3.1 AESTHETICS This section describes the existing visual characteristics of the plan area and evaluates the potential of the 2018 LRDP to result in substantial adverse visual impacts. The visual impact analysis considers existing scenic resources and the potential for public views to be affected by the project. In response to the NOP, comments were received that identified concerns with potential building heights, fencing, and the aesthetic changes from loss of open space, primarily associated with potential changes to Russell Field. With respect to Russell Field, initial considerations for campus land uses changes included potential redevelopment/reuse of Russell Field; however, student housing development on Russell Field is no longer proposed as part of the 2018 LRDP and therefore, this issue is not addressed within this analysis. All other aesthetic-related comments are addressed in the environmental analysis of this section. 3.1.1 Regulatory Setting FEDERAL There are no federal programs or policies addressing visual resources that pertain to the 2018 LRDP. STATE California Scenic Highway Program California s Scenic Highway Program was created by the California Legislature in 1963 and is managed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The goal of this program is to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from changes that would affect the aesthetic value of the land adjacent to highways. A highway may be designated scenic depending on how much of the natural landscape travelers can see, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes on travelers enjoyment of the view (Caltrans 2008). There are no designated or eligible scenic highways within the vicinity of the campus. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Design Review Process Design review of campus projects takes place throughout the project planning, design, review, and approval processes to sustain valued elements of the campus visual environment, to assure new projects contribute to a connected and cohesive campus environment, and to otherwise minimize adverse aesthetics effects as feasible. Formal design review takes place for every major capital campus project by the campus Design Review Committee, which includes standing members from the Offices of Campus Planning and Environmental Stewardship, Design and Construction Management, Grounds, and other departments concerned with potential aesthetics effects, as well as program representatives and invited design professionals with expertise relevant to the project type. The Design Review Committee is advisory to the Campus Architect and recommendations from the committee are reported to the Chancellor s Committee on Campus Planning and Design, the body responsible for reviewing most campus-based projects. Many project approvals take place under authority delegated from the Board of Regents with design review and approval taking place 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-1
by the Chancellor of. Certain projects go through further design review by the UC Offices of the President prior to consideration by The Regents. For smaller minor capital and maintenance projects that do not require formal design review, representatives from Design and Construction Management, Campus Planning and Environmental Stewardship, and other departments concerned with potential aesthetics effects participate in informal design review during the project approval process. Campus design standards and plans that provide the basis for design review include the Physical Design Framework Plan, as identified in Chapter 1, Introduction, and the Campus Design Guide manual, which has been in place and updated annually since 1994 and provides a list of required products and mandatory design constraints for all construction use on campus. In particular, the Campus Design Guide manual requires that campus projects minimize glare through window sizing, shades, and window glazing. The manual also requires that campus projects complement existing trees and vegetation. This includes the preservation of campus trees where feasible, but also installation of landscaping that does not preclude long-distance views where appropriate. Additional guidelines include the campus Architectural Design Guidelines used by the Architects and Engineers Office to communicate design objectives to consulting architects and further used by the Design Review Committee to evaluate proposed architectural designs. Other Campus Planning Documents There are three other campus planning efforts that are considered applicable to aesthetics and visual resources within the campus. The Putah Creek Riparian Reserve Management Plan provides guidance for management of the Putah Creek Riparian Reserve. The plan is intended to increase the function of the Reserve as a naturalized habitat resource and to increase mature trees and native grasses within the Putah Creek Riparian Reserve, thereby increasing the aesthetic appeal of the area. The Core Campus Capacity Study and Garden Walk Conceptual Design identifies detailed development patterns for the central campus, including academic and administrative building sites and a linked system of pedestrian corridors, quads, bikeways, and other public spaces. The Arboretum Master Plan provides development guidelines and development priorities for enhancing the existing resources at the Arboretum and for expanding the developed areas of the Arboretum. LOCAL As noted in Section 3.0.2, University of California Autonomy,, a constitutionally created State entity, is not subject to municipal regulations of surrounding local governments for uses on property owned or controlled by that are in furtherance of the university s education purposes. However, may consider, for coordination purposes, aspects of local plans and policies for the communities surrounding the campus when it is appropriate and feasible, but it is not bound by those plans and policies in its planning efforts. City of Davis General Plan The City of Davis General Plan, amended in 2007, includes goals, policies, and standards specific to maintaining an aesthetically pleasing environment. The following goals and policies related to aesthetics are presented in the Urban Design and Neighborhood Preservation Element of the City of Davis General Plan. Goal UD-1: Encourage community design throughout the City that helps to build community, encourage human interaction and support non-automobile transportation. Policy UD 1.1: Promote urban/community design which is human scaled, comfortable, safe, and conducive to pedestrian use. 3.1-2 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
Goal UD 2: Maintain an aesthetically pleasing environment and manage a sustainable community forest to optimize environmental, aesthetic, social, and economic benefits. Policy UD 2.1: Preserve and protect scenic resources and elements in and around Davis, including natural habitat and scenery and resources reflective of place and history. Goal UD 3: Use good design as a means to promote human safety. Policy UD 3.2: Provide exterior lighting that enhances safety and night use in public spaces, but minimizes impacts on surrounding land uses. City of Davis Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinance The City enacted the Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinance in 1998. The ordinance, commonly referred to as the City s Dark Sky Ordinance, provides standards for outdoor lighting in an effort to minimize light pollution, glare, and light trespass caused by inappropriate or misaligned light fixtures, while improving nighttime public safety, utility, security, and preserving the night sky as a natural resource and thus facilitating people s enjoyment of stargazing. This ordinance does not apply to interior lighting, including lighting at greenhouse facilities. Additionally, single family residential and duplex properties are exempted from the ordinance (City of Davis 2016). Other Local Jurisdictions General plans of other communities in the project region also contain policies that are intended to minimize adverse visual changes from new development. In particular, the Solano County General Plan identifies the county s significant visual corridors, including the Dixon Ridge area along Interstate 80 (I-80) between Vacaville, Dixon and Davis, and notes that the County shall make special efforts to encourage and assist cities in maintaining their community identities by retaining visual corridors and establishing community buffers. In this context, the County has adopted a Resources Element, which identifies specific elements of the visual landscape that should be protected and also aims at directly new development along scenic roadways in a manner that respects the scenic attributes of the roadway. I-80 in the area of the campus is identified as a scenic roadway (Solano County 2008). 3.1.2 Environmental Setting REGIONAL SETTING The campus is located on approximately 5,300 acres within Yolo and Solano counties. The area consists of predominantly agricultural uses with small to medium-sized cities and towns located along major transportation corridors. The campus is generally bounded by agricultural uses to the west and south and by residential, institutional, and commercial land uses within the City of Davis to the north and east. More intense urban development lies approximately 15 miles to the east in the cities that comprise the Sacramento metropolitan area. I-80, which serves as a major transportation corridor between Sacramento and San Francisco, passes through property and generally separates the central and southern campuses, while State Route (SR) 113 separates the western and central campuses. Views within the Davis area generally consist of open views of agricultural land and supporting facilities with views of hills to the west and views of developed areas within the City of Davis or UC Davis campus. The surrounding agricultural lands and views of the Coast Range Mountains (Coast 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-3
Range) to the west create a distinct identity for the Davis area, and physically separate the Davis area from other communities. UC DAVIS The campus consists of four general geographic areas: the central campus, the west campus, the south campus, and Russell Ranch. In addition, owns several properties in the City of Davis, including buildings in downtown Davis and buildings and vacant parcels in the South Davis Research Park located south of I-80. Important visual resources of each campus geographic area and 's off-campus properties are described below. Central Campus The central campus consists of approximately 900 acres and is generally bounded by I-80 to the south; SR 113 to the west; Russell Boulevard to the north; and First Street, A Street and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) to the east. Of the four campuses, the central campus is the most urbanized and includes the majority of academic and administrative buildings, housing areas, recreational facilities, parking, and support facilities. It is characterized by existing structures with varying architectural styles. The central campus is extensively landscaped, with mature vegetation and trees masking the mass of some academic buildings and obscuring long-range views. The Quad, a large lawn between the Memorial Union and Shields Library, is one of the primary focal points of the entire campus. Other large open spaces include the recreational fields along Russell Boulevard, the recreational fields near the intersection of La Rue Road and Hutchison Drive, the campus Arboretum, and teaching and research field areas east of SR 113 and north of I-80. The majority of structures within the central campus do not exceed four stories in height. Sproul Hall, which is nine stories in height, is the tallest building in Yolo County. The Jan Shrem and Maria Manetti Shrem Museum of Art, which was built in the fall of 2016 and is one of the newest on-site structures, and the Mondavi Arts Center, are two of the more distinctive visual elements of the UC Davis campus and can be seen by motorists from I-80. Both structures display high integrity architectural elements and are attractive. The east side of the central campus borders A Street and downtown Davis and consists of a variety of academic buildings ranging in height from one to nine stories. Along the north and east sides of the central campus are formal open space areas with mature trees and expansive lawn areas used for passive and active recreation. The mix of academic buildings and landscaped open areas imparts a strong visual identity for the campus as a welcoming and established institution. Development toward the west side of the central campus is typically viewed from and defined by the La Rue loop road which provides automobile access into and through the central campus. La Rue Road includes a landscaped median and landscaping along each edge of the roadway. Viewpoints from La Rue Road allow visual access to large dormitories, recreation fields, the Recreation Hall and Activities and Recreation Center complex, and large academic buildings. The widest streets within the central campus, such as California Avenue, West Quad, North Quad, and Shields Avenue, allow linear views of the campus. There are many older buildings on the central campus, including a number of buildings reflective of the campus s agricultural heritage, such as Wyatt Pavilion, the Silo building, the Hog Barn, and North and South halls, which were residence halls that have been converted to offices. Others are more traditional college structures such as Hart Hall and Walker Hall. Most of the large buildings in the central campus are constructed of concrete or steel and are indicative of institutional structures, with modest architectural elements that are generally unremarkable, while small buildings tend to be of wood-frame construction. Newer 3.1-4 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
buildings such as the Plant and Environmental Sciences, the Life Sciences Addition, and the Mondavi Center for the Performing Arts make extensive use of pre-cast concrete or stone exteriors, color, and tall multistoried glass walls or building entrance areas, and have introduced a more interesting architectural style than the older campus buildings. The campus Arboretum is a distinct visual amenity within the central campus. The Arboretum includes a landscaped area with bicycle and pedestrian paths along both sides of the Arboretum Waterway. The Arboretum extends approximately 1.5 miles from the Solano Park housing area on the east side of the central campus to the west side of the central campus in the Health Sciences District. From within the Arboretum, few buildings or roads are visible and the aesthetic experience is dominated by the linear views of the waterway and the extensive landscaping surrounding the waterway. Night lighting includes street lights, interior and exterior building lights, and automobile headlights. Glare is caused by light reflections from pavement, vehicles, and building materials, such as reflective glass and polished surfaces. During daylight hours, the amount of glare depends on intensity and direction of sunlight. Dominant sources of night lighting on the central campus are the field lights used for illumination of sports and recreation fields, which can cause a skyglow effect that can be visible from long-distance viewpoints. Glare and night lighting from other sources on the campus are minimized by mature landscaping and low building profiles that tend to minimize glare. The generally low buildings and large amounts of landscaping, combined with the central campus urban location, keep night lighting from appearing particularly intrusive to individuals in nearby buildings and residences. West Campus The west campus is located on approximately 2,200 acres, the majority of which consists of agricultural fields. The west campus is generally bound by Russell Boulevard to the north, SR 113 to the east, Putah Creek to the south, and privately owned agricultural lands to the west. Uses on the west campus include teaching and research fields with supporting facilities, campus support facilities such as the University Airport and the campus landfill, West Village campus housing, and academic and administrative buildings such as those comprising the California National Primate Research Center. Visual resources on the west campus primarily consist of agricultural fields and open space with scattered low-intensity development that allow long-distance views to the west and south from many locations. Within the west campus formal rows of olive trees line two roads Hopkins Road and Olive Tree Lane. Hopkins Road connects Hutchison Drive with the Putah Creek Riparian Reserve and is the access road for the University Airport and academic buildings on the south campus. Olive Tree Lane is a pedestrian and bicycle road that connects the Russell Boulevard bike path with Hutchison Drive. The narrow width and dense rows of olive trees on these roads contribute to a rural visual character that defines the area and provide a unique, contained landscape with views extending only along and not outside the roads. Other areas with unique visual character on the west campus include the Putah Creek Riparian Reserve and the Old North Fork of Putah Creek. The large mature trees and topographical relief caused by the riparian channels contrast with the adjacent agricultural landscapes and provide visual appeal to these areas. Night lighting on the west campus is limited to lighting along roadways, exterior lights on the few scattered agricultural buildings, and concentrated lighting around campus support facilities and academic and administrative buildings. The lack of extensive lighting on parts of the west campus imparts a rural character to the night-time environment that contrasts with the urban night-time character of the central campus. 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-5
South Campus South campus consists of approximately 600 acres that are generally bounded by I-80 to the north and west, Putah Creek to the south, and privately owned agricultural lands to the east. Uses within the south campus are primarily rural including agricultural teaching and research, animal pastures, academic and administrative research buildings, and support facilities such as the campus wastewater treatment plant and an electrical substation. Most of the developed area on the south campus is east of Old Davis Road, while the land west of Old Davis Road is predominantly agricultural. Visual resources on the south campus primarily consist of views along Old Davis Road of agricultural fields and are limited by I-80 and existing landscaping. Night lighting on the south campus consists of roadway lighting along Old Davis Road, building area lighting around the small one-story buildings, and arena lighting for the equestrian facility. Russell Ranch Russell Ranch consists of approximately 1,600 acres and is bordered by privately owned agricultural land to the north, east, and west and by Putah Creek to the south. Land uses on Russell Ranch currently include agricultural teaching and research, the Russell-Ham home grounds and outbuilding that are used for academic/administrative uses, and habitat mitigation and restoration along Putah Creek. Visual resources of Russell Ranch include the open agricultural fields and views to the west of the Coast Range. REPRESENTATIVE VIEWPOINTS Exhibit 3.1-1 shows the location of photographs and viewpoints referenced in this analysis. Viewpoint 1: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-2, Viewpoint 1 represents a typical view of west campus, and is dominated by agricultural land with large trees along roadway edges and near structures. Due to a lack of varying topography, long-distance views of the Coast Range to the west are present. Lighting in the area is limited to some street lighting and security lighting near structures, including University Airport. Viewpoint 2: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-3, Viewpoint 2 presents a typical view of the existing West Village development. Existing structures are distinctive and up to four stories in height. Existing roadways are primarily two-lane arterial roadways with street parking and sidewalks. Open space areas are interspersed within the existing development. The area immediately surrounding West Village is currently teaching and research fields with some undeveloped open space and is visually similar to that of Viewpoint 1. Viewpoint 3: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-4, Viewpoint 3 is considered a representative view during the academic year of the Campus Quad, which consists of open grass space with trees scattered throughout. The Quad is surrounded by academic buildings on all sides, along with large sidewalks and walkways for people to walk about. Long-distance views from the quad and the majority of central campus are precluded by existing development and landscaping, as demonstrated by this viewpoint. Viewpoint 4: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-5, Viewpoint 4 presents a typical view of recreational open space within the central campus. This view is of Hutchison Intramural Field with associated field lighting. One of the parking structures and administrative buildings are located in the background. Similar to Viewpoint 3, long-distance views are precluded by existing development and landscaping. Viewpoint 5: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-6, Viewpoint 5 is a representative view of south campus within UC Davis. As noted above, views of and from south campus are primarily limited to those along I-80 and Old Davis Road, a two-lane arterial that extends through south campus. As shown in this view, 3.1-6 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
agricultural/teaching fields are the dominant feature west of Old Davis Road, while campus-related development, including the campus wastewater treatment facility and equestrian center, are located to the east, however landscaping largely prevents unimpeded views of campus facilities east of Old Davis Road and further east. I-80 is also a dominant visual feature from within south campus, as shown in this exhibit. Long-distance views are available from Old Davis Road looking to the west and from I-80. Viewpoint 6: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-7, Viewpoint 6 presents a typical view within and of Russell Ranch. Russell Ranch is largely agricultural and undeveloped land for research and teaching purposes. Kinsella Lane, as shown in this exhibit, is a dirt road that provides primary access to UC Davis teaching facilities at Russell Ranch. The topography is predominantly flat with little variation in elevation and long-distance views in all directions are only limited by trees located along the edges of fields and occasional structures. Viewpoint 7: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-8, Viewpoint 7 presents a view looking northward along A Street and is considered to be representative of visual conditions at the eastern interface between the City of Davis and. Landscaping along A Street largely presents unimpeded views of existing structures, which include academic, administrative, and residential uses. The tree-lined street is bordered on both sides by sidewalk and spaces for cars to parallel park. Long-distance views are also precluded by existing landscaping and trees. Viewpoint 8: As shown in Exhibit 3.1-9, Viewpoint 8 presents a view along Russell Boulevard and is a second example of the visual interface between existing campus development and the City of Davis. Russell Boulevard, a four-lane arterial road with bike lanes and a center median, is lined with sidewalks, trees, and other landscaping. The four-story building to the south serves as student housing. development along Russell Boulevard varies between housing (up to four stories in height) and open space/athletic facilities, while within the City, development is a mix of residential and commercial uses. VIEWER PERSPECTIVE AND SENSITIVITY Viewer sensitivity is considered in assessing the impacts of visual change and is a function of several factors. The sensitivity of the viewer or viewer concern is based on the visibility of resources in the landscape, proximity of the viewers to the visual resource, elevation of the viewers relative to the visual resource, frequency and duration of views, numbers of viewers, and types and expectations of individuals and viewer groups. The viewer s distance from landscape elements plays an important role in the determination of an area s visual quality. Visibility and visual dominance of landscape elements depend on their placement within a viewshed. A viewshed is defined as all of the surface area visible from a particular location (e.g., an overlook) or sequence of locations (e.g., a roadway or trail) (FHWA 1981). Landscape elements are considered higher or lower in visual importance based on their proximity to the viewer. Generally, the closer a resource is to the viewer, the more dominant, and thus the more visually important it is to the viewer. For purposes of analysis, landscapes are separated into foreground, middleground, and background views (Forest Service 1995). In general, the foreground is characterized by clear details (within 0.25 or 0.5 mile of the viewer); the middleground is characterized by the loss of clear detail in a landscape, creating a uniform appearance (from the foreground to 3 to 5 miles in the distance); and the background extends from the middleground to the limit of human sight (Bacon 1979). 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-7
Aesthetics Exhibit 3.1-1: Photo Key with Project Overlay 3.1-8 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
Aesthetics Exhibit 3.1-2: Viewpoint 1 Exhibit 3.1-3: Viewpoint 2 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-9
Aesthetics Exhibit 3.1-4: Viewpoint 3 Exhibit 3.1-5: Viewpoint 4 3.1-10 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
Aesthetics Exhibit 3.1-6: Viewpoint 5 Exhibit 3.1-7: Viewpoint 6 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-11
Aesthetics Exhibit 3.1-8: Viewpoint 7 Exhibit 3.1-9: Viewpoint 8 3.1-12 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
Visual sensitivity is also affected by viewer activity, awareness, and expectations in combination with the number of viewers and the duration of the view. Visual sensitivity is generally higher for views that are observed by people who are driving for pleasure, or engaging in recreation activities such as hiking, biking, camping or by residents of an area. Sensitivity is lower for people engaged in work activities or commuting to work. Viewer response must be based on regional context. The same landform or landscape feature may be valued differently in different settings; landscape features common in one area would not be valued as highly as the same feature in a landscape that generally lacks similar features. For example, a small hill may have little value in a mountainous area but may be highly valued in a landscape that has little topographic variation. LIGHT AND SKYGLOW CONDITIONS The terms glare and skyglow are used in this impact analysis to describe the visual effects of lighting. For the purposes of this impact analysis, glare is considered to be direct exposure to bright lights and skyglow is a glow that extends beyond the light source and dominates or partially dominates views above the horizon at night. Because the majority of the outlying campus lands are agricultural land, open space, or undeveloped, much of the campus is unlit during nighttime hours. Nighttime lighting within the central campus, eastern portion of the south campus, and eastern portion (West Village) of the west campus is limited to building and street lighting. The most substantial sources of night lighting on campus are the existing football stadium, the equestrian facility in south campus, and other open space/field lighting (e.g., Howard Field, Toomey Stadium, Hutchison Field, and Dairy Recreation Field). The campus is a prominent nighttime lighting source, especially when viewed from west of campus (i.e., along I-80 approaching SR 113) and particularly when recreation field lights are illuminated. Other more prominent nighttime lighting sources in the vicinity include those associated with the City of Davis to the north and northeast of the campus, SR 113, and I-80. 3.1.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, a visual resources impact would be considered significant if implementation of the project would do any of the following: have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway; substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; or create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Evaluation of potential aesthetic and visual resource impacts are based on review of site photos representing key vantage points and documents pertaining to the campus and surrounding area, including the City of Davis General Plan (City of Davis 2007) and the City of Davis Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinance (1998). In determining the level of significance, this analysis focuses on the nature and magnitude of visual change, the number of public vantage points from where this change 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-13
would be visible, and the number of viewers who would be affected by this change. It is assumed that projects implemented under the 2018 LRDP would comply with existing regulations and procedures pertaining to development within. ISSUES NOT EVALUATED FURTHER Visual Resources within a State Scenic Highway No highway segments in the vicinity of the campus, including I-80, have been designated by Caltrans or other state agency as scenic. The closest highway designated as an Eligible or Officially Designated State Scenic Highway is SR 160, located over 15 miles southeast of the campus (Caltrans 2011). Therefore, no impacts to visual resources within a state scenic highway would occur. This topic is not addressed further in this EIR. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Impact 3.1-1: Result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Implementation of the 2018 LRDP would result in the construction and operation of additional facilities within and could result in alteration of views to the coastal range, west of campus. While new construction would be consistent with, and immediately adjacent to, existing development which has already altered long-distance views, further development could further preclude longdistance views. Therefore, this impact would be significant. As noted above, the campus is located on predominantly flat terrain and is surrounded by primarily one- and two-story developments with some four- to six-story development to the north and east. Within the central campus and adjacent areas within, views are limited largely by existing development and landscaping, and long-distance views are precluded. As noted above, through implementation of the Physical Design Framework and adherence to the Campus Design Guide Manual, prioritizes maintenance of existing long-distance views along existing view corridors. As a result, development within the central campus is expected to be consistent with and complementary to existing development and is not anticipated to result in substantial changes in longdistance and scenic views from within or across the central campus. As a result, impacts would be less than significant within the central campus. Within the west campus and Russell Ranch, agricultural uses and open space are the dominant land uses located to the west and south and allow for more long-distance views from and of. Views from these areas on and around the campus are relatively expansive, and on clear days include agricultural land and the Coast Range west of Davis. West campus and Russell Ranch provides the most expansive views, simply because of the lack of development within these areas, which allow for a clear line-of-sight to the Coast Range. Due primarily to contemplated development within the west campus, implementation of the 2018 LRDP could disrupt the existing long-distance views, including those of the Coast Range to the west from points along SR 113 and Russell Boulevard. As noted above, additional development within west campus, primarily within West Village, would be similar in massing and scale to that of existing buildings, facilities, and landscaping and would be required to undergo approval from the Campus Design Review Committee. As a result of processes, views of new on-site structures would largely be screened by planned open space areas and landscaping/vegetation, however, planned vegetation could, while screening views along Russell Boulevard from on-site structures, disrupt expansive views along Russell Boulevard across agricultural lands to the Coast Range mountains west of Davis. This would be a significant impact. 3.1-14 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
Within south campus, additional campus-related development would convert existing open space and agricultural uses to academic and administrative space with surface parking. Views of south campus are limited by existing vegetation and largely limited to motorists along I-80, primarily the eastbound lanes. While development in this area would represent a change in visual conditions at the site, landscaping and other design considerations would be made as part of the Design Review Process and in accordance with the Physical Design Framework and Campus Design Guide Manual such that the changes in visual character would be consistent with other campus development and development within the City of Davis. As such, the anticipated change would not be considered substantially adverse. In summary, although the majority of development under the 2018 LRDP would not preclude longdistance views in the area, development within west campus as part of the 2018 LRDP would occur in areas that are currently undeveloped and could result in alterations of existing views. While all new 2018 LRDP-related development would be consistent with, and adjacent to, existing development which has already altered long-distance views, implementation of the 2018 LRDP could further interrupt long-distance views. Therefore, this impact would be significant. Mitigation Measures No feasible mitigation measures are available. Significance after Mitigation The implementation of design review standards under UC and requirements would address impacts and minimize, where possible, impacts on scenic views. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to less than significant within west campus. Lesser development and/or greater setbacks could reduce the potential disruption to existing expansive views, however, any development within west campus could reduce long-distance views westward towards the Coast Range. As a result, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. Impact 3.1-2: Degrade existing visual character or quality. Implementation of the 2018 LRDP would result in temporary and permanent visual changes throughout the campus. New buildings and other development within would require design review to ensure consistency with the existing character and quality of the campus and surrounding areas. Therefore, any impacts to visual character or quality would be less than significant. The 2018 LRDP focuses land uses changes primarily within and around the central campus of UC Davis. While these changes would modify the existing visual character and quality of, the changes would not be significant due in large part to the proposed land plan and the design review process that would require consideration of and consistency with adjacent development. In general, the 2018 LRDP conserves the existing pattern of uses and continues the procedures (including the design review process) employed by for the protection and long-term conservation of important visual resources within the campus and maintenance of existing visual conditions where interfaces with neighboring jurisdictions, especially the City of Davis. Future buildings under the 2018 LRDP would be generally low-rise (1 to 3 stories) and mid-rise (3 to 12 stories) but could be higher to accommodate higher-density academic and administrative buildings and housing facilities. This level of development is consistent with the heights of existing structures at (generally 4 to 6 stories with some taller structures). Further, all future buildings, as part of the design review process and in accordance with the 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-15
Physical Design Framework and Campus Design Guide Manual, would provide landscaping, fixtures, and other features consistent with existing conditions (as shown in Exhibits 3.1-3, 3.1-8, and 3.1-9), which would soften the visual interface between new development under the 2018 LRDP and existing campus structures. Further, land use changes identified in the 2018 LRDP largely focus future development on underutilized sites close to the central campus, in support of s objective of maintaining a compact and connected academic core. While new development in these areas may change the visual quality, these changes are more likely to be perceived as an improvement rather than an adverse impact by providing a more congruous visual condition, consistent with a higher-education institution. In addition, potential adverse effects would be avoided by subjecting proposed new development under the 2018 LRDP to the existing design review process. Illumination of athletic and recreation fields would include tall light fixtures (approximately 80 feet in height) located along the periphery of fields. These fixtures would be similar in character to existing recreation field light fixtures at nearby fields. As noted above, all new development is required to comply with the Physical Design Framework and Campus Design Guide Manual, which establish requirements intended to maintain important aesthetic features and compatibility with existing visual conditions, including the installation of landscaping (both in terms of bulk and color) and exterior features consistent with adjacent development (e.g., exterior lighting and finishings). Overall, the 2018 LRDP would require future new/renovated land uses to consider and incorporate design elements of the existing visual character of the particular area of campus in which that development would occur, such that potential changes in visual conditions would not substantially degrade. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are necessary. Impact 3.1-3: Create a new source of light or glare. Implementation of the 2018 LRDP would introduce new sources of light and glare associated with new buildings and facilities. Such lighting could contribute to indirect lighting/glare on adjacent land uses that could adversely affect daytime or nighttime views and result in additional skyglow. This impact is considered potentially significant. Of the four areas of addressed by the 2018 LRDP, the central campus is the most developed/urban and a significant amount of light fixtures (both interior and exterior) from this more urban area of the campus and adjacent City of Davis land uses already exist. Exterior lighting includes landscaping and structure lighting, as well as athletic field lighting at several locations throughout campus, including Howard Field, Toomey Stadium, Hutchison Field, and Dairy Recreation Field. Within the west and south campuses and Russell Ranch, lighting from existing uses is less present, except in the vicinity of West Village and existing campuses uses east of Old Davis Road. Land use changes allowed under the 2018 LRDP would create new sources of light during nighttime hours from any of the following: exterior building lighting, lighted recreation facilities, parking lot lights, and headlights of vehicular traffic. These sources of light could create spillover light impacts to nearby sensitive receptors, especially in existing residential areas of campus and adjacent neighborhoods within the City of Davis. While new land uses would be subject to the design review process, the types of building materials used and direction of new lighting sources, especially within west and south campuses, could result in additional glare and nightlighting and could be considered a substantial adverse change compared to existing conditions, especially if it would contribute to skyglow. Therefore, while new lighting, as a result of implementation of the 2018 LRDP, would be similar in nature to existing light sources, it is possible, as specific architectural features and building 3.1-16 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR
materials have yet to be determined, that light and/or glare from new projects could hinder academic activities or intrude on neighboring residences and facilities. In addition, under the 2018 LRDP, additional existing and potential new recreational fields may be illuminated for use during the evening hours, including extending the hours of operation on fields already illuminated. Due to their additional height, recreational field lighting, if not properly directed and shielded, could result in skyglow and light spillover onto adjacent uses, including uses within the City of Davis, primarily across Russell Boulevard and A Street. Further, under the 2018 LRDP, recreational field lighting may be permitted at some recreational fields as late as 12:00 a.m., which if not properly directed away from existing residences could result in light spillover effects. While existing landscaping and vegetation located along both Russell Boulevard and A Street would prevent some spillover light from affecting nearby receptors, the potential for light spillover and skyglow may still occur. Therefore, this impact is considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measure 3.1-3a: Building surfaces. shall require the use of textured, non-reflective exterior surfaces and non-reflective (mirrored) glass during design review of all new/redeveloped structures. Mitigation Measure 3.1-3b: Lighting fixtures. shall require all new outdoor lighting to utilize directional lighting methods with shielded and cutoff type light fixtures to minimize glare and upward directed lighting such that light spillover onto adjacent structures does not occur. Verification of inclusion in project design shall be provided at the time of design review. Significance after Mitigation Implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure the use of non-reflective surfaces and direction lighting with shielded and cutoff type light fixtures such that light spillover onto adjacent uses and skyglow, which is typically associated with upward directed lighting, as a result of development under the 2018 LRDP would not substantially increase beyond existing conditions and impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR 3.1-17
This page intentionally left blank. 3.1-18 2018 Long Range Development Plan EIR