PROTOTYPE VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT MANUALPREFACE ‘This Manual was prepared as part of Cooperative Research Agreement PSW-62 with the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station and the "Interagency Agreement between the Bureau of Land Management, U.S.D.1., and the Forest Service, U.S.D.A., Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experi~ ment Station for Landscape Planning (Visual Resources Management) Methodology Research for Range, Timber, and Energy Producing Wildlands. ‘This Manual incorporates two years of quantitative and qualitative testing work undertaken to find out what visual impact assessment methods and variables are valid and reliable. Although we have strong indications of what major variables have been left out of existing visual impact assess- ment methods and how the weightings should be changed, the procedures presented in this manual are experimental. They have not yet been tested for reliability and validity. This is what we hope to do in the forthcoming year as well as testing people's reactions to additional before-and-after images. This will enable us to build a visual catalog of typical projects with validated and reliable contrast ratings attached as examples. This will facilitate "grounding" or reference for contrast ratings for similar projects en- countered in the field. ‘Stephen Sheppard and Sarah Newman are to be congratulated for their fine efforts in pulling this manual together. All comments will be welcomed concerning the effectiveness of this manual in providing guidance and its potential for implementation. Pil bard ‘Richard C. smardon Research Associate Scheol of Landscape Architecture State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry Syracuse, New York 13210 December, 1979SUBMITTED To: Dr. Gary H. Elsner, Project Leader and. Tand Use and Landscape Planning Methodology Research Unit Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station 1960 Addison street Berkeley, California 94701 SUBMITTED BY: Richard C. Snardon, Research and Associate School of Landscape Architecture College of Environmental Science ‘and Forestry State University of New York Syracuse, New York 13210 PREPARED BY: Stephen 8. J. Sheppard, Research and Specialist Department of Landscape Architecture Warster Hall University of California Berkeley, California 94720 WITH GRAPHIC ASSISTANCE BY: Dick Akina, Natalie gokum, and Larry Rugoff, Research Assistants Department of Landscape Architecture Berkeley, California 94720 PROTOTYPE VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT MANUAL Me. Robert Ross, Landscape Architect U.S.D.I., Bureau of Land Management. Recreation Division Interior Building igch and "C™ streets, N.W. Washington, D. C. Donald Appleyard, Professor Department of Landscape Architecture College of Environmental Design Warster Hall University of California Berkeley, California 94720 Sarah Newnan, Research Assistant Department of Landscape Architecture Wurster Hall University of California Berkeley, California 94720 December, 1979TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS GHAPTER 1, INTRODUCTION . - - ~~ CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY A. CONCEPTS 1) Landscape components ~ 2) Visual elements ~~ color Fors, Line Texture Scale Space = 3) Visual impact severity _ 7 B, PROCEDURES mms 1, Visual Contrast Rating System. 2. Visual Resource Managenent Classes. Basic & Detailed Procedures. Use of the Basic Procedure _ Use of the Detailed Procedure _ _ C. EXAMPLES . 1, Basie Procedure Simulations. Basic Works! Basic Worksheet 2. __ Basic Worksheet 3_ __ =. ~~ 2. Detailed Procedure . Simulations _ _ _ Detailed Worksheets CHAPTER 3. FIELD TECHNIQUES 1, Viewpoint selection. 2. Field documentation 3. SimulationTABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) CHAPTER 4. MITIGATION A. PROCEDURES =. _ 1, Basic Procedure. _ 2. Detaited Procedure. B. EXAMPLES = 1, Basic Procedure, 2. Detailed Procedu: APPENDICES ‘A. REGIONAL LANDSCAPE CLASSIFICATION BLANK WORKSH3ETS FOR BASIC AND DETAILED PROCELURES 84EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS The draft manual for Visual Contrast Rating presented here, contains several differences from the in-service Visual Resource Contrast Rating Manual 8423. The proposed revisions are derived from the results of over two years of re- search into the psychological, administrative, and biophysical aspects of Visual impact assessment as practiced by the Bureau of Land Managenent. It must be sald at the outset, though, that the revised draft is a very prelimi nary attempt to improve the reliability, validity, ang practicality of the Visual contrast rating system, as well as to make the system more understanda~ ble. The draft is not complete; emphasis has been placed upon laying out the conceots and procedures in detail, since these Form the core on which other aspects of the system depend, However, many features of the system are untried ‘and untested as yet. They are put forward here to Invite comment and criti- cism, prior to exhaustive testing. They should definitely not be taken as Final. Nonetheless, on the basis of psychological testing of design professionals and others, of open-ended questionaire responses, and of consultation with BLM Tandscape architects, It 1s possible to recommend some major revisions of the ting system. These changes are summarized as follows: 1, The breadth and depth of analysis of the visual elements Is increased. in order to Include more comprehensive an array of visual Impact variables, the elements of scale and spatial character have been added Une Elie’ eienenes of form: Tine, eplorsafd texture. At the sane time, definition, explanation, and descriptions of all elements have been made more detailed and precise, as an aid to more objective and consistent description and impact assessment. Different types and aspects (or sub-elements) may be Identified within each Vidar element (see pages 5-16 of draft). With the Inctusion of scale and space as elements, the concept of contrast alone becomes inadequate, and that of visual dominance-- the relative dominance of a modification over its setting due to its size and spatial location--must be added into the rating system, . Besides analyzing the individual landscape components (formerly called landscape features but re-named to avoid confusion with feature landscape compositions), it is important to consider the entire landscape alteration and its setting as complete units. Hod!- fications to different landscape components may interact to lessen or heighten the overall impact. Thus, the various element contrast and dominance ratings are brought together in a final rating of visual impact severity. This should not be 2 summing of component ratings, SThce es aodiFication introducing or altering a single component can cause as severe an impact as one with land, vegetation, and structure wvcomponents. Summing of element ratings for each component is retained, however, since it helps pin-point the parts of the modification contri- buting most visual contrast. Any scoring or rating system is somewhat arbitrary and tends to over- mplify. As a means of checking the scoring system, or by-passing it altogether, the recomended procedures use qualitative levels as well as numerical retings. These nay be more defensible Tn sone sTtoations. and more sidely acceptable. Weightings for the relative importance of visual elements should be moc 3d to fit the different landscape regions into which,BLM lands fall. The map and classi n of landscape continuities (Appendix 8) would form the basis for this. VAM Class requirements might also have to be altered by the region. It is possible to develop general ized weightings of wide appl icability--evidence suggests that the following order of importance is more accurate in determining visual impact severity than that currently used in the VCR system Scale dominance -- most important Color contrast Form contrast. Spatial dominance ' Scale contrast Line contrast Texture contrast -- least important A two-tier rating system Is desirable, separating the routine situations which require a quick straightforward assessment by BLM landscape tech- nicians from the more conplex cases requiring more scrutiny. Two separate but parallel procedures--the Basic Procedure and the Detailed Procedure--are outlined. The latcer procedure demands a longer and much ore detailed analysis, elenent by element, and requires a landscape architect to be involved. It would be applied to special projects {rather than typical projects) of unosuel size or SigniFTcanes In the tandscape, and aiso allows for aesthetic design considerations. - Both procedures rely heavily on visual simulations of the proposed modifi- cation, though requiring simulations with different degrees of accuracy and real . Although practical methods of simulation are suggested {and reference may be made to the forthcoming VAM manual on simulation), there is need of more substantiation of the validity and effectiveness of the various lation methods now available. ‘The approach taken in this manual Is to present the concepts and procedure in as as much detail as possible, using graphics to aid understanding. Testing may Prove that sone of the detail and complexities may be omitted,” The current draft lacks Chapters 3 and 4 on operational techniques and mitigation procedures (but see the flowcharts for mitigation, included here), and also the appendices| Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION General Philosophy The quality of our environment has becose increasingly important to a large ‘seguent of our population. Sinee one of the major components of a quality environment: is its appearance, visual resource management has begun tc receive considerable attention from both the public and land managesent agencies. Many of BLM's land management activities involve some alteration of the natural character of the landscape on public lands. It is important that these alterations be understood and managed to fit the natural character and quality of the landscape. It must be recognized that esthetic values may not be compatible with management objectives of other resources. Thus, it 1s nct always practical to provide maximus protection for visual quality. It ther becoues necessary to have a system to evaluate the visual resource anc to Geternine the level of management which is desirable and practical for protection, retabilitation, and enhanoeaent of the landscape. VRM System ‘This manual describes the process of Visual Contrast Rating--one part cf the Visual Resource Management Syster. The VRM System consists of the following:Visual Resource Contrast Rating Purpose - to provide a method of assessing potential visual impacts of specific proposed management practices for all BLM activities. Objectives - to give a measure by which an individual or team can determine if @ proposed nanagement activity will meet the requirements of the Visual Resource Management Class of the area in which it is being proposed, and if required, which impacts oust be reduced. Policy - the contrast rating is to be used in the project planning stages of all proposed land management activities that will disturb the soil, change or remove vegetation, or place a structure in the lendscap Use - the contrast rating must be included in environmental assesszent records, environmental statenents, land reports, ete. It shoula be applied to all areas that are identified as needing rehabilitation. It should also be used as an evaluation procedure for sonitoring compliance with visual requirements over the long term. Basic Premise - the degree to which a management activity adversely affects the visual quality of the landscape depends upon the amount of visual contrast that is created between the activity and the existing landscape character. The amount of contrast and the degree of visual dominance of a proposed activity in the landscape can be measured by predicting the magnitude of change in each of the basic visual elements (scale, color, line, form, texture, space) in the landscape. Together with the overall landscape alteration, the visual changes introduced by separate components of the proposed activity (land and water surfaces, vegetation, and structures) can be measured in terms of the basic elements. Assessing the amount of contrast for a proposed activity in this manner will indicate the severity of its visual impact. It will alsc serve as a guide in determining what is required to reduce the contrast to the point where it will meet the Visual Management Class for the area. ‘The contrast rating quickly reveals the elements and ccgponents that Will create the greatest visual impact. It is a guide to the most effective method of reducing the visual impact of a proposed activity or Project. Those elements with the highest degree of contrast and dominance are the ones that can be most easily identified, and often offer the most opportunity to reduce visual contrast.Chapter 2 CORE METHODOLOGY A. CONCEPTS ® Landscape Components Any landscape can be described in teras of its physical parts. These are: a) Land and Water-o landforn, topography, slopes © rock and soil surfaces 0 lakes, water courses, marshes © ice and snow. b) Vegetation - trees, shrubs, and low vegetation--perceived as three-cimensional objects in foreground, but as two- dimensional patterns over longer viewing distances. c) Structures - manmade objects in the landscape--usually three~ dimensiona) (e.g. buildings, transmission towers, irrigation channels), but sometimes low-profile and two-dimensional (e.g. roads). Management activities introduce or aodify one or more of these Landscape components. @ Visual Elements Any landscape, component, or individual object has the following visual characteristics or basic elenents: © color © texture © form © scale 9 line © spatial character The following concepts sre inportant in describing any of the visual elements: a) Visual Contrast ‘The visual elements are the source of visual contrast in the landscape, creating the patterns that we see. An object may differ from its setting or other objects in one or more element. texturePattern consists of an arrangement of parts thet ‘Suggests a design or distinct distribution. The ‘overall pattern of a landscape is composed of color patterns, form patterns, line patterns and texture patterns, with their parts having a certain scale and spatial arrangement. ‘The pattern of any element may be described in terns of its: ‘© complexity - the intricacy or simplicity of arrangement of parts © diversity - the number and variety of parts making up the pattern ») Visual Dominance ‘The visual elements also help determine the degree of visual doninance of an object over its setting or other objects. Where there is significant contrast in one or more of the elements, one object may dominate other parts of the landscape. texture ©) Relative Importance of Visual Elements In any landscape, one or more of the visual elements may be more important than the cthers. The most important elements in a Scene are those which contribute most to its character, due to either i) their high contrast; or 44) their extent and uniformity of expression in the scene.Examples of Element Importance: mu texture Often two or three elements in combination are most important: color, space, line, texture Color, scale, and spatial character are frequently the most important elements in setting the character of landscapes or dictating the compatibility of landscape modifications. However, different elements tend to be important in different regional landscapes and in different viewing conditions. The following pages illustrate the visual elements in detail and explain how they may be used to describe visual contrast and dominance in the landscape. A suggested vocabulary of descriptive terms is included for each element. Definitions of those terms requiring further explanation are given in the lllustrated Glossary (Appendix &). 5Element COLOR definition The property of reflecting light of a particular intensity and wavelength (or mixture of wavelengths), to which the eye is sensitive. It is the major visual property of surfaces. sub-elements Hue - the aspect of color which we know by particular names, e.g. red, blue, orange, and which forms the visible spectrum. A given hue or color tint is caused by a particular wavelength. Value - the degree of lightness or darkness, caused by the intensity of light being reflected, ranging from black to white. Chroma - the degree of color saturation or brilliance, determined by the mixture of light rays. It is the degree of grayness in a color, ranging from pure (high chroma) to dull (low chroma). suggested vocabulary Hues - red, yellow, brown, olive gray, reddish brown ete. (See Munsell color books for precise terns.) Primary colors - red, blue, yellow Secondary colors ~ green, orange, violet Tertiary colors - mixtures of secondary colors Value - dark to light Chroma ~ brilliant, pure, saturated; dull, greyish Color temperature - warm to cold; temperature is caused by hue. Red, yellow, brown and orange are considered warm and sunny. Blues and greens are cool and shady. Vivid Color - usually primary or secondary colors, with high chroma. Subtle Color - colors or mixtures which are delicate; usually tertiary or low chroma colors. Luminous Color - emitting its own light. Glare ~ reflection of high intensity light (very high value). Pastel Color - delicate "soft" color of high value but low chroma. Monotone - the sameness or uniformity of color Color Harmony - the assortment of combinations of colors which readily ‘and pleasantly blend with each other. dominance With other things equal, light, warm, bright colors in a scene will "advance" and tend to dominate dark, cool, dull colors which "retreat." Dark next to light tends to attract the eye and become a visual focal point.variable effects Distance - atmospheric perspective, due te scattering of light by dust particles, makes colors become paler, lower in chroma, and bluer as viewing distance increases. High value colors tend to remain most recognizable over great distances. Atmospheric Conditions - haze, fog,"dust, rain, ete. may cause atmospheric perspective to become extreme even over short viewing distances. Compared with sunshine, clouds reduce value and chroma. Lighting Direction - objects which are frontlit (i-e., illuminated from the front, behind the observer) appear paler and brighter than those which are backlit (i.e., illuminated from behind) Time of Day - illuminated surfaces tend to become paler during midday sun and to become darker and redder early and late. example: LNG Floating Facility Hiei VALUE. Description The major colors in this scene are the medium-value blues of the sea and sky, and the subtle mixture of pale beige and low-chrona greens of the hills. However, the vivid chromatic yellow and highly reflective white of the floating LNG facility contrast severely with the darker, duller backdrop, tending to advance and dominate the scene. Color contrast is heightened by the very dark adjacent ship.Element FORM definition The mass or shape of an object or of objects which appear unified. types 2-Dimensional Shape - the presence of an area or ‘areas which contrast in color and/or texture from adjacent areas creates a two-dimensional shape in the landscape. 3-Dimensional Mass - the volume of a landform, natural object or manmade structure in the landscape. sub-elements Geometry - the extent to which a form approaches a standard geometrical figure of 2 or 3 dimensions e.g-, square, circle, triangle, cube, sphere, cone, etc. Complexity - the degree of simplicity or intricacy of a form; simpler forms tend to be regular, and complex forme to be irregular. Orientation - the relationship of the fore to the horizental axis of the landscape (e.g., vertical, horizontal, diagonal, non-directional), or to the points of the compass (e.g. north-south, ENE-KSW) « suggested vocabulary Bold/definite/inaistinet Diverse/numerous/few Prominent Large/suall Flat/rolling/rugged Convex/coneave Rounéed/angular Cireular/oval Rough/snooth Square/rectangular/rhonboid/ Jagged/doned/flattened Triangular/trapezoid Steep/noderate/gentie Linear/parallel/curving Solid/transparent Conical /eylindrical/eubic/ Sinple/coapiex Pyramidal/spherical ‘Anorphous/geonetric Contrasting/compatible Regular/irreguler Vertical, horizontal, diagonai Narrow/uide Non-directional Long/short/tal2 Symmetrical/asynmetrical Strip/block/patendominance Forms that are bold, regular, solid or vertical tend to be dominant in the landscape. variable effects Viewing Angle - the visual proportions of forms change with the direction and angle of viewing, due to perspective effects. Two-dimensional forms become foreshortened with lower cbserver positions and oblique viewing angles. Three-dimensional forms appear to diminish towards the horizon, especially with oblique viewing angles. Lighting - frontlighting and backlighting tend tc flatter three-dimensional forms. Backlighting may emphasize two-dimensional silhouettes. Sidelighting enhances three-dimensional effect. Movement . - the eye is attracted to movement in the landscape, @.g- such changing forms as waterfalls, steam from cooling towers, or smoke plumes. Cooling Tower ‘SOLID veRTicaL Description ‘The major 3-dimensional forms of the natural landscape consist of the rounded irregular masses of the foreground trees and the simple horizontally oriented ridges. ‘Ihe cooling tower provides the dominant form due to its unusual, geometric, concave shape. regularity and vertical orientation are unprecedented in the landscape. The movement of the irregular form of the plume attracts attention. Subordinate forms include those of the observatory anc 2-imenoivnel field patterns its solidElement LINE definition The path, real or imagined, that the eye follows when perceiving abrupt differences in form, color, or texture or when objects are aligned in a one-dimensional sequence. Usually evident as the edge of shapes or masses in the landscape. types Edge - the boundary along which two contrasting areas are related ‘and Joined together--the outline of a 2-dimensional shape on the land harp eg bettece eee 74 fraction Sentraseing ree Tiietl couecting to come beevan fun fontrasting Casting areas; frming's” arena ‘ate fena sage betoaen Sete. Band - contrasting linear form with 2 roughly parallel edges dividing an area in two. Silhouette-line - the outline of a mass seen against a backdrop. The skyline is the silhouette-line of the land against the sky. sub-elements Boldness - the visual strength of a line. Smooth, long and sweeping lines are stronger than lines formed by the overlapping of numerous forms, e.g. treetops; edges between strongly contrasting colors, e.g. skylines are bolder than those between similar colors. Complexity - the degree of simplicity or intricacy of a line, determined by the variety of directions it follows: sky-lines in rugged terrain are more complex than on flat plains. Orientation - the overall relationship of the line to the (horizontal) axis of the landscape or to compass bearings. 10suggested vocabulary ¥ Bold/weak Sof t/hard Regular/irregular Broken/continuous Straight/curving Concave/convex Diagonal/horizontal/vertical Converging/diverging Angular/subangular Parallel/perpendicular vJagged/rugged/smooth Geometric/circular/semi-cir= Undulating/flowing cular Complex/simple dominance Bold vertical lines which interrupt the skyline tend to dominate weax horizontal lines. variable effects Distance - the strength of a line can decrease with distance due to atmospheric haze. Atmospheric Conditions - clouds, fog, haze, snow can obliterate skylines. Lighting '- frontlighting flattens form and reduces line strength. Often only the “skyline remains evident (e.g. mountain ranges). Sidelighting accentuates the silhouette-lines of separate forms. Backlighting blends together forme of equal distance into one outline. In mountain ranges, ‘the ridgelines delineate overlapping flat silhouettes. example: Pipeline BOL ceomermC BAND wr WEAK, Bao ve Bint eens star Description ‘This scene contains a variety of line. The dominant lines are the bold, regular and diagonal skyline of the hills and smooth horizontal line at the edge of the plain. The pipeline adds a straight horizontal line, with parallel but soft butt-edges of the adjacent disturbed area. These lines cut across the diagonal silhouette-lines of the hills. Subordinate lines in this scene are the short, hard verticals of the fenceposts, and telephone poles. "Element TEXTURE definition ‘The aggregation of small forms or color mixtures into a continuous surface pattern; the aggregated parts are enough that they do not appear as discrete objects in the composition of the scene. type olor Mixture (mottling) - intrinsic surface color contrasts of very small scale in relation to the perceived mass may be due to hue, chroma or value, alone or in combination. Light and Shade ~ the color contrast particularly in value, created by differences in lighting on a varied surface or repeated forms. It consists of the repetition of a lit side, shaded side, and the shadow cast. sub- element Grain - the relative dimensions of the surface variations, ranging from large (coarse texture, e.g., coniferous forest) to small (fine texture, e.g., grassland). Regularity - the degree of uniform recurrence and symmetrical arrangement of the surface variation. Based on density distribution (unifore vs. variable) and spatial arrangement (ordered vs. random). uneven/random even/ordered ‘even/random gradation Internal Contrast - the degree of contrast in colors or values creating the texturesuggested vocabulary Coarse/nedium/fine Glossy/matte Smooth/rough Striated Uni form/patchy/gradat ional Scattered Directional/nondirectional Dotted Discont inuous/continuous Clumped Random/ordered Striped Contrasty/subtle Stippled Dense/sparse Granular dominance Coarse and contrasty textures tend to dominate fine-grained textures of low internal contrast. variable effects Distance - internal contrast and the apparent grain of the texture is lessened into distance-~coarse textures of coniferous forest may remain visible at up to 8-10 miles, while fine textures of grassland may disappear within 1/4 mile of the observer. Atmospheric Conditions - haze, cloud, dust, etc. reduve the distances at which textures disappear and lose internal contrast. Mlumination - light and shade textures are most obvious in side-lighting and when light intensity is strong, casting distinct dark shadows. Strong side-lighting increases distance-range within which textures remain visible. example: Limestone Qu: Description ‘The uniformly scattered vegetative cover gives this scene a consistent rough texture of medium to coarse grain. Internal contrast is fairly high and due to color mottling. Strong textural contrast is introduced by the nearly smooth fine-grained surface of vue Limestone quarry.| Element SCALE definition The proportionate size relationship between an object and the surroundings in which it is placed. types Absolute Scale - the absolute size of an object obtained by relating the size of the object to a definitely designated standard, (i.e. measurements). Relative Scale - the relative size of objects; the apparent size relationship between landscape components and their surrcundings. sub-elements Proportion of landscape setting (Scale dominarce) - the scale of an object relative to the visible expanse of the landscape which forms its setting. Scale contrast - the scale of an object relative to other distinct objects or areas in the landscape. Proportion of field-of-view - the scale of an object relative to the total field-of-view accepted by the human eye or camera. suggested vocabulary Tiny/small/large/huge Over-sized/under=sized Massive/delicate Conspicuous/inconspicuous Heavy/ light Monumental Expansive/confined Intimate Insignificant Dwarf (verb). dominance Large, heavy, massive objects within a confined space dominate small, Light, delicate objects in more expansive settings.variable effects Distance - the apparent size of, an object ducreases with distance from the observer. Spatial Enclosure - the size of the enclosing space inversely affects an object's relative scale--smal1 spaces make objects appear larger. Viewing Angle - the apparent scale of an object in the landscave is affected by the observer's angle of view in two way: (1) perspective (2) by increasing an Foreshortening reduces the object's el apparent size of surfaces of areas or objects. When the object's seen obliquely or at low scale tends to vieving angle: inerease. Atmospheric Conditions - increased hazi- ness may increase the apparent. scale of the landscape's space by obscuring its boundaries. example: Chaining Description ‘The area of, chaining covers a large part of the plain, dominating the entire middleground of the scene. The low angle of view decreases the apparent scale of the chaining. Though occupying a small proportion of the field-of-view, it covers a significant portion of the landscape setting. soale to tho large landseape components (landforms) in this scene. 15 The chained area is similar inElement SPACE definition The spatial qualities of a landscape are determined by the thre arrangenent of objects and voids. sub-elements Landscape Composition - the arrangement of objects and voids in the landscape can be categorized by their spatial composition: aNeMante = brane ss ceepenttion POGML = converging lines CAMPIED - ene scene Serirenta oe BRR TT ke asite ee GREE ponitions ah oe Ghiect en cluter of . Separene tats to the Shlecte gun ase site incdes piste, stttetay practnant eased ef watery ar Tinefore cr trees Athos an shi ren. staan ay soouby much of the scene. Some compositions, especially those which are distinctly focal, enclosed, or feature-oriented, are more vulnerable to modifications than others, depending upon how strongly the spatial configuration draws the eye to certain locations. Spatial Position - the elevation and location of objects in the landscape relative to topography affect their prominence: high and exposed Positions are more prominent than low obscured positions. Backdrop - the backdrop against which an object is seen affects its visual contrast. Modifications seen against the sky or water are usually more Prominent than against a land backdrop. vesuggested vocabulary Ridge/plateau/bench/side-slope/slope-toe/valley floor/plain Panoramic/focal/feature/enclosed/canopied Vista Superior/normal/inferior observer position Void Bowl/corridor/depression Complex/simple Volume Distinet/ indistinct Intimate/spacious Open dominance Objects which occupy vulnerable positions within spatial compositions, which are high in the landscape, and/or which are seen against the sky dominate in the scene. variable effects Observer Position - the position of the oberver relative to the landscape may be described as: inferior (below! normal superior {above] ‘A change in position can affect the observer's perceptions of degree of enclosure and an object's degree of spatial dominance. Inferior positions may increase both apparent degree of enclosure and spatial dominance. Distance - the opserver's proximity to elements will affect perception of their spatial importance. Longer viewing distances tend to reduce the impression of spatial enclosure and dominance. example: Coal Heaps Description The landscape is panoramic. ‘The observer position is normal. Although the coal heaps are located in a broad plain, they are prominent due to their high position against the sky. At this distance, they dominate the space. 7© Visual Impact Severity The severity of visual impact of a management activity depends upon: (1) visual contrast of its elements, especially in color, form, line, and sometimes texture. (2) visual dominance of its elements, especially in scale and spatial position. (3) relative importance of its elements - severe impacts may occur where important elements are altered or where a new important element is added. EXAMPLE: Coal Power Plant © Visual contrast in form and line is provided by the geometric buildings and towers. The scale of the build- ings and power complex dominates the valley floor. Their central position in an enclosed landscape dominates the space. Introduction of strongly contrasting colors, forms, lines lead to their joint portance where form alone was previously most important. In order to evaluate visual impacts of a proposed management activity, the factors which create the overall visual contrast must be rated. The overall rating is then compared with the visual objectives of the Visual Management Class in which the activity is to occur. If the project fails to meet the required objectives, it must be re-designed. Consideration of the visual contrasts created by particular landscape components and visual elements helps to pin-point those aspects of the project which most need to be mitigated. In order to predict the visual contrast of the proposed project, some sort of visual simulation is required. This entails a drawing or other form of graphic visualization of what the landscape will look like after the project has been carried out. Most situations require a visual simulation before accurate contrast rating may occur. The sophistication of the simulation technique varies with the importance of the project. ‘Suggestions on simulation procedures are given in the section on Field Techniques.B. PROCEDURES @ Visual Contrast Rating System ‘The overell system of visual contrast rating, , indicated in the generalized flow-chart, determines whether the proposed modification mey be approved on grounds of the severity of its visual impact, or whether it must be redesigned in order to mitigate its visual impact to acceptable levels. PROJECT PROJECT f asoonee| PROPOSED eae E {|LANDScaP VV wW REVISED SIMULATION SIMULATION| VISUAL CONTRAST RATING BASIC PROCEDURE DETAILED PROCEDURE Sl] | | | | | | | | | | | Me VRM CLASS z PREDICTED VISUAL IMPACT SEVERITY APPROVAL MITIGATION® Visual Resource Management Classes RM Clesses are assigned to all BLM lands in the Inventory & Evaluation phase of the VAM System. The Visual Contrast Rating of # propose? Phestication must weet the requirements of the VAM Cless assigned to the area concerned, if it is to be approved. The various Classes and their requirements are as follow: TASS To lay contrast created within the enaracteristic lancacee? ASS 2m Ar secenble. The haunt ispact of a proposed eockricazicn Say nok exceed NeLIOIELE, with s total secre of 0 - 6.5% seeeita cegrae of contrast in any one elezent say not exceed: top, or suboreznate, with ar elesent score of 2% GLASS TE = Guanaes In any of the basic visual elenents should act 6 hacee tithe Unarseteristie, iandscape; contrasts aay be see0 SUSSREUS Got Sterace attention. Tne visual sapact of « Propesed aoeifieation should not exceed: WEAK, vith a total score of $017.58 ana ta Nagra cf contrast 12 any one elesent should ot exceed Rov, or seborcinate, wieh an elenent score of 3° GUISE TIT ~ contrasts tn the paste visual elenents say be evident ene cigin te eheract attention. fovever, the changes stoulg reeaic Se Ste ce the existing charactersstic landscape, The wince] gapect of proposed sodifleation my not exceed: HOUERATE, with a tote score of 18 - 26.54 and tha depres of contrast or coninance i ary one eleent Should not excess? eae tetas gontnant, with an elepent score of 6% GEASS T= Goneraate say averact atventicn and be a comiaant feature oe ceeeeise ts terns of doale. However, the ebenges stoule Eageat tee eictlancacape, ihe visual sapact of a propeaed eaitication should cot exceed ‘STRONG, with a total score of 27235.5" ane tor guates cf corseaet of douinance in any elesent say be CLES eSlaSenk’ hut sneule not exceed an elezent score of + cop elesents other than scale, GIGS V = Esisting contrasts are intarzersous with the charsezeristic sindacase, of ene landscape fea potential for erancenent ty TEENS eclccopeabie visual variety. The visueh ixpact of isting seeifieations say be: SEVERE, vier a score of 36-454 and the Geefee of contrast or doninance in any elenent aay be TESS cSi.tane nian an elenent score of @ or above. [eyect toa devel {iifoisce acceptable visual varsety. |___sntroduce secertapne visel variett______—__i Te any Vir clans, the viaval izpact ef a proposes codification 41S gunegentapie i it ist SEVERE vith a totet acore stove 36 A the degree of contrast or dosttance ia any elesen: is si0h op dontnany, with an elerene secre above OF lecents other than Seale. Seer eee TIRGG TGGTAE Tave TST etn acequately tasted yet and may need to be cepanged oeasiaerabiy. 20@ Basic & Detailed Procedures ‘Two alternetive procedures of Visual Contrast Rating are used secording te the type of project proposes: BASIC PROCEDURE nis provides @ conprehensive and quick assessuent of visual impact severity, in order to deteraine whether or not the aovification mects the required VAN Class. In most situations With Typical Projects commonly encountered by BLM tecnnieiere and Jandscape architects, the Basic Procedure is used « DETAILED PROCEDURE This provides a more accurate and sensitive analysis of the visual elements causing the visual impact, and helps to establish how such and by what means the visual contrast may be reduced. The Detailed Procedure is used in full for specie! projects of unusual scale or significance in the landscape. It is also used in part for typical projects where the Basic Procedure indicates that mitigation is necessary. ‘The table below explains the distinction between the two types of project. rocket TES ‘pesca riots siscra. rroers saamtee ire roads Sater ten ageany oetages ata overs Eevevoltage poverbines O11 ertiting alee hegeaye Becreation fu ‘re lever tartstieg ——‘Mapovelfage poveriinen Paso ac Takes Stick iazemcaerts taining Strteceseineg softs nent a tat oe carried out wih standare « Tngiseualiy dentged on ne oaitiee ree aoreat design let bslerate Local interest omy. “iy pobiteteter aw ta nderate visu aeattiviey Mls hou seanttcrty tn the tandwcape Site ae possibien Teele leh fe gorivie uglese poseee tans Sterewateg lareseape. ‘Sept wen seen in Sacgrewees | asing Brecere + Re nase seceoine. be DETATLED PCEIRE enrouhest, + Caria oot by By cectmitas: + Careiee out by lancacape areniteets etiy,‘The approach te Visual Contrast Rating Se aiailar in the tho proced differing coly tn the etree of etait saed tn estleating visu contrast 4 deainaree, First, the existing charasteriatic landscape 1s described in terzs of the cclor, fore, 2 and of the overall ianessape- Texture, scale and spatial character of Landscape coaponents itn tne al@ of a sioulation, the proposed edification is described {In teras of the sane visual elezents of the project couponents and the overall landscape between the existing lancscas ted for each element an neeification 1 and the proposed ch cosponent in the scene. then necessary, the dasinance of project corpanents relative to the characteristic’ Landen 1s rated for particular visual elesents. ‘ne relative ioportance of the various visual elezents, esaigred for each Tandscape region, 1s used to weight the ratings of contra! ts which contribute most attaching 2082 significance to 1d esainance, the regions! Landscape he overall visual inpact severity of the proposed eodification 13 asssgree ‘Tee tvo procedures are coxpares in the Flev-charts belov. The use of the procedures tn Hitagation (9 dtscuased in Chapter ty BASIC PROCEDURE Prepare ROUGH SIMULATION of proposed project Conduct BASIC V.C. RATING. Describe charaderishe landscape, har visual characteristics projec aed Peel ef visual contrast foreach elemert Rate overall visuia) impact severity compare with VRM. CLASS Poewiy whom ease APPROVAL of pre with cords) DETAILED PROCEDURE Conduct DETAILED V.C. RATING Describe 4 measure visual Clements of characterishe landscape] Deserve 4 measure Visual element 2 eaxure Conia Ee ab ‘element 4 Sub-elewent Rate visual contrast far each e) Consider special circumstances, 2 desig Factors, Rote overall visual impact ‘severity, Compare with VRM. CLASS Iogacl sey Wee@ Use of Basic Procedure In order to carry out the Basic Procedure, a simulation is required which approximates the predicted appearance of the modification, con- trasting it with 2 view of the existing scene (see Chapter 3 for sim- ulation techniques). The Basic Procedure consists of three Worksheets, as shown. SECTION A. PROJECT INFORMATION This section records information necessary to ry and document the project and the contrasting rating process. It is important to record precisely the location of the viewpoint (s) used in the simulation and Visual contrast rating. A sketch map of the location should be included, together with a map reference. A brief description of the project details should be included, identifying the type of project, arrangement of its parts, materials, etc. SECTION B. CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION Section B descrites the characteristic landscape prior to the proposed modification. The landscape is broken down into landscape components Cland/water, vegetation, and structures }, each of which is described in terms of the basic visual elements. A list of sub-elements is given to remind the assesor of the range of considerations in these descrip- tions. Reference may be made to pages 5-16 in this manual for definitions of terms, suggested vocabulary, and examples of their use. In addition to the visual attributes of each component, a description of its physi- cal constituents and type, eg. of landform, vegetation species, etc., is necessary. These should be referred to when describing scale, color. form, line, and texture. An important part of Section B is the desc n of the overall land= scape: the physical arrangement of the landscape components, the rela~ tionship of vegetation and structures to land and water, the predomi- nance of certain components,etc. The general appearance of the land~scape setting should be recorded. Two aspects of the overall iand- scape are particularly significant: the scale of the setting is des eribed in terns of its degree of confinenent, area, and viewing dis tances; and the spatial composition of the landscape is described (see pages 15-16) and the nature of the space-forming conponents identified. SECTION C. PROPOSED MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION The rough similation is used at this stage to aid in the description of the visual elements of the proposed modification. The project is broken down into its components of land/water, vegetation, and struc~ tures which are introduced or modified. It Is not always clear to which component part of a modification be~ longs. Each part should normally be assigned to a single component. In order to avoid counting part of a modification twice, the following list should be used as a cui PROJECT COMPONENT TYPE OF MODIFICATION LAND/WATER, Disturbed or exposed soil. Dirt or gravel roads. Road cut and fill. Exposed rock. Water impoundments. Coal or other mineral heaps farth piles. VEGETATION Seeded or planted vegetation Lopped or pruned trees Timber-felling debris Debris piles and windrows. Vegetation clearing which ex- poses or produces vegetative understory. ‘STRUCTURES Bul Idings. Pipes, wells, and transmission towers. Hard-top roads. Conerete, wood, stone, or metal used in construction of retain- ing walls, dikes, etc. There are cases, however, in which the same part of the project consists of two components which may contribute to different visual elements. The following examples are common and should be treated as shown: ¢ Berms, dams, and other revegetated new landforms: the land component of these modifications should be described in terms of form, silhouette 24lines, scale, and space,its 3-dimensional aspects; the vegetation component should be described in terms of its 2-dimensional aspects, lee. color, texture, and the edges and forms of any surface patterns. Vegetative clearings which leave or produce much bare ground finely scattered with vegetation: assign the modification to whichever component is predominant in the mix, but note that the effect is due to a combina~ tion of components As with the characteristic landscape, the physical make-up of each project component - its parts,amounts, and character - is described, together with its visual attributes. A description of the physical nature of the entire landscape alteration is recorded, relating the project components to each other and their setting. The scale of the overall project is described in terns of the proportion of the landscape occupied. Lastly, the spatial character of the modification in its setting is defined. SECTION D. VISUAL CONTRAST RATING Visual contrast ratings are a measure of the contrast between 2 proposed modification and its setting in the characteristic landscape. They are as- signed in the three parts of Worksheet 3, dealing with visual element con- trast, scale dominance, and spatial dominance. Visual Element Contrast This section derives contrast ratings in each visual element for pro- Ject components and the entire modification. It proceeds in the stages Shown below. « The visual elements (color, form, line, texture, and scale) of each project component are compared with the visual elements of the pro~ Ject's setting. ‘An introduced component is not necessarily compared with the same component in the landscape. For example, a dirt road (land compo- nent) may be compare in terms of color and texture with the scrub (vegetation component) through which it cuts. It Ts Important to also realize that the introduced component is not compared with what was there previously, but with what would co-exist with it in the setting. A new structure is not compared with the vegetation it replaces, but might be compared with one or sore of the following: i) nearby rock outcrops with which It shares certain characteristics of scale, shape, etc Ii) the vegetation surrounding the site; or If) the distant slopes which form the backdrop to the modi- fication. In the case of a landscape which already contains cultural modif cations, it must be decided whether they form part of the charac- teristic landscape or whether they are visual intrusions (see VR Manual). If the former, the proposed modification may be compared with them to determine contrast or compat, y with the charac- teristic landscape. If they are not part of the characteristic landscape they should not be used as a basis for evaluating contrast. 2sVCR BASIC PROCEDURE [D] VISUAL CONTRAST WORKSHEET 3 RATING oo Sina SE + /eeen Seewens —— Oey (Gee coLoR High | ot s eShttasr [eon r Low OVERALL HIGH it ' ‘NONE. Vemma | t roar 4 2aaeteras nat + [Pino CONTRAST We Seis f LOW 2| OVERALL MEDIUM i owe 1+2 components Medium with : HIG) = LINE: co higher ratings i vt tomas } moe ——— roncecg me mics | | rextune aman \ eu itor Fy OVERALL NONE it 1 woe To ScaLe [ANT components None { [se Te CONTRAST ‘jp Meo Tow i ‘ domnance a sao aN a 7 nica! jet ore ionic soumince rant _|~ feconicuoa| |) cing Pema eee ee : rama [BE IPD cc cg eran moran Inconspieuonal | poms meet) i ten inane srenricanr|o ons [E] VISUAL IMPACT SEVERITY PRAT ELEN [SENDA ENT TaISE nigh eae Coan/Saa ry conbivation cael ste ba uauarve Festa rest heen NY FEStar Wan Sle TSI py Compaen Ter Tes ae Tore TTT Color tor feale Board [orm novel, Space SEVERE [36-45] STRONG 27-35] MODERATE 18-26} WEAK 9-17) NEGLIGIBLE 0-8 PROJECT NAME: Project visual_impac VAM Class __— requirements TmaxT DOES PROJECT MEET VRM CLASS REQUIREMENTS ? Assessor: Date: ‘Severity [ar sare waTaL ga vesL—] nol]For example, a proposed cooling tower would not be considered of low contrast in’ the landscape simply because the scene already contains 2 jar cooling tower The contrast in each visual element between the project component and its setting is judged to be High, Medium, Low or None. These element contrast ratings carry points: reat High = 3, Medium = 2, Low=1, None = 0 However, since the visual elements vary in their contribution to the visual impact of the project, the points system is weighted to reflect their relative importance, as shown. ELEMENT | WEIGHTING ELEMENT CONTRAST RATINGS & SCORES None Low Medium High Color x3 Form x2 Line xl Texture xl Scale x2 The weightings shown here are generalized and widely applicable to BLM lands. However, modifications to the weightings should be made to fit regional landscape conditions wherever necessary. . The element contrast ratings of each landscape component are tallied to give an overall component score. These scores are useful in com paring the relative amounts of contrast between project components. If, later, it is found that mitigation measures must be taken, the component scores help to identify which parts of a project need to be re-designed. The component scores are not used in the overall contrast rating because the total score: of projects containing several components would be inflated over projects which may produce equally severe visual impacts but which contain only one component ‘An overall element contrast rating for the entire modification is determined for each visual element. These ratings cover the same range as the contrast ratings for individual components, i.e. High, Medium, Low, None. To determine an overall element contrast rating, the contrast ratings for each component are tallied as follows:ELEMENT CONTRAST RATINGS OVERALL ELEMENT CONTRAST RATING 1-3 components High or High 3 components Medium 1-2 components Medium with Medium no higher ratings 1-3 components Low with Low no higher ratings © AL! components None None Cd Points and weightings are assigned to the overall element contrast ratings as before, to give overall element contrast scores, ranging from 0-9 for color to 0-3 for line and texture. . The overall element contrast scores are added to give the total contrast score which summarizes the contrast produced by the whole Tandscape alteration in the elements of color, form, line, texture, and scale. In assessing contrast for particular elements, there are certain directions to be followed. COLOR - value and hue tend to be the more significant sub-elements ‘of color in dictating visual contrast. In the extrene, either alone is capable of producing high contrast, so these two predo- ninate in assigning color contrast ratings. In general: © extreme contrast in either value or hue, or both gives 2 gh rating; ignificant contrast in either hue or value, or both gives & Medium ratings © some contrast In hue or value gives a Low ratings 3 little or no contrast in both hue and value gives a rating ‘of None. Other factors, such as chroma, reflectivity, and color tempera~ ture, may increase the rating, however FOR ~ contrast commonly results from two or more of the sub-elements ‘of geonetry, complexity, and orientation. In general ® strong dissimilarity in two or more sub-elements gives 2 jh rating; «significant dissimilarity in two sub-elements or strong dissi- milarity in one sub-element alone gives a Medium ratings « considerable similarity in two sub-elements gives a Low rating; * close similarity in sub-elements gives @ rating of None The rating may be modified if proportions, syametry, and solidity are significant factors.LINE = contrast in line results from change in edge types and inter- Tuption or introduction of edges, bands, and sithouette-Vines. New lines may differ in their sub-elements (boldness, complexity, and orientation) from existing lines. In general: * radical changes in edge-type, interruption of skylines, oF high contrast in sub-elements give a High rating; jganificant changes In edge-type, eruption of strong Vines in the landscape, or significant contrast in sub-elements give a Medium rating. slight changes in edges, minor interruptions of line, or some changes in sub-elements give a Low rating. « Tittle or no alteration or interruption of lines, and little or no contrast in added lines give a rating of None. TEXTURE ~ noticeable contrast in texture usually stems from the major sub-elenents of grain, density, and internal contrast. In general: ‘« extreme differences in two or more sub-elements give a High rating; + significant differences in two or more sub-elements gives @ Hediun atin + slight noticeable differences in sub-elenents gives a Low rating: « little or no difference in sub-elenents gives a rating of Hone Other factors, including regularity and directional pattern of texture, may contribute to the contrast rating. SCALE - in this case, the scale of distinct parts of a project such as wal roads, grouped buildings, or discrete areas, is compared to the scale of surtounding landscape objects or areas. In general, project parts which are: + fuch larger or smaller than surrounding objects give a High rating;” @ significantly larger or smaller than surrounding objects give a Hedium rating; slightly larger or snaller than surrounding objects give a Low rating; + similar in scale to surrounding objects give 2 rating of None. Scale Dominance Rating In scale dominance, the scale of the entire modification is compared to the scale of the entire setting. The difference between scale dominance and scale contrast is illustrated below: SEALE CONTEAST SCALE SOMMEThe scale dominance of a proposed activity is rated as follows: dominant - the modification Is the major object or area in @ ‘confined setting (e.g. valley or basin) and occupies @ large part of the setting; co-dominant - the modification is one of the major objects of ‘areas in a confined setting or is the major object/area an unconfined setting (e.g. plain or plateau) ; subordinate - the modification is of significant size but occupies 2 minor part of the setting; insignificant - the modification is 2 small object, occupying @ very small area in the setting. Scale dominance is often the single most important elenent creating severe visual Impacts. In the generalized weighting scheme, it is given a weighting of 4, resulting in the assigned scores: Dominant 2 Co-dominant Subordinate = 4 Insignificant = 0 Spatial Dominance Rating Whereas scale dominance is due to size, spatial dominance is due co location. The spatial dominance of a pruposed activity is rated in theee parts: a. spatial composition of the landscape. Sone landscape compositions are more vulnerable to visual contrasts than others, due to their channelling, dispersion, or obscuring of Views. Prominence of modifications due to spatial composition is rated as follows: + prominent - focal, feature, or enclosed landscapes D Significant - panoramic or weak focal, feature or enclosed landscapes * inconspicuous = canopied, indistinct or obscured landscapes. Mihen the spatial composition Is a combination of the above types, it should be rated for the more vulnerable type, if equally distinct. . spatial position of the project. The prominence of a modification due to its elevation and location in the landscape is rated as follows: *» prominent - ridge or side-slope sighificant - plateau, bench, valley floor, or plain * inconspicuous - slope-toe Where the modification is linear and continuous, €,9. road or pipeline, it may traverse several spatial positions within a singie view or setting. In those cases, it should be rated for the most prominent of its position, providing it is distinctly visible at that point . backdrop to the project The prominence of a modification due to backdrop is rated as follows: » Prominent ~ all or a significant part of the modification is seen against sky or water + Inconspicuous ~ modification Is seen against @ backdrop of landThe overall spatial dominance rating is determined Fron the above ratings, a5 follows: dominant - 2-3 ratings of Prominent co-doninant - 2 highest ratings Significant or 1 rating Prominent subordinate - I highest rating Significant significant - all ratings inconspicuous spatial dominance has a generalized weighting for relative Importance of 2, giving the scores: Dominant Co-domi nant 6 4 a ° Insignificant Once all the above ratings are complete, a measure of the visual inpact severity can be obtained by sunming the three scores Total contrast score 0-27 Scale dominance score 0-12 Spatial dominance score o- 6 | Visual Impact Severity Score = 0-45 The level of visual impact severity may be assigned as follows: Final Score T Severity of Visual Impact 36 - 45" Severe 7 Strong 18 Moderate 3 Weak 0 Negligible It may also be determined by 2 qualitative method using the non-nunerical ratings of overall elenent contrast and dominance as 2 check on the scoring systen. Tke system shoun below is based upon the sane generalized weighting schene already mentioned; it attaches most significance to color and scale, which primarily determine the level of severity, while the renaining elenents act as modifiers. In order to deternine the level of severity, first identify the appropriate combination of color contrast rating and scale dominance rating If the contrast and dominance ratings for the renaining eTenents do not exceed the limits shown, the visual impact severity can be read off direccly Uf one or more of the other elements have contrast or dominance higher than the allowed linits, the modification is assigned the next highest level of impact severity (see next pese). If the qualitative and numerical results do not match, it is a sign of error in the calculations, or, more probably, of uncertainty in assigning contrast ratings in border-line or ambiguous circumstances. In such cas repeat the rating procedure carefully, paying attention to possible amb! "Footnote - These scores have not yet been adequately tested and may need to be changed considerably. aiguities in rating. If problems persist and the project is of sufficient importance, the Detailed Procedure should be carried out Once the visual impact severity has been calculated, it can be determined uhether or not the modification is acceptable under the terms of the VAM Class for the area. SECONDARY ELEMENTS PRIMARY ELEMENTS RY UERITY Color High Seale Co-Don/Dom_| Any combination Severe Toler Med/High Scale Dom Color High Scale Insta/Subor, iat Strong Lister Wore/iow Scale fon] ¥¥_ combination Color Med Seale Insig/Co-bon | Form Wone/Hed, Space Tolar Wane) Fed SESTe Corton | Insig/Co-Dom, ‘scate |Hoderate None/Hed Color Low Scale Subord Form None/Med, Space |Weak Insig/Co-Dom, Scale None/Med, Line None/ Med ‘lor None/tow Seale Tasig | Form Wone/tow, Space Negligible Insig/Sub, Scale None, Low© Use of Detailed Procedure The Detailed Procedure requires accurate simulations of the appearance of the proposed modification, together with a view of the existing scene (see Chapter 3.on simulation techniques) ie car Ee WORKSHEET 1 This sheet contains identifying information and a brief summary of the salient characteristics of the existing landscape, as in Sheet 1 of the Basic Procedure. It also describes the proposed project in terns of its materials, construction methods, arrangement on the site, and overall appearance in the landscape. WORKSHEETS 2-7 Each of the following worksheets 2-7 are devoted to a single visual ele nent, and describe in deteil both the characteristic landscape and the pro~ posed modification in terms of the particular element. Contrast ratings are assigned by conparing significant pares of the modification to Fieant pares of the lendscaper pris? te an-oversiTl rating forceech element of the contrast and dominance of the whole landscape alteration. A significant part of the landscape or project is a relatively homogeneous or distinct unit large enough to have major significance in the scene. A part is considered significant in terns of @ particular element if a change in it would distinctly alter the overall scene, or if it remains visible when squinted at through half-closed eyes.For each element, the combination of all parts forms the mosaic or pattern of that element in the scene. This pattern should be sketched out on tracing paper overlaid on the photograph of the “before scene. This is done for every element: coe He ee B= LAND. REE LAD SB \ (SPORE, Cie veseran ‘Seceranen 2-0 |( 8). = vecerarion pee onl |) BvecerAen $5 || = sraucrune: = “A 2 cet sexruee sence (Re -uw> + RTexuosing WAGE Bier vecsraen | [87 VEER as - For a given element, each significant part assigned to 2 particular land- seape component (land/water, vegetation, of structure). is labeled (A,8,C, D, etc.), and is entered at the top of the relevant worksheet. It may. then be described and measured according to the separate sub-elements and other relevant factors, (see Chapter 3 for details of specific measurement techniques). In addition to the measurenents, a brief verbal description required (refer to pages 5-16 for Suggested Vocabulary) for each part in terms of each sub-elenent. Where two or more parts combine to create a strong and distinct pattern Within the overall pattern of the scene, this too should be described. Finally, the whole scene is described in terms of the sub-elements and its overall visual contrast. The relative dominance of individual land- scape parts in contributing to the overall pattern of the scene is assessed in the right-hand column. It should be noted that what forms a significant part in one element. e.g. color, may not always be @ separate part in another element, e.g. form, and may be divided into two parts ina third element, e.g. texture. For example, a single three-dimensional form such as a building, may be painted in two colors, or its sides illuminated differently, in which case it may be treated as two parts for color contrast rating. Often, however, parts in one element coincide with those in other elenents, reinforcing the visual contrast of the particular objects ‘The process is repeated using the simulation of the after" scene. The view of the proposed modification is broken down into its significant parts for each element, as shown:Tz END 3 ea For a given element, each significant part of the modification Is assigned to a project component (land/water, vegetation, or structure), is numbered accordingly (1,2,3,ete.), and is entered in turn in the central section of the worksheet.’ Each project part Is described, verbally and by measure ments, according to the sub-elenents, as in the characteristic landscape Each project part is then compared with the major part or parts of the landscape which form its setting. These parts may be: i) nearby parts of the landscape, which are most similar to the part of the modifica- tion and which might form a precedent In the natural landscape from which the modi~ fication could borrow; or, if these are lacking or indistinct, ii)the parts of the landscape surrounding or adjacent to the modification; or ) the parts of the landscape behind the cation and forming its backdrop The difference or ratio in measurements between the project part and the landscape part Is rated from High contrast to None for each sub-element, according to the directions given at the bottom of the worksheet. The element contrast rating for each project part is based upon the highest contrast recorded within the major sub-elements (see later explanations Of individual worksheets). The relative dominance of the project parts is assessed by reviewing their contrast and extent in the scene. Once all the significant parts and combinations of parts of the proposednodification have been rated, the visual contrast and don! whole landscape alteration i$ rated,using the sane criteria as were used to rate the project parts. This rating reflects the degree of overall contrast and dominance created by the significant parts and project compo- nents in combination. It should not be a mere summing of all parts and components, nor be directly proportional to the number of parts or compo- nents, since different parts may cancel out each other in combination, and even simple modifications (consisting of one or two separable parts) can produce high visual contrast. The overall contrast rating for each element (excluding spatial character) nay becsasToned af Fol Tow? nic High/Medium MEDIUM Mediun/Low Low Low/Wone NONE Similarly, the overall dominance rating for each element ranges fron: DOMINANT Doninant/Co-dominant CO-DOMI NANT Co-doninant/Subordinate SUBORDINATE Subordinate/ Insignificant INSIGNIFICANT WORKSHEET 8 The overall element contrast ratings for color, form, line, texture, and scale, together with the overall dominance ratings for scale and space, are transferred to Worksheet 8, where they are converted to overall element contrast scores as shown: OVERALL ELEMENT OVERALL OVERALL CONTRAST RATING DOMINANCE RATING ELEMENT SCORE HIGH DOMINANT High/Medium Domi nant/Co-dominant MEDIUM O-DOMI NANT Hedium/Low Co-dominant/Subordinate Low SUBORDINATE Low/tione Subordinate/ Insignificant NONE INSIGN:F ICANT The element scores are then weighted for relative importance of visual elements, as determined for every BLM landscape region. The generalVCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET & SUMMARY a gees Tea = FEREIR VISUAL ELEMENTS Eonieicay Bounce ext Fonte weer en COLOR ConTeAST x Fee connenst ma : eo e Pet en a LINE conTeAST | Resttuw s| x1 : Bw ee aww ds TEXTURE CoNMEMST | BERN Uy fs] xl Be yeve be] x fe $: Presses is SCALE ConTensT | nepal fs] x2 x Bneve és +, BEST nmunmer Be SCALE DOMINANCE spears UaotnninTe. ts] x4 x EBSeRee werner | oe BRE co enum & ‘SPATIAL DOMINANCE | SSSSRERET susmeainare fs| x2 x FueSeBINATE-insemumicnnt | OS ieee 3 TNSi@] SUBaeO Bow inne/co-bon| Poem Mone] HED INee/weD | Co-Dom [EE Ney mie suecer ANY RATING [Project visual_impact VRM Class _~— requirements [maxT DOES PROJECT MEET VRM CLASS REQUIREMENTS ? vasinstnes = reece sagenhting scheme is used below: ELEMENT IwercHTING | MINIMUM SCORE | MAXIMUM SCORE weighted) | (wetgheed) coLoR FORM LINE TEXTURE SCALE CONTRAST SCALE OMINANC SPACE TOTAL The weighted element scores are totalled to give a total score which indicates the severity of visual impact of the proposed modification FINAL SCORE* | SEVERITY OF VISUAL IMPACT 36-45 SEVERE 27-35.5 STRONG 18-26.5, MODERATE 9-17.5 WEAK 0-8.5) NEGLIGIBLE 2 SSSESEEEEEs ASCE el AS SSESESSSS SESE SSS | “These scores have yet to be adequately tested and may need to be considerably revised By the same method as used in the Basic Procedure, the level of severity may also be found without the use of scores, as a qualitative check on the validity of the rating The visual impact severity determines whether or not the modification meets the requirements of the YRM class. However, there may be certai special considerations for prominent or unusual projects, considerations which may modify or offset the assigned level of visuai impact severit: Examples include @ bold aesthetic design, or Important symbolic value of 2 project. Such considerations must be specified in detail on Worksheet 8 by a landscape architect, after intensive scrutiny of the project design and simulations. The assigned level of visual impact severity may br altered if there is sufficient evidence that the design introduce: acceptable visual variety and enhances the characte landscape.SPECIFIC GUIDELINES FOR INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS In assessing contrast and dominance for particular elements, the directions given in the Use of the Basic Procedure also apply here. The following Section gives further suggestions for rating particular elements in detail. These are tentative guidelines only, and need to be tested in practical situations. Throughout the following sections refer to the accompanying examples. COLOR - the most conmon problem encountered with Detailed Rating of color is to distinguish it from texture. For practical purposes, texture is a small-scale color pattern or mixture of color parts. Whenever the indi- vidual parts are too small, numerous, scattered, or intimately connected to be described separately in a quick and easy manner, treat the whole area as a single color with a textural pattern. Where color parts are large but repeated, measure the most typical part only It is reconmended that color measurements be taken using Munsell color charts.* These are small field notebooks containing color chips which are arranged in gradations of value and chrome, with each page representing a single hue. Any part of the landscape or picture of the scene may be matched to a particular color chip. Each color chip bears a code which identifies its hue, value, and chroma: e.g. SYR 7/3 means a hue half-way between yellow and red, with a fairly light value of 6 (on a scale from 0 = black to 10 = white), and a dull chroma of 3 (on a scale of O = gray to 20 = pure and saturated). Munsell also gives names which are useful to describe various codes. On sunny days in the field, the charts should be used only with the sun roughly behind the observer's back (frontlighting), to avoid variations in illumination of the charts. Once the color codes for parts of the project and its setting have been identified, the two may be compared in terns of each sub-element (hue, value, and chroma) as suggested at the bottom of Worksheet 2. As an alternative to Munsel1 charts, a comprehensive color chart from a paint store might suffice, although lacking the advantages of a systematic arrangement and coding. For value measurements, the Kodak gray scale from O(white) to 19(biack) may be substituted. ‘It is generally available from photographic supplies. FORM - Two and three-dimensional forms may overlap and cause problens with rating. For example, a brush-clearing on a hill represents a two-dimen- sional shape superimposed on the surface of a three-dimenstonal mass. Both types of form should be described and measured Whether a modification is two-dimensional or three-dimensional may depend partly on the viewing distance. A clearcut or low dam, for instance, may be three-dimensional when seen in foreground but appear to be tno-dimen- *Available from Munsell Color Company Inc., 2441 N. Calvert St., Baltimore, Naryland, 21218.sional in middleground or background. As a rule of thumb, vegetative cover may be thought of as two-dimensional unless it is taller than eye-level and seenin foreground. Roads are normally two-dimensional unless the cut and fill is over several feet high. In rating the geometry and complexity of forms, there is no easy way to measure the shape. The hunan eye can estimate relative shape much more quickly, using standard templates, such as the ones below, for comparison: recat SEONETEC INTERMEDIATE | AAMORPRTS seomereic omy (ES (ESI parnaic, ! {nt In rating the orientation of forms, measure the direction of the longest CONPLERTY axis: If no single axis predominates, the form is non-directional (although its edges may have perticuler orientations which should be measured under the element Line). The measurenent of orientation may be absolute (as shown in plan or elevation drawings) or apparent, as would be seen in the field or Simulation. LINE - The distinct parts of a scene fn terms of Tine are not areas of the ‘image but the major lines or edges in it, A line introduced by a modifi- cation may be contrasted with? i) lines which it meets or interrupts 4i) other prominent lines in its vicinity TEXTURE - There are two ways of measuring texture--measuring the actual (absolute) size and spacing of objects forming the teyture, and measuring the apparent size and spacing of objects. Apparent measurements vary with distance fron the viewer and the size of the photograph or simulation used to obtain then; within a particular picture, however, they permit compari- son between the project and its setting. Very often, precise measurement of apparent texture is difficult, and comparison with standard textures, such as "Zipatone" press-on films which illustrate textures of different grain and density, may be easier. SCALE - As with Form, two-dimensional and three-dimensional parts may overlap, each requiring separate measurement. The dimensions of area, height, and breadth should be measured both in absolute terms and as seen in a real or Simulated view of the landscape. Area may be medured on plans or pictures by tracing the boundaries with a planimeter or by overlaying 2 transparent grid and counting grid cellswithin the boundaries. Linear dimensions may be measured direct from plans or pictures. An important absolute dimension is the relative relief Of the setting, i.e. the elevation difference between the high and low points in the landscape. Absolute breadth is not normally measured since there is no definite absolute breadth of the cone of vision with which to compare it. Apparent breadth is taken as the horizontal measurement across the Tine of sight. It is measured only when the modification is a Tong Tow three-dimensional impact or a linear two-dimensional impact. Where volune is rated, only absolute measurements may be taken, since apparent volume is perceived as two-dimensional in images and pictures. Each part of the project should be contrasted with a part of the setting (see p. 34) to give its scale contrast (if there are distinct and compa- rable objects in the setting) and also with the setting as a whole to give its scale dominance. The ratios between project and setting may be rated as shown at the bottom of the worksheet. Obviously, it is essential that the before and after views are of the same picture size for the comparison to be meaningful. Three alternative worksheets (6a, 6, and 6c) are given, to cover three different situations. For any one project, only one of these worksheets is used. Worksheet 6a deals with projects proposed in unconfined settings, Such as plains or extensive plateaus, where ft would be dificult to conpare the volume of @ project with a fixed’volume of the landscape space. Work~ sheets 6b and 6c cover projects in confined settings where volume may be an important consideration. Worksheet 6b déals with modifications proposed on the floor of confined settings, while 6c is for modifications occurring on the steeper enclosing slopes. ‘For two-dimensional modifications espe- cially, the two situations are very different in terms of scale measurement. The “floor” of a confined setting is defined as the lower flattish area enclosed by the walls. Slopes over 20% should be counted as walls. Some settings with little or no floor--modifications occurring anywhere within then should thus be rated on Worksheet 6c. With two-dimensional modifica- tions on slopes of more than 202, the plan area tends to underestimate the total surface exposed to viewing, and the surface area of the modification should be calculated and contrasted with the approxi- mate surface area of the walls. On sheer slopes (over 150%), the area of a modification ‘as seen in elevation may be measured instead (i.e. vertical elevation difference x breadth). When measuring the apparent area contained in the field-of-view of a ‘photo- graph or simulation, the immediate foreground should be discounted, because a slightly different camera angle will include a very different amount of foreground, while the area of middie- and background remains constant. Not all of the above measurements are necessary for any one situation (seeVCR DETAILED PROCEDURE es ‘siento Preis, Tyres 2 SUB ELEMENTS OF SCAU WORKSHEET 6a | SCALE IN LINGONFINED SETTING y AREx WEIGHT (Comment) Benet (Fertoase Sega ‘FSSGSTE | APRRERT | RBTOLE | APPR AoeneeN omer], Deseabrions Volome (30) sone] Sime Rast |Ance: Suntec iacate LANOSCWE. Fperring| srewervers vecernow, aioe ara ae [TERR in elev esl Aso cyte] Fo Site Faria? vag ar TRAST wa ERE BAIT foRTion oF ST eB RST we Teast ea ie eee frorinauce RA parses wir ASTRA Prose RoreeES MODI CATION PATTERNS ors reset RATING, Peeper aman RAT som Paspextenee er Sear ee | jurener BATTING, Gry ait: Tore altars TRoing Doneennce arama Rf Oge ating. = |. VCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEETS Gb fon suots <5 SuST FLEES SALE a]sanireanT REIGN (erm) [EeenoM | VOLO a = fl ener aa nn [meant Cee mee Tame] at oe acre] Forts RATING) a Bac po. cl epRAE ED, Te aeE, [eo TER ast 8 prea f |e mat Ur ie Ursa if S s i iS 8 I, i a > 3 3 re y | =| io) x : a: SV j Ei é wean Aoacte oF FSTAL Atexnien free amare 2 [Geos SS ines Beating emo sess ERTEEE ereEPeeR ere eer cert eter ee regenera eee eee VER DETAILED PROCEDURE WoresumsTay 4c WALL” InracTS ON SLOPES > 40% PRODECT T Ri sicniricany 2 SUs-ELEMEN Z| PARTS Rae Lecce FUSES pram oscuTe ae Zi Boraast eat foser_ cE ri AT Teer OT MOPTen ae nar ex wae oF | K or. Rar {BND (OUTER i TeasT EC) rope Borin HS PROPOSE: THPACTS CRLY | SLGPES 520% WALL IMPACTS 207 Teg AAT = 5. reac LS ie ie Wehserse ea (ace ately ae lees eae Rethe following example of the Detailed Procedure). Only those dimensions which are significant need to be measured. It must be noted that modifi- cations which occupy only 2 or 3% of the total field-of-view may still be of major significance in the scene. This is especially so when the modi- fication is large but distant--the human eye tends to correct for distance and perceive an object as large even when it is smaller in the field-of- view than nearer smaller objects. It is important to not rate scale in extreme close-up views because even smal] objects may then appear to dominate the setting, and the relationship of the modification to the context of its setting cannot be seen. SPATIAL CHARACTER - In rating spatial character of the modification, it is not necessary to identify all the parts of the project and setting. Instead, the space-forming parts should be described. At the top of Workshest 7 should be entered the following data, as appropriate: feature composition - size, height, and nature of feature focal composition - nature of focal objects enclosed composition - enclosure type, height, size of space panoramic composition - view distance, nature of horizontal perts Canopied composition - type, height, density, etc. of vegetation the clarity or strength with which the spatial composition is expressed. For spatial position, it is advisable to draw a quick diagram or section showing the modification in relation to topography. Enter specific measurements conparing the modification with its setting {see Directions on Worksheet 7) in the blank column on the worksheet. ‘These measurements may be used to rate the prominence of the modification The ratings for composition describe the extent to which compositional qualities are altered in definable ways (see following diagrams for guidance). The prominence ratings for composition, position, and back- drop are combined to give an overall spatial dominance rating. In summary, the Detailed Procedure permits each aspect of a proposed modifi- cation to be analyzed in detail, yielding ratings for each visual element. which renain valid regardless of the weighting schene chosen to reflect ele- ment importance. Each rating is based upon measureable or objectively esti~ mated criteria which are defined precisely and which are open to Tittle argument. In working back from the rating of visual impact severity to find the main causes, Worksheet 8 indicates which elements contribute most to the final score.’ Turning to the worksheet(s) describing the appropriate element(s), the significant parts and project components which produce the most contrast may be found from the visual dominance colunn on the right. The detailed Measurements of the element and sub-elements which cause these higher and more dominant contrasts can then be pin-pointed.RATING SPATIAL. PROMINENCE ~ SPATIAL COMPOSITION PRSHRE oo (ea ke. 6 Fearune ip mNoe oe RDISTINeR IM IT Bireessien, A foe une OF BE HereaPeAATE, Le peer os Stace) Pee, fh inane LEE OF Peannence Mat Pe AScioNED Feptune Smee Genre SueHTCY oem Seteuen) <4 a) beens. | fen are Beane ate fam @armmr, eTiatyiiaomane perry BOS NET See hee tee forme Pee Signer cried rr Setecnc wie £ Ferre Dem7e Ba Suman (oF Ws coeaion, 7 Ne. reas 6 WORK 0 NDETI, bower Levee op Pewee HO Be RBLone (Focus 15 Exeerimeiy sro fh Moree Le Gerenincnce: BAL BE ASSIGNED PROMINENT Siena? [| _EviBENT _Jinsenmonnt] Pe | ( ewary ceauries mee Ss Su Dre] course 46RATING SPATIAL PROMINENCE ~ SPATIAL CoMPOSITICN (on) ENcoseD CANDSCAPE Cae) Rese ERaMInENT Sigimicnt| SBE [SCART = fSeoren. ~ emery piceueré Sete” enienaRATING SPATIAL PROMINENCE ~ SPATIAL. COMPOSITION (mt) 3 PANORAMIC LANDS CAPE aaah FBS { ea [Peonest | Sieniricant | evpent —__[ nsrenincnt| EE] = NB IF cavosente [26 eo cn iemuars cowmury Perciny stente} Seneent sae Bees fret alata NeIMTY meneens — ConTINUITY oF Gerluire ar See cerns Pemunence MAY — Be fostered al it Raw Bucs Broave nes CTT Sompunsty ACT Gs cones vows, Ort CANOPIED LANDSCAPE, BASINS MeDirieS DeaINENT | SiamieicaNT AEN [ironman ae PeRUry tomes canary INTaer. ay enn Conve Views INTRCT,C. EXAMPLES @ BASIC PROCEDURE CHAINING [BRUSH CLEARANCE] ~ UTAHBNBPS ,3EL4¥, 30 NolLWTNWSNAVAJO. MTN, UTAH ones nt oe Ht 401 foe wastes FRRECT Fem — Chvining 2 wndrowing dt yimiper seabo -fentst finds at 60 Ye Windies at 60 read es { CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE _ i ‘Sone sonal ale outeerps on buver Slepis, Dusecke lover slopes. TRE. 160%) mrnbin slopes, kaife-cice vidas akon bread bench (0-154 eo Pe TT 4 5 ar eS es [eerssalee Meare Bere ee Ae = s z < Sink ae ine [EERIE Ronaisduel deed — high enclenng wate veins B Powe HI, { Vat hes Aros) lowe thls 1A Toveqrnind + wad licen z Pires sen in Midileqround, witown gn bench ST coun alee A dake buns green. “Groat : pale qi been, gan Ra 5 [pe ee ap week 2D PRS oF Hg. clearings, imple Rein Tbe betnounai, ° S [enue [an deh Peae ore, Sin ay ee eee: 7 Pgesned TURE FA ome 1euk arad View fea $521 S 0G 2 do adead Faveqeamd plea’ Mg clear @ L_ g & 5 2 8 3 z Fe a Diente Sian wie ais Soar & | | epacevef tundeh oneal rah aah tree sores FO Spo hoo’ ie 2 bers a whittle Foe Ja fea pee gavew a 2 fou, Baca ator reset, Definite S| Smee | ete, Parlians) 01 Heo baud "dace sides, S| citismat [ame | OSL hy 9 fang, ing sides, eaubadvs,VCR BASIC PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 2 PROPOSED MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: LAND/WATER VEGETATION TOTAL LANDSCAPE ALTERATION LITAH CHANING. wWindvons io (ao nieralae Bun eal ts ape SEE a eres fexte 4 ow a Pe es ares te 7 7 Dr ae, a itin ree Fires Tigers Conger ia im enclored bowl, 6 Ranial deren pasihion, epothan feed dion, Fe ere sides ¢ ; cotstoobe MRS a ining i elim Crees sen aganst lond/veg roma — Bigoal Goal wl bench, — il nc law Ves bench an oe Fhe volley flowVCR BASIC PROCEDURE = WORKSHEET 3 [D] VISUAL CONTRAST RATING VSuAL mo Blewenrs coun (sh Eontmast z : : ry r a } OVERALL HIGH it 1 1 | 1-3 conmonests #igh or 1 om | {| 3 onposents Resin 1 eonrnast zy f i | y ¥ OVERALL MEDIUM it ' a ol mal | ene B a) eessste | feonrnasr 3 } fiw [1 © fo[nonelo] | | OVERALL LOW if ! ‘rextune [Ha alien [>| 1 | 1-3, components tow with { Conrmasr jad | ves Tales |2|_ J b ‘ Ne fe [stort ew fay! } none[o[none[o]none]o] | | OVERALL NONE tt 1 wee (ram [fen lstian |e] + | a conponents sone \ contrast {ues [ques [aus |4|_) Ng ow [2 PERT tow | ——__ | spariat 2-3 catigs of Prntaet pownant |e Soununce Ato PAR vations Donny 1 maps eating Signin lawonooure [2] 2 ravage soamptana fwstoncant| 0 CE] VISUAL IMPACT SEVERITY apa oS SE Cap See a oar ‘Quacerarive eee [ (STRONG MODERATE WEAK NEGLIGIBLE 0-8 [seventy] ta ein ara geet) Project visual impact STRSNS~SEERE VAM Class JUL requirements Imaxl_| MobeRATe = 26: DOES PROJECT MEET VAM CLASS REQUIREMENTS ? yes(__) Nol] Assessor: 1 Tother— Bates te Pt@ DETAILED PROCEDURE COAL MINE - UTAHSN@S , Fag, 40 HAVADOLONdnealay, NIL = Hewer20101g ASHONoLayVCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 1 PRQJELT INFORMATION END EAL DESCRIPTION GENERA, DESCLIPTION a § é £ 0 g i i ; 3 a PROJECT Coal Mune - Utah LOCATION Frenchman CK , N mile 24 om ViewPoint ~ see skeldh Mae N72 DESIGN DETAILS — Proposed copl mune; = cluster d 100’ fall mefal-siced bl hosing cusher; 200’ melgl-sided chute , 'Z0’ high ae. coal heaps oho mane ane ave, 3000" x 400’ (max at ony ont Ante) vunning NE-Sw, distwhid” a,sectne Pg XR: Pt, IZ pees SE, ouildgs 4 Epe piles Wi SE, te be graded Plain 2 lew platean comby, conyers CO’ cep , sice-slopes 4 10-100% Plins 5- 15%, Limestone 2 siltsime curswps. Mt. Hoard Le 5560! NE of volley Jevper sauo dense m plateaus, setered on gente slopes x plurs. Boxe sailon skep slop, qressfhevos on plans 2 cpenuigs i Sento si A low, howzonbl landscape , except ov pyremidal ML Howard, Jorpev sono 2 grass pune shang auk/ighh cela’ contest PHYSICAL MAKE-UP 2 Mace mdttled sppeoona, Plateau edges of 2-1 mile Bom viewpeint” limit views. Buildings ~ gelvenizeD comagsted mekl panels 2 re6fs (slonting), highly vflechie when new Chute suppots 4" tubular cteel. Conical coel- heap, Olede, 10’ max. radius, Sip — high walt 16’ hgh, under 5! aevbuvden (mudstene 7 alluwwh) PHYSICAL. MAKE-UP ZLouge expanse 4 black ground, dele spail piles (lou), 2 conned black coal heap , pleced in low powit Semi-encese basin Beiudings will be wcfengulay, tu, 2 highly flechve —pslestVER DETAILED PROCEDURE WorxsnpeTst 60 Cor stoves 5 ok ee = a Facute Ea 3] parts mor a al = Zu B Zi al eles tT ~ ia = Zi E “, iS z y : = ‘ Reem eel TD TO =e os [oo emed Te EE STs : - emia ani Zi LZ. Ly i Mh Y, HE: Teo ARS RAT LL, ZA. —S = Tne earl (ia WELK ; y eo . — L Lop arr i ft y " CLL 7 cere ee 1 Z Yi Z copes oe Taran = Ve Z co ‘Less ees Zo t LE WA 1 WE i i [ETO ae ! { Z Spa 3 3 LY ofjzree of TK YG eens ee t LL. wort 7 iy \P faa or presen f eee 4 7 "BY eens Bane TOTP LL fl ‘| REST SAT SY ass f icra SP ear LL rt ikea ae (ree S|the following example of the Detailed Procedure). Only those dimensions which are significant need to be measured. [t must be noted that modifi- cations which occupy only 2 or 3% of the total field-of-view may still be of major significance in the scene. This is especially so when the modi- “fication is large but distant--the human eye tends to correct for distance and perceive an object as large even when it is smaller in the field-of- view than nearer smaller objects. It is important to not rate scale in extreme close-up views because even smal] objects may then appear to dominate the setting, and the relationship of the modification to the context of its setting cannot be seen. SPATIAL CHARACTER - In rating spatial character of the modification, it is not necessary to identify all the parts of the project and setting. Instead, the space-forming parts should be described. At the top of Workshest 7 should be entered the following data, as appropriate: feature composition - size, height, and nature of feature focal composition - nature of focal objects enclosed composition - enclosure type, height, size of space panoramic composition - view distance, nature of horizontal parts canopied composition - type, height, density, etc. of vegetation the clarity or strength with which the spatial composition is expressed. For spatial position, it is advisable to draw a quick diagram or section showing the modification in relation to topography. Enter specific measurements comparing the modification with its setting (see Directions on Worksheet 7) in the blank column on the worksheet. These measurements may be used to rate the prominence of the modification. The ratings for composition describe the extent to which compositional qualities are altered in definable ways (see following diagrams for quidance). The prominence ratings for composition, position, and back- drop are combined to give an overall spatial dominance rating. In summary, the Detailed Procedure permits each aspect of a proposed modifi- cation to be analyzed in detail, yielding ratings for each visual element . which renain valid regardless of the weighting scheme chosen to reflect ele~ ment importance. Each rating is based upon measureable or objectively esti- mated criteria which are defined precisely and which are open to little argument. In working back from the rating of visual impact severity to find the main causes, Worksheet 8 indicates which elements contribute most to the finai score. Turning to the worksheet(s) describing the appropriate element(s), the significant parts and project components which produce the most contrast may be found from the visual dominance column on the right, The detailed measurements of the element and sub-elements which cause these higher and more dominant contrasts can then be pin-pointed.RATING SPATIAL PROMINENCE ~ SPATIAL. COMPOSITION, FeaTuRs lAvascaPe Rees Sasa PROMINENT | SIGNIFICANT | EVIDENT he id wae Re] featy wears TMT Lees Poucmeannes Prem emporinen Suet WET Ge SNEED, (Cem MEDI EDS : INSIGNIFICNRATING (vl |30 ce. 26 sq] — JZ Titacas [isco 000 | 54 sq a1] 200" BOO IcaTiCh 5 8 te Hs Bs aS pura rear ie ero. oF eee = ie mn) Bl aq ms Bere = 2a” 5:26 Do! z or Hrzoe, 00" won | Mo [rhe = % oBaeD VED Ti TIT: ‘NED. 136DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET’ $¢ 7 -SPATIAL CHARACTER PROJECT: Wah Gal Mine PemuRe siamiy|forURe LEFT PEGR AED ObiFcAn, Prono fy SPATIAL. POSITION, ee Of Mersnce-% oF Centon /Unmascare OBLCOS IPRORIMITY To FENTMRE:, em mls,VCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 3 SUMMARY eT ane [Pann ee eB Tansee ieeneveo Scale d baldings 9 distance orld be herd 10 otter écongm ically. Suton hoy ve-eaebiishing vegetshdn ih focgrand is prpposed ni z A a seoce | 36-46 ep [ae em Project visual impacl SENS (coi [VAM Class J0_ requirements Imax] NaseeATe zie s DOES PROJECT MEET VRM CLASS REQUIREMENTS? — YESL__] NO| peieaeaeChapter 3 FIELD TECHNIQUES @ Viewpoint Selection General hints on selecting viewpoints for simulation of visual impacts are given in the forthcoming BLM publication Visual Simulation Techniques. For visual contrast rating, it is important to identify the most critical view- point or points which are or will be conmonly used by observers. Critical Viewpoints reveal the modification at its most obvious to the most people. They are therefore often located on comonly-traveled routes or at likely observation points. The modification is usually viewed in middleground (beyond % mile). Factors which may influence viewpoint selection include: Angle-of-view - as the angle between the line-of-sight and the slope (visualized in plan or in section) approaches 90°, the maximum area of a modification becomes visible and the view most critical. Length of time the project is in view - if the observer has only a brief glimpse of the project, the contrast may be less critical. If the project is subject to view for a long period, as from an overlook, the opportunity to detect contrast becomes very critical. Lighting - under certain lighting conditions associated with season and time-of-day, modifications may become very obvious for a sig- nificant part of the day. Season ~ both the appearance of the modification and the use of observation points may change with seasonal effects, e.g. snowfall, foliage change. Spatial composition ~ certain landscape types, especially focal and feature landscape, draw the eye to particular locations, which may affect how easily the modification is seen. The number of viewpoints required varies. Most small typical projects may be evaluated from the single most critical viewpoint. Special project, or projects with two or more highly sensitive viewpoints giving very different impressions of the modification, require more than one viewpoint. Continuous linear impacts such as power-lines or highways should be rated from several viewpoints representing: i) most critical viewpoints, e.g. views from communities, road crossings. i4) typical views in the main landscape types encountered, if critical viewpoints are few and far between. iii) any special project or landscape features such as skyline crossings, river crossings, substations, etc.@ Field Documentation a] BASIC PROCEDURE ‘Once the viewpoints have been selected, a field visit is necessary to evaluate the existing landscape and record its appearance at the critical time of day or season. Color photographs should be taken from the viewpoint towards the project site and to both sides, so that a panoramic view may later be spliced together. A standard 55 mm to 70 nm lens should be used; (for further hints on photography, see the Visual Simulations Techniques publication). The skyline should always be included in the frame or panoramic composites avoid including too much of the immediate foreground. Attempt to include objects in the view, e.g. fences, people, which give clues to scale and distance: ‘these help to visualize the proposed modification. Worksheet 1 of the Basic Procedure may be filled out in the field. The view- point should be documented precisely with the aid of a sketchmap, allowing BLM staff to return later for monitoring purposes. If any special camera equipment or film is used, this should be recorded, along with any other factors affecting the description or recording of the existing landscape. If the assessor is familiar with the proposed modification and has the plan details to hand, he may note major expected contrasts introduced by the project on Worksheet 2. However, the remainder of this and Worksheet 3 should be filled gut after a rough simulation has been prepared from the photographs taken on the field visit. . bl DETAILED PROCEDURE ‘The same steps are taken as in the Basic Procedure, but attention must be paid to a few further details, if accurate and high quality simulations are required. Camere shots may need to be bracketed, i.e. repeated at higher and lower expo- Sure settings, to achieve the best photographic quality. The absolute heights and distances of objects in the scene should be measured or estimated accurately and their positions marked on a detailed map. If the landscape contains poor scale indicators, these should be provided, prior to photography, by setting up survey poles at key positions in the scene. The eye level at which the photograph is taken should be found with an abney-level and marked on a quick sketch of the scene where it intersects two or three objects. The sections of Worksheets 1 dealing with the characteristic landscape should be filled out in the field. The rest of the worksheets are most easily completed in the office using photographs, maps, and plans. However, colors should be measured in the field using Munsell charts, if at all possible, for comparison with the colors shown in the photographs of the scene--the assessor should be aware that the colors may vary considerably due to film type, processing, etc.@ Simulation The forthcoming BLM publication on Visual Simulation Techniques should be consulted for appropriate methods to use, particularly on special projects. There are, however, general suggestions which can be made on the level of sophistication of the simulation. In the Basic Procedure, a rough simulation is normally required to place the modification in the landscape context. The basis for the simulation should be a color print or slide of the existing scene. This aids the sketching~in of modifications in context, using and adapting project plans or designs. The sketching can be done on a vellum or mylar overlay to the print, or on a sheet of paper on to which the slide is projected. A black and white sketch is sufficient, though tonal values (dark to light) are important and should be shown if possible. Pencil or pen shading, or “Zipatone" press-on film may be used for this purpose. Where the proposed project is minor and the assessor has prepared simulations and contrast ratings for similar projects in similar landscape types before, new simulations may not be necessary. However, simulations are useful in comparing with photographs taken after the project is completed; in this way, the assessor may monitor both the visual impact of the project and his own ability to visualize its appearance beforehand. Simulations are essential in all instances where the VRM class for the area is I-III, or where the landscape is particularly vulnerable to disturbance. With special projects for which the Detailed Rating Procedure is used, more sophisticated simulations are required. These should accurately depict a11 the elements of the modification: color, form, line, texture, scale, and spatial character. Thus a careful perspective drawing or computer-generated graphic is need to establish the form, line, scale, and spatial qualities of the proposed modification; some kind of color treatment is needed to similate ‘the surface qualities of color and texture. These can be fairly closely appro- ximated by simple color renderings using felt-tip markers or crayons matched to the Munsell colors identified in the landscape; more realistic effects are produced by retouching color prints which permits direct comparison of before and "after" photographs.Chapter 4 MITIGATION A. PROCEDURE The Contrast Rating quickly reveals the elements and features that will cause the greatest visual impact. It thus acts as a guide to the most effective method of reducing the visual impact of a proposed activity or project. As shown in the flow charts, the overall visual impact rating is compared with the V.R.M. class. If the rating exceeds that which is acceptable for the class, mitigation is required. For projects using the basic procedure, go back to the scores on Worksheet 3 for landscape conponents, visual elements, scale dominance, and space dominance. Identify the specific cause of contrast scores that exceed the requirements for the assigned V.R.M. class. Re-design the project, preparing specific mitigation Measures for each critical element or component where the impact has been deter- mined to be significant. Consider-additional mitigating measures beyond what 1s, necessary to meet contrast rating requirements. Indicate whether or not these additional measures can be implemented without substantial additional costs. Keep in mind the concepts of strategic location, minimizing disturbance and repetition of the basic elements when proposing mitigation measures. Try to use the most effective method. Prepare a rough simulation of the re-designed project. Using Norksheets 4 & 5, conduct a visual contrast rating of the re-designed project. For special projects, again identify critical project parts and re-design the project, preparing ipecitic mitigation measures for each critical clenest or component. Prepare an accurate simulation of the re-designed project. Describe the re-designed project on Worksheet 1.°- Then, simply repeat the visual contrast rating on those worksheets dealing with the critical visual elements. F111 out Worksheet 8 to summarize the results. It is intended that mitigation measures form the essence of the stipulations for the proposed project. The personnel to prepare specific mitigation measures include: a) Bureau. Specific mitigation measures for special projects will only be prepared by professionals trained in the environmental design arts (i,e., landscape architects, etc.). Registration of these individuals within the applicable States is encouraged. b) Non-bureau. Specific and general mitigation measures shall be required to be prepared by professional expertise representing the environmental design arts (i.e. landscape architects, etc.). These individuals andMITIGATION PROCEDURE FOR TYPICAL PROJECTS Conduct BASIC V.C. RATING Describe charackeriste landscape} Describe pret Rate visual contrast for each visual element Rate overall visual Impact Severity Prepare ROUGH SIMULATIONS) oF reedeigred REDESIGN poet to reduce eaatrast in crikical visual elemerds)MITIGATION PROCEDURE FOR SPECIAL PROJECTS yare MCLURATE Consider spectal cireum- Prep: chances aldesign &clors, SIMULATION of Rate overall visual impact severity, VISUAL ELEMENTS, A with high contrast makings ‘or otter problem,firms shall meet all the registration and laws applicable to their respective States. List and prepare an overlay of those significant visual impacts that would reain after the mitigating measures have been applied either because the mitigating measures have a limiting effect or the mitigation requried to offset the adverse visual impact was not feasible. For large-area or corridor- ‘type proposals, include a map showing areas or projects that do not meet VRM class objectives even after al] mitigating measures have been applied. This map should be titled Residual Adverse Visual Impacts. In those cases where the mitigation measures are not feasible, it is suggested that those measures be listed in an appendix for purposes of review in the event the measures become feasible in the future.B. EXAMPLES @ BASIC PROCEDURE CHAINING - UTAHNeos , 24s, dO NOLLYTNNIS wasinay 1%VCR BASIC PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 4 " RE-DESIGNED MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION VEGETATION STRUCTURES. LAND/WATER TOTAL LANDSCAPE ALTERATION PROJECT NAME: Ziteh Chaining - ] Slight soil dethrbance, as bez. Chaining Leaping gions 38 ets , but lean wider gh Ve Ee fs oats Bud mp, been in ~wgular 2-D shapes, Tie af Sides eee ad a As before "but wath, wardigns 4 Frip -edges onented” hozavilly As before 2a ifiont, popavtion ef bench comed; similar im scale | coco Matos As befor, baubles adensia Trorcenon oe | Occupies siqifiiant, povtion 4 bench, but ececiree” dacs e Bode veto amd in tems =e porte PHNINANCE auntie eg | tS size in fald-d- vies ae PRP oy 2D- seen aqpcnth long. WATER, cilhpacTER. on PooiTin — Rise Cenhel om wih - bench - HiVCR BASIC PROCEDURE = WORKSHEET 5 REVISED VISUAL CONTRAST RATING ae ee nerd SSS aay Seer ef ais 6 = 1 |yeememematines ft) [ame | ay VU CoD | 2 2 = ae) t [saomeaneee| | Ca iver fet | | | Peat Most 9 <2 jajmone}o] | | OVERALL LOW it ' None 10. fae SyrerTal || 3 coporene tow win || (uae reenine ace |2| J [te naber volo ty Ree] ter etfs Sea eelolnemsfofeertal | [ovenaut. none 1 | ents Sone wor lean [slmar[s] ¢ | air components none 4 [omen Te. conriasr {wes [4]ioa [4] mea [4]_} \,y[weouit[e ee ee iors iors [None feng) 0 | None! | HONE o Corre rie i eet tee ia a wea Wee ee ea a SS) hae Revoesal | Toa aaa Tato we SEP I amine emf wcconor eee ed —” al rackngs tncomspicvous |INSIGRIFICANT | 0 inconeple vou) 4 (E] VISUAL IMPACT SEVERITY (er as — [Sa gape Berea severe Pe Estar _nore7Cos ScaTs ton Any combination STRONG Shad tere TOOT WEAK SRT ATTN NEGLIGIBLE [Project visual VAM Class J DOES PROJECT MEET VRM CLASS REQUIREMENTS ? Assessor: M.Thstha— Date: ves] Nol] 17 Dee 74@ DETAILED PROCEDURE COAL MINE - UTAH2@ldy, GANSIssd-3a JO NOUVTNNISVCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 1 karsep PROJECT INFORMATION a 3 § y 0 g : § DATE [2-15.74 Bisteict Hsmatton LOCATION Frmdinn Ck. paieage eee tineks See ongiial wolsheet | Men . comvast My, snting schemes to broke reewre Ve see orignal worshert 1 PINSICAL_ MAKE-UP Re-design ~ apply rom-reflccive pao 4 fallowiig cilns to Fal clade wane baldngs, «owner chide, « any trellers on site: ores fod hn veddihana), e564 LC doule greith Green), ¢ simile Jou -chvema eat tomes. Design scheme fo boku uniform verial ov disgonal Sitse path datker henzolal bands ot bese « top _d bvildngs to mots plokau bloffs. Avord comple equlevity. Ceol piles 2 dighrbed ates remain, bik will be fempowry Impodts Buildings epek the cllers of the ohffs bdund’, toung the | Prrape choy 2 tere] coats due to the cool piles 2 distobed grad: 2TRRUC URE IZHARACTERISTZ CONDXAPE cern PATE IGNIFANT PARTS. Z VER DETAILED PROCEDURE wWorkSHEET 2 [ZotoR | Keun PROECT Cal Mant Uba CORTON: Frenchmon Cle Se seston. Einar c TST Gea ce mast wie a] BAIN: [DoF Gras RENE MIREST UN ae | Pa Hit [Don BAT icaenet TA RATING wT 2 ra | eT FT Ra TING, TRA Ty Ne CDTERRST TH Sutdirgs = aT RATING, NONE, Hone. i i 5 : (CONTRAST carta be eA, ICASTRRST Cath =] SAT RAS on SET TOTAL ALTERATION. VERBAL DEscRPTION ST wT SETTING tree) ‘iPrERECE Wo HUNSELL MEACUREMENT. lo-z = OWPFEREE Kopak Grey - Scale aRecTIONSVCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 2 [rege reer aR TR = = z aT Zea Heap. jconrensr wets] A HecHt | Sutoeo RATAG oa | es Nea Hi pend xno otha Lows |oom RATING. ZT | None | tow ran TEE, erst cad ree RATT ery eee Ta ae oe paves TA = Sor eae eat, Zon oes eon cone | tos aise | a Sreuera nes PROPOSED MOOIFIATON I cor BANG) Tome peraeaton Jo rehomed Deva Peg _| Seer aren] Zon Mekal Zz eenrvenst ame Fine cco | Dene =spane | Rendon) Zw = Heh Low [suse] RATING Texture conmersy RATING ABSOLUTE. MERSURERENT Re RRCaRT ers Bike erONS.REVISED VCR DETAILED PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 8 SUMMARY a Hider LINE CONTesST TexTuRE CoNTeNST Sienna Sse nates ASOT FSCS SNATE anstenumicnact ieweneicnnrt INGe/eo-bor co-pom [3 [Profect visual_impac Highest element ‘WRM Class I~ requirements Imax]LANDSCAPE CLASSIFICATION OF THE WESTERN UMTED STATES(am) nvoaeta 207401, “aK (a9) ureruno, exentg (23) uokuey puesy (183) a398aq ay07 319g 3899 (mo) surequnoy eaudng (p98) 22080q Apues av0I9 sozqna eTTyaséreW (42) urseg oprexoaty (421) UreeG soTaBuy coy SHONTAOWd AVOSGNYT noaaeta of eacn, spuetuosue savareta uaTH uyseg vauyn, pueTysin wepon, 32e82q uez0U0g, uysvg 30939 uyeta 2947y oyeUs sureta oradeg supeaunoy ante asnoqea spuequokurg wrqun{oD (UA) se8ueY CUP|EA Bppacy 233975, s2ps2e9 usTH sopeose9 399% Gs) uBrozy uoates Aer1#A 28919 Cam) Korea eaa2mer Ts wanoay, 3204 eodusy copoduy cor soSury 3ee09 eruz031109 38a20g wo0x82003/pooKPOY soBury ase09 uoBo39 (Wo) UFeIUNoK 9FdaKO ALIANIINOO BavoSANVT SALVIS GALINA NYZLSIM JO NOIIVOTAISSYTO FavosaNVI(90) SITE puss exserqey (ua) StH ete (uq) supequnoy usourTE (Aza) cam) spuetda Ao4yy onfuor/asyy Treyetesenn, cs) cay Can (day Suan Anows/poonyayy/kx>0y at2ayr/medavag (is) STITH sse8320ng (48) 401794 wosyoung (ds) 28a Wanos (4a) ea OLPPTH (du) yaeq Yaz0N (44) nvearta suoasnottex SHONIAOUa BaVOSANYT uBnozy, sos9a snesqetg uoqey suzezg 9ea3g uxoyanog sureta qvea9 ux0y2705 (ats) Sortea sty wos + + sopjooy uzeyznog uzerg BuTwosy + + + soryoog TpPrK sop90y Ux9y220N surequnoy uoTTo8oR neeqeTg UoT{OIOR XUIANTINOD ZavOSaNYT 9 se eeAPPENDIX B BLANK WORKSHEETSVCR BASIC PROCEDURE = WORKSHEET 1 PROJECT INFORMATION CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE LAND/WATER VEGETATION o a « 5 Re 3 5 z = o LANDSCAPEVCR BASIC PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 2 PROPOSED MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION L PROJECT NAME: Wee. wane & Lan Z Rese 8 [we py < anit, 3 oe ae haat haar Z lemon | i, & asin, 3 [een [oti 8 Lume eaten | g ay > | rexnwe | gan Bite, aAta. fee aa Pr 8 {onoe Fieri, B leon Peet i 2 lie Ered & Posrmon — Paoge =sioe tt = TOE ted TOTAL LANDSCAPE ALTERATIONVCR BASIC PROCEDURE = WORKSHEET 3 [PD] VISUAL CONTRAST RATING ane Sore 2a TE : ‘ites HES tos pes ces = fal wan Ta oan | at ‘ rs ton 3 : | [ovenaue wan Hae Tseomameetioy ec [1 rom 1 [pngmeuse es |) Esp fet eSareast ' | acer - tow [2 Y | overaus meow it 1 yon Te 1 | 3 enone at ton =e Baw 1) kierntgt } mE on rN i 4 ee C7 overt Low it 1 none | [xen ae || tat comnanes toe win] [Tees : eens, A [aoieensntae \ eee Hi ———| ae (eee aaa | [owe ‘SCALE 1 ‘ATT components: Mone el a, Conraasr J \ gf cweoua [a tow fe none 7 Bonu — fe ' DOMNANCE rage eee te wnconieg ving [ko-pouman] s 4 ' ! ‘sera (seelisniattondeon oman |e ! Sines ren steon | \ fnsoemplenees] | achighane ratings ign Fleer: :0- DOMINANT] 4 1 femer| | seem fon I am ire furoronare [2 : coms ' woe fmt |) icons ecotamee inscnncanr| ' ree | 1 ' (E] VISUAL IMPACT SEVERITY Pri eciebrs [SECON HL \ ae ee ems toe { cusiranve (ete ip nee ‘SEVERE ! al lor Roe toss SevTe Bog MY combination ‘STRONG ‘ Pine eho eee \ BIS RaneTRe STE ae) iavterton, sate |] MODERATE i acm, || WEAK : Tofsun. See el NEGLIGIBLE | 0-8 DOES PROJECT MEET VRM CLASS REQUIREMENTS? — ves{__] NoL__] Assessor: Date:VCR BASIC PROCEDURE WORKSHEET 4 " RE-DESIGNED MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: PE 2 Wane 7 wu DLOF. Pio g [ageing 3 Leon (ret 2 Lune z 3 [_veccrion —] STRUCTURES: Zz Q —E = Prorernon oF a) some B | portance | ioe Zz FAD oF VIEN a [Proce & -: g | seams. esl 9 | tttRacTerR Z = LD 3 2) Poorrn — Rue = Tse Hil 2 — TE ,PaTOH,VCR BASIC PROCEDURE = WORKSHEET 5 [D] REVISED VISUAL CONTRAST RATING Tay Sea visuAL Boent | BlEsen| - ELewenrs wares | soe wick To couon onrmasr pete (ow Ts OVERALL WIGH IF 1 ows 1-3 components igh or iS FORM 3 components Medium : = s} cowtnast 1 yes Ty Vln Ta OVERALL MEDIUM if ' inom fal — 123 corenntsneson ion] | Fee fo Ln ne nigher ratings, ; =e tow OVERALL Low it — 153 cananents tow wit rere so nigner ratings OVERALL NONE it sone AN components None contnast seas Doumance at bch ‘SPATIAL, eraeent 2:3 eatings of Prominent jpomnanr | 8 pownance | _ ' \ Hi ste elite ‘o-pounanr]a i -~ ro V ahs vatng Sgnticont lueonoware | : ron Se fecal | { EE] VISUAL IMPACT SEVERITY : PRIMARY ELERDTS (SESOHDARY ELENEN’ i ee ee

También podría gustarte

• The 48 Laws of Power

  

  De Everand

  The 48 Laws of Power

  Robert Greene

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (2287)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  De Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (3310)
• The Hobbit

  

  De Everand

  The Hobbit

  J.R.R. Tolkien

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (25200)
• • Revistas
  • Podcasts
  • Partituras
• Freakonomics Rev Ed

  

  De Everand

  Freakonomics Rev Ed

  Steven D. Levitt

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (7866)
• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  De Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (5813)
• The Handmaid's Tale

  

  De Everand

  The Handmaid's Tale

  Margaret Atwood

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (13228)
• The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: The Infographics Edition

  

  De Everand

  The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: The Infographics Edition

  Stephen R. Covey

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (2487)
• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  De Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (20099)
• Pride and Prejudice: Bestsellers and famous Books

  

  De Everand

  Pride and Prejudice: Bestsellers and famous Books

  Jane Austen

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (20479)
• Art of War: The Definitive Interpretation of Sun Tzu's Classic Book of Strategy

  

  De Everand

  Art of War: The Definitive Interpretation of Sun Tzu's Classic Book of Strategy

  Stephen F. Kaufman

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (3321)
• The Hobbit

  

  De Everand

  The Hobbit

  J.R.R. Tolkien

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (24588)
• Orgullo y prejuicio: Clásicos de la literatura

  

  De Everand

  Orgullo y prejuicio: Clásicos de la literatura

  Jane Austen

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (20551)
• The Courage to Be Disliked: The Japanese Phenomenon That Shows You How to Change Your Life and Achieve Real Happiness

  

  De Everand

  The Courage to Be Disliked: The Japanese Phenomenon That Shows You How to Change Your Life and Achieve Real Happiness

  Ichiro Kishimi

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (398)
• American Gods: The Tenth Anniversary Edition

  

  De Everand

  American Gods: The Tenth Anniversary Edition

  Neil Gaiman

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (12955)
• Matar a un ruisenor (To Kill a Mockingbird - Spanish Edition)

  

  De Everand

  Matar a un ruisenor (To Kill a Mockingbird - Spanish Edition)

  Harper Lee

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (23062)
• The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People

  

  De Everand

  The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People

  Stephen R. Covey

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (2571)
• Rich Dad Poor Dad

  

  De Everand

  Rich Dad Poor Dad

  Robert T. Kiyosaki

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (1115)
• The Art of War: A New Translation

  

  De Everand

  The Art of War: A New Translation

  Sun Tzu

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (3045)
• Good Omens

  

  De Everand

  Good Omens

  Neil Gaiman

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (12042)
• The Big Book of 30-Day Challenges: 60 Habit-Forming Programs to Live an Infinitely Better Life

  

  De Everand

  The Big Book of 30-Day Challenges: 60 Habit-Forming Programs to Live an Infinitely Better Life

  Rosanna Casper

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (64)
• The Perfect Marriage: A Completely Gripping Psychological Suspense

  

  De Everand

  The Perfect Marriage: A Completely Gripping Psychological Suspense

  Jeneva Rose

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (1133)
• American Gods [TV Tie-In]: A Novel

  

  De Everand

  American Gods [TV Tie-In]: A Novel

  Neil Gaiman

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (12556)
• How To Win Friends And Influence People

  

  De Everand

  How To Win Friends And Influence People

  Dale Carnegie

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (6538)
• How to Win Friends and Influence People: Updated For the Next Generation of Leaders

  

  De Everand

  How to Win Friends and Influence People: Updated For the Next Generation of Leaders

  Dale Carnegie

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (2327)
• Good Omens: A Full Cast Production

  

  De Everand

  Good Omens: A Full Cast Production

  Neil Gaiman

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (10941)
• To Kill a Mockingbird \ Matar a un ruiseñor (Spanish edition)

  

  De Everand

  To Kill a Mockingbird \ Matar a un ruiseñor (Spanish edition)

  Harper Lee

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (22958)
• And Then There Were None

  

  De Everand

  And Then There Were None

  Agatha Christie

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (6792)
• Remarkably Bright Creatures: A Novel

  

  De Everand

  Remarkably Bright Creatures: A Novel

  Shelby Van Pelt

  Calificación: 4.5 de 5 estrellas

  4.5/5 (5719)
• Wuthering Heights (Seasons Edition -- Winter)

  

  De Everand

  Wuthering Heights (Seasons Edition -- Winter)

  Emily Bronte

  Calificación: 4 de 5 estrellas

  4/5 (9974)