Visual Impact Assessment Guidebook
Table of Contents
(To be completed for each individual cutblock or road proposed)
| Licensee Name:_____________________________ | Licence Number:_______________________________ | |
| CP# or RP#:_______________________________ | Block No.:____________________________________ | |
| Proposed Year of Harvest:_____________________ | Proposed Silviculture System:_____________________ | |
| Type of Proposed Operation:___________________ | Net Block Size excl. WTPs (ha):__________________ |
| Visual Resource Management LABEL (old) | VLU#: | VSR: | VAC: | EVC: | EVQO: | |||||
| Visual Resource Management LABEL (new) | VSU#: | VSC: | VAC: | EVC: | EVQO: |
| Date Visual Landscape Inventory Completed:__________ | DOES EVC EXCEED ESTABLISHED VQO? | Yes ___ | No ___ |
VIEWPOINTS & PHOTOGRAPH INFORMATION
| Number and name of viewpoints from which the proposal is visible and photos are taken | VPT #___ _______ |
VPT #___ _______ |
VPT #___ _______ |
VPT #___ ______ |
| Viewpoint importance (Major/Minor/Potential) | ||||
| Viewpoint coordinates (Lat./Long. or UTM inc. elevation (m)) |
||||
| Viewing distance (Foreground/Middleground/Background) | ||||
| Viewing duration (High/Moderate/Low) This factor is important when deciding the VQO achieved from all selected VPTs. (See Box 1) |
||||
| Focal length of camera lens (mm) | ||||
| Direction of view (degrees) |
1. ASSESSING BASIC VQO DEFINITION
| Describe the level of impact that the proposed alteration, in combination with any existing non-VEG alterations, will have on the landscape from each viewpoint, using one of the following terms:Not visible, Not visually evident, Subordinate, Dominant, Out of scale | VPT #___ | VPT #___ | VPT #___ | VPT #___ |
| Which basic VQO definition would the proposed alteration, in combination with any existing non-VEG alterations, meet from all the selected viewpoints and taking into account viewpoint importance, viewing distance and viewing duration? P ___ R ___ PR ___ M ___ MM ___ | ||||
| If applicable, state reasons why the proposed
alteration(s) does not achieve the basic definition of the established VQO from any of the
selected viewpoints. _________________________________________________________________________ |
||||
2. ASSESSING VISUAL DESIGN
| Have major lines of force been identified and used to develop the size and shape of the proposed operation? (If Yes, attach visual force analysis to this form.) | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Has the proposed operation borrowed from the natural character of the landscape? | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Have edge treatments been incorporated into the design of the proposed operation (feathered edges, irregular cutblock design, etc.)? | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Have "islands," or patches of trees, been maintained to mitigate visual impacts and other resource management objectives? | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Are there any existing human-made alterations visible in the
unit that exhibit poor design? If Yes, describe design deficiencies below: ___________________________________________________________________________ |
Yes ___ No ___ |
| If applicable, list any additional design
techniques used and/or state reasons why certain design techniques could not be employed. __________________________________________________________________________________________ |
|
Complete either the clearcut or partial-cutting section below depending on the silviculture system used.
Percent Alteration Worksheet for Clearcutting
| Use photograph or computer simulation output from each viewpoint for calculations. See Appendix 8 for example of calculation. | VPT #____ | VPT #____ | VPT #____ | VPT #____ |
| 1. Total area of landform/VSU in perspective view as seen from each viewpoint (measured in cm2) |
| 2. Visible ground area of proposed alteration(s) in perspective view as seen from each viewpoint (measured in cm2) |
| 3. Visible ground area of all existing alterations in non-VEG state in perspective view as seen from each viewpoint (measured in cm2) |
| 4. Total % alteration of the viewshed in perspective view as seen from each viewpoint [(#2+#3)¸#1]´100=#4 |
| Identify for each viewpoint which VQO will be achieved based on % alteration. See Table 3 in VIA Guidebook for % alteration guidelines. |
| Which VQO would the proposed alteration, in combination with
any existing non-VEG alterations, meet from all the selected viewpoints based on percent
alteration only? P ___ R ___ PR ___ M ___ MM ___ or Other _____________________ |
Partial-cutting Evaluation
| What percent volume or stems retention is proposed? | %Volume Remaining | % Stems Remaining |
| Which VQO would the proposed alteration, in combination
with any existing non-VEG alterations, meet from all the selected viewpoints based on
volume or stems remaining? See Table 4 in VIA Guidebook for partial-cutting guidelines. P ___ R ___ PR ___ M ___ MM ___ |
VIA SUMMARY
| Does the proposal, in combination with any existing non-VEG alterations, achieve the basic definition for the established VQO? | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Have visual design concepts and principles been incorporated into block/road design? | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Does the proposal, in combination with any existing non-VEG alterations, fall within the numerical ranges for the established VQO? | Yes ___ No ___ |
| Given the three criteria listed above, does the proposal meet the established VQO from all the selected viewpoint(s)? | Yes ___ No ___ |
Completed By: _______________________ Date Completed: ________________
NOTES:
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS