitigation Summary: Aesthetics. Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact

Visual Impact Assessment - December Figure 5.2: Viewshed analysis of the haul route.

APPENDIX V FRAMEWORK VISUAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN

D.14 Visual Resources

Rangeland Health (Rangeland only)

Lower Sensitivity. VS Classification Level 2: Exposed Upland/Plateau

In the tall grass prairie, grasses can be up to 2 meters tall! This is tall grass prairie at a state park in Iowa.

Woodland Conservation and the Master Plan

5. Environmental Analysis

Appendix C Visual Analysis Information

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DEEP VALLEY DRIVE AND INDIAN PEAK ROAD MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

3. Highway Landscaping Assessment

Toddington Central Bedfordshire Stage 3 Green Belt Study December 2017

Lower Sensitivity. VS Classification Level 2: Hills, Lower Plateau & Scarp Slopes (74%)/ Lowland Valleys (17%) / Exposed Upland/Plateau (7%)

4.1 AESTHETICS EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ALAMITOS BAY MARINA REHABILITATION PROJECT CITY OF LONG BEACH

VISUAL QUALITY POLICIES

Section 6A 6A Purpose of the Natural Features and Landscapes Provisions

3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

Genex Kidston Connection Project: Draf t Environmental Assessment Report Powerlink Queensland

Northland Regional Landscape Assessment Worksheet

ROSEMONT 138kV TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT. Public Open House Meeting #2 August 27, 2009

3.1 AESTHETICS Background and Methodology

920 BAYSWATER AVENUE PROJECT

5.8 Visual Resources and Aesthetic Qualities

Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Project: Scenery Resources Report

36.1. PURPOSE APPLICABILITY DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES

2012 FINAL SOILS AREA 2 Envirothon Questions Answer KEY

Figure 6e: Ndwalane Mainline Toll Plaza Viewshed Analysis

Soil Notes. General Soil Information

DOCKETED 09-RENEW EO-1

Review of East Dunbartonshire Local Landscape Areas, A Light Touch Review

Protecting Scenic Views

Lower Sensitivity. VS Classification Level 2: Exposed Upland/Plateau


APPENDIX C. Architectural and Environmental Design Standards. Environmentally sensitive areas should be protected.

Reading the Driftless Landscape

22a. Existing Condition. 22b. Simulation of NE 20th Street Alternative (D3)

Annex H. Visual Specialist Report

UNIT 3. LANDSCAPES CHANGE. PRIMARY 3/ Social Science Pedro Antonio López Hernández

MOOLARBEN COAL PROJECT

4.8 Landform Alteration and Aesthetics

Describing Places- Adjective Word Order

4.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL QUALITY

SITE ASSESSMENT FORM

3.1 Aesthetics and Visual Resources

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER LAN DSCAPE ARCHITECT. Main Topics: ARL 200 UNITY ~ STRONG CHARACTER

A. General Plan: Land Use, Growth Management and the Built Environment Element. d. Use visually unobtrusive building materials.

Apply scoring methodology

B4. Te tiaki taonga tuku iho - Natural heritage

Digital Terrestrial Television Infrastructure Rollout. Environmental Impact Assessment - Tsumkwe -

Cheyenne River Range Area Management Plan. Buffalo Gap National Grassland Wall Ranger District. Scenery Resource Specialist Report

Introduction. The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams. Eleanor Roosevelt ( )

CB1 Moderately undulating landscape with slight gilgai (few inches) formation: broad ridge tops and upper slopes of moderately shallow grey cracking

Covenant Design Review Committee Supplemental Design Criteria

McCormick Pit Category 1 Class A License, Pit Below Water For Blueland Farms Limited. Visual Impact Assessment Report February 2013

Lower Sensitivity. VS Classification Level 2: Exposed Upland/Plateau

4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Sherman Pass Project Post-Fire Treatment Scenery Report Barbara Jackson, Landscape Architect, 3/30/2016

Visual Assessment and Addendum

Glossary. Acceptable Levels of Quality The lowest standard permissible in the constituents' view.

The analysis of key visual characteristics and attributes that contribute to variations in the

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW ORDINANCE DESIGN GUIDELINES DECEMBER 2000 PREPARED FOR THE MEREDITH PLANNING BOARD BY CHRISTOPHER P. WILLIAMS, ARCHITECTS

- - - Key Characteristics

2011 ASLA Design Awards

Town of Vershire Road Erosion Inventory Report

City of Lafayette Staff Report

Transcription:

1 2 Appendix 17A Scenic Quality Rating Forms

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT SCENIC QUALITY RATING SUMMARY Date: March 7, 2018 Landscape Character Unit: N/A Key Observation Point: KOP 259 on State Route 12 Evaluators (names): Jennifer Ban, PLA Scenic Quality Rating Unit (KOP): KOP 259 on State Route 12 EXISTING SCENIC QUALITY Key Factors Scenic Quality Rating (1) Landform 1 Explanation Generally flat agricultural landscape with some raised topography where access roads grade up to meet State Route (SR) 12. (2) Vegetation 3 Contrast in vegetation between shorter grasses along access road and taller grasses bordering flooded fields with vegetation stubble in foreground and trees growing in groupings on upland areas and on horizon line. (3) Water 2.5 Water visible when fields are wet from rain or irrigated. (4) Color 4 (5) Adjacent Scenery 4.5 (6) Scarcity 4 Color provided by seasonal variations such as when trees in leaf, grass is green or brown, and fall colors. Strong contrast between large visible portions of blue sky against browns and greens of fields. Blue and white color of sky reflected on flooded fields. Limited amount of contrasting color from buildings. Few visual intrusions and views of the Diablo Range to the southwest add to the scenic quality. Views over agricultural lands with intermittent hedgerows and vegetation and flooded fields that reflect sky add to quality of views from the roadway. View is somewhat similar to others in the region but includes a scenic vista across ag fields. View is from a road noted for its scenic qualities. (7) Cultural Modification 0 Wooden transmission lines and a residence are the primary cultural modifications and fairly harmonious (8) Total Score 19 (9) Scenic Quality Rating C A = 29-32 B = 24-28 C = 19-23 D = 14-18 E = 9-13 F = 4-8 G = 0-3

Key factors Landform Vegetation Water Color Influence of Adjacent Scenery Scarcity Cultural Modifications High vertical relief as expressed in prominent cliffs, spires, or massive rock outcrops, or severe surface variation or highly eroded formations including major badlands or dune systems; or detail features dominant and exceptionally striking and intriguing such as glaciers. A variety of vegetative types as expressed in interesting forms, textures, and patterns. Clear and clean appearing, still, or cascading white water, any of which are a dominant factor in the landscape. Rich color combinations, variety or vivid color; or pleasing contrasts in the soil, rock, vegetation, water or snow fields. Adjacent scenery greatly enhances visual quality. One of a kind; or unusually memorable, or very rare within region. Consistent chance for exceptional wildlife or wildflower viewing, etc. Modifications add favorably to visual variety while promoting visual harmony. * A rating of greater than 5 can be given but must be supported by written justification. Scenic Quality Inventory and Evaluation Chart Rating Criteria and Score Steep canyons, mesas, buttes, cinder cones, and drumlins; or interesting erosional patterns or variety in size and shape of landforms; or detail features which are interesting though not dominant or exceptional. Low rolling hills, foothills, or flat valley bottoms; or few or no interesting landscape features. Some variety of vegetation, but only one or two major types. Little or no variety or contrast in vegetation. Flowing, or still, but not dominant in the landscape. Absent, or present, but not noticeable. Some intensity or variety in colors and contrast of the soil, rock and vegetation, but not a dominant scenic element. Subtle color variations, contrast, or interest; generally mute tones. Adjacent scenery moderately enhances overall visual quality. Adjacent scenery has little or no influence on overall visual quality. Distinctive, though somewhat similar to others within the region. Interesting within its setting, but fairly common within the region. * 5+ 3 1 Modifications add little or no visual variety to the area, and introduce no discordant elements. Modifications add variety but are very discordant and promote strong disharmony. 2 0-4 INSTRUCTIONS Purpose: To rate the visual quality of the scenic resource on all BLM managed lands. How to Identify Scenic Value: All Bureau lands have scenic value. How to Determine Minimum Suitability: All BLM lands are rated for scenic values. Also rate adjacent or intermingling non-blm lands within the planning unit. When to Evaluate Scenic Quality: Rate for scenery under the most critical conditions (i.e., highest user period or season of use, sidelight, proper atmospheric conditions, etc.). How to Delineate Rating Areas: Consider the following factors when delineating rating areas. 1. Like physiographic characteristics (i.e., land form, vegetation, etc.). 2. Similar visual patterns, texture, color, variety, etc. 3. Areas which have a similar impact from cultural modifications (i.e., roads, historical and other structures, mining operations, or other surface disturbances). NOTE: Values for each rating criteria are maximum and minimum scores only. It is also possible to assign scores within these ranges.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT SCENIC QUALITY RATING SUMMARY Date: March 7, 2018 Landscape Character Unit: N/A Key Observation Point: KOP 259 on State Route 12 Evaluators (names): Jennifer Ban, PLA Scenic Quality Rating Unit (KOP): KOP 259 on State Route 12 SIMULATED SCENIC QUALITY Key Factors Scenic Quality Rating (1) Landform 1.25 (2) Vegetation 3 (3) Water 2.5 Explanation Generally flat agricultural landscape with some raised topography where access roads grade up to meet levee road remains the same. New shaft site introduce geometric raised landform in to middleground views. RTM disposal areas do not stand out/are not noticeable in this view because they re blocked by foreground and middleground vegeration. Vegetation remains mostly the same. Contrast in vegetation between shorter grasses along access road and taller grasses bordering flooded fields with vegetation stubble in foreground and trees growing in groupings on upland areas and on horizon line. Water would be visible when field are irrigated. (4) Color 4 (5) Adjacent Scenery 4.5 (6) Scarcity 4 Color provided by seasonal variations such as when trees in leaf, grass is green or brown, and fall colors. Strong contrast between large visible portions of blue sky against browns and greens of fields. Blue and white color of sky reflected on flooded fields. Limited amount of contrasting color from buildings. Variety in color is not reduced by shaft sites. Few visual intrusions and views of the Diablo Range to the southwest add to the scenic quality. Views over agricultural lands with intermittent hedgerows and vegetation and flooded fields that reflect sky add to quality of views from the roadway. Not affected by change. View is somewhat similar to others in the region but includes a scenic vista across ag fields that would be opened up more. View is from a road noted for its scenic qualities would be affected. (7) Cultural Modification -2 Wooden transmission lines and residence are the primary cultural modifications, are fairly harmonious, and would remain. Addition of new transmission lines introduces tall steel vertical structures that look industrial into the landscape. Raised, geometric shaft site island would introduce a landform not compatible with flat ag lands. (8) Total Score 17.25 (9) Scenic Quality Rating D A = 29-32 B = 24-28 C = 19-23 D = 14-18 E = 9-13 F = 4-8 G = 0-3

Key factors Landform Vegetation Water Color Influence of Adjacent Scenery Scarcity Cultural Modifications High vertical relief as expressed in prominent cliffs, spires, or massive rock outcrops, or severe surface variation or highly eroded formations including major badlands or dune systems; or detail features dominant and exceptionally striking and intriguing such as glaciers. A variety of vegetative types as expressed in interesting forms, textures, and patterns. Clear and clean appearing, still, or cascading white water, any of which are a dominant factor in the landscape. Rich color combinations, variety or vivid color; or pleasing contrasts in the soil, rock, vegetation, water or snow fields. Adjacent scenery greatly enhances visual quality. One of a kind; or unusually memorable, or very rare within region. Consistent chance for exceptional wildlife or wildflower viewing, etc. Modifications add favorably to visual variety while promoting visual harmony. * A rating of greater than 5 can be given but must be supported by written justification. Scenic Quality Inventory and Evaluation Chart Rating Criteria and Score Steep canyons, mesas, buttes, cinder cones, and drumlins; or interesting erosional patterns or variety in size and shape of landforms; or detail features which are interesting though not dominant or exceptional. Low rolling hills, foothills, or flat valley bottoms; or few or no interesting landscape features. Some variety of vegetation, but only one or two major types. Little or no variety or contrast in vegetation. Flowing, or still, but not dominant in the landscape. Absent, or present, but not noticeable. Some intensity or variety in colors and contrast of the soil, rock and vegetation, but not a dominant scenic element. Subtle color variations, contrast, or interest; generally mute tones. Adjacent scenery moderately enhances overall visual quality. Adjacent scenery has little or no influence on overall visual quality. Distinctive, though somewhat similar to others within the region. Interesting within its setting, but fairly common within the region. * 5+ 3 1 Modifications add little or no visual variety to the area, and introduce no discordant elements. Modifications add variety but are very discordant and promote strong disharmony. 2 0-4 INSTRUCTIONS Purpose: To rate the visual quality of the scenic resource on all BLM managed lands. How to Identify Scenic Value: All Bureau lands have scenic value. How to Determine Minimum Suitability: All BLM lands are rated for scenic values. Also rate adjacent or intermingling non-blm lands within the planning unit. When to Evaluate Scenic Quality: Rate for scenery under the most critical conditions (i.e., highest user period or season of use, sidelight, proper atmospheric conditions, etc.). How to Delineate Rating Areas: Consider the following factors when delineating rating areas. 1. Like physiographic characteristics (i.e., land form, vegetation, etc.). 2. Similar visual patterns, texture, color, variety, etc. 3. Areas which have a similar impact from cultural modifications (i.e., roads, historical and other structures, mining operations, or other surface disturbances). NOTE: Values for each rating criteria are maximum and minimum scores only. It is also possible to assign scores within these ranges.