You are on page 1of 33

VISUAL

QUALITY
Noor Aida Farain BT Amir Shahfuddin
2012629438
Muhammad Qamarul Ariffin B. Mohamad Zain
2013111841

Nazatul Athirah BT Abdul Rashid


2013346889

Final
definition
of visual quality

Visual quality is a measure


of the overall impression
or appeal of an area
created by the physical
features of the landscape

Visual Quality
Evaluation

Evaluation
of visual quality

The visual quality of an area is determined by completing


a visual resource inventory process based on six factors
which are landform, water, color, scarcity and cultural
modifications. Each of these factors is ranked on a
comparative basis with similar features within the
physiographic province. The visual quality was rated
based on BLM VRM guidelines, using BLM Scenic Quality
Field Inventory Bureau Form 8400-5. Each rating unit was
ranked depending on the type of user, the amount of use,
public interest, adjacent land uses, special areas and
consideration of other factors.

Factor
of visual quality
evaluation

high quality
-High vertical relief as
expressed in prominent cliffs
-spires on massive rock
outcrops
-severe surface variation
-highly eroded formations
including major badlands or
dune systems
-detail features dominant and
exceptionally striking and
intriguing such as glaciers.

moderate quality
LANDFORM

-Steep canyons, mesas, buttes,


cinder cones, and drumlins
-interesting erosion patterns or
variety in size and shape of
landforms; detail features which
are interesting though not
dominant or exceptional.

low quality
-Low rolling hills, foothills, or flat valley bottoms
-few or no interesting landscape features.

high quality

low quality

moderate quality

Example of landform
HQ

MQ

LQ

Massive, highly eroded, unique mountains

Interesting volcanic features

Little variety of landform

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986. Visual
Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1

Factor
of visual quality
evaluation

moderate quality

high quality
A variety of vegetative types
as expressed in interesting
forms, textures and patterns

VEGETATION
low quality
Little or no variety or contrast
in vegetation.

Some variety of vegetation,


but only one or two major
types.

high quality

http://communicativelandscapes.wordpress.com/

low quality

moderate quality

http://tcgwww.taipei.gov.tw/np.asp?ctNode=15974&mp=106002

Example of vegetation
HQ

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986. Visual

Variety of vegetative types and color

MQ

Some variety of vegetation, but


only one or two major types.

LQ

Little or no variety or contrast


in vegetation.

Factor
of visual quality
evaluation

WATER

high quality
Clear and clean
appearing, still, or
cascading white water, any
of which are a dominant
factor in the landscape

moderate quality
Flowing or still, but not
dominant in the landscape.

low quality
Absent, or present, but not
noticeable.

high quality

low quality

moderate quality

Example of water
HQ Clear and clean-appearing

MQ Some intermittent and perennial streams

LQ

Absent, or present, but not


noticeable.

Factor
of visual quality
evaluation

high quality
Rich color combinations,
variety or vivid color, or
pleasing contrasts in the soil,
rock vegetation, water or
snow fields

low quality
Subtle color variations,
contrast, or interest;
generally mute tones.

COLOR

moderate quality
Some intensity or variety in
colors and contrast of the
soil, rock and vegetation,
but not a dominant scenic
element

high quality

low quality

moderate quality

Example of color
HQ Rich color combinations and harmony

MQ

Good color variation

LQ

Muted tones similar to area

high quality
One of a kind; or unusually
memorable, very rare within
region. Consistent chance
for exceptional wildlife or
wildflower viewing.

moderate quality

Factor
of visual quality
evaluation

Distinctive, though
somewhat similar to others
within the region.

low quality
Interesting within its setting,
but fairly common within the
region.

SCARCITY

high quality

low quality

moderate quality

Example of scarcity
HQ

Highly unique for physiographic


region

MQ

Somewhat unique hills

LQ

Blends in, looks typical

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986. Visual
Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1

Factor
of visual quality
evaluation

high quality
Modifications add
favorably to visual variety
while promoting visual
harmony.

moderate quality
Modifications add little or
no visual variety to the area
and introduce no
discordant elements

low quality
Modifications add variety
but are very discordant and
promote strong disharmony.

CULTURAL
MODIFICATION

high quality

low quality

moderate quality

Example of cultural modification


HQ Modifications add favorably to visual variety
while promoting visual harmony.

MQ Little modification and no discordant


elements

LQ

The red sculpture promote strong


disharmony

FACTOR OF VISUAL QUALITY EVALUATION CHART

FACTOR OF VISUAL QUALITY EVALUATION COMPOSITE MAP

Sensitivity Level
Analysis

Sensitivity
level analysis of

visual quality

Sensitivity levels area a measure of public concern for scenic quality. Visual
sensitivity is dependent upon user or viewer attitudes, the amount of use, and the types of
activities in which people are engaged when viewing an object. Higher degrees of visual
sensitivity are correlated with areas where people live and with people who are engaged in
recreational outdoor pursuits or participate in scenic. While area of industrial or commercial
use are considered to have low to moderate visual sensitivity because the activities
conducted in these area are not significantly affected by the quality of the environment.
Public lands are assigned high, medium, or low sensitivity levels by analyzing the various
indicators of public concern. Factors to be considered are as below.

1.Type of Users
high sensitivity
Maintenance of visual
quality is a major concern
for most users

moderate sensitivity
Maintenance of visual
quality is a moderate
concern for most users.

low sensitivity
Maintenance of visual
quality is a low concern for
most users.

Sensitivity
level analysis of

visual quality

Visual sensitivity will vary with


the type of users.
Recreational sightseers may
be highly sensitive to any
changes in visual quality,
whereas workers who pass
through the area on a
regular basis may not be as
sensitive to change.

Areas seen and used by


large numbers of people are
potentially more sensitive.
Protection of visual values
usually becomes more
important as the number of
viewers increase.

high sensitivity
*Road and Highways
more than 45000 visits/yr
*River and Trails
more than 20000 visits/yr
*Recreation Sites
more than 10000 visitor-days/yr

Sensitivity
level analysis of

Low sensitivity

visual quality

*Road and Highways


Less than 5000 visits/yr
*River and Trails
Less than 2000 visits/yr
*Recreation Sites
Less than 2000 visitor-days/yr

moderate sensitivity
*Road and Highways
5000-45000 visits/yr
*River and Trails
2000-20000 visits/yr
*Recreation Sites
2000-10000 visitor-days/yr

2. Amount of Users

Sensitivity

high sensitivity
Maintenance of visual
quality is a major public
issue.

level analysis of

visual quality
moderate sensitivity
Maintenance of visual
quality is a moderate public
issue.

3. Public Interest

Low sensitivity
Maintenance of visual
quality is a low public issue.

The visual quality of an area may be of concern to local, State, or National groups. Indicators
of this concern are usually expressed in public meetings, letters, newspaper or magazine articles,
newsletters, land-use plans, etc. Public controversy created in response to proposed activities
that would change the landscape character should also be considered.

Sensitivity
level analysis of

visual quality

Low sensitivity
high sensitivity

moderate sensitivity

Maintenance of visual
quality to sustain Special
Area management
objectives is very important.

Maintenance of visual quality to


sustain Special Area
management objectives is
moderate important.

Maintenance of visual
quality to sustain Special
Area management
objectives is slightly
important.

4. Special Areas

Management objectives for special areas such as Natural Areas, Wilderness Areas or
Wilderness Study Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Scenic Areas, Scenic Roads or Trails, and Areas
of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), frequently require special consideration for the
protection of the visual values. This does not necessarily mean that these areas are scenic, but
rather that one of the management objectives may be to preserve the natural landscape
setting. The management objectives for these areas may be used as a basis for assigning
sensitivity levels

CHART OF VISUAL QUALITY SENSITIVITY LEVEL

VISUAL QUALITY SENSITIVITY LEVEL COMPOSITE MAP

Viewing Distance
Zones

Viewing

distance

zones
Landscapes are generally subdivided into three distance zones based on relative
visibility from travel routes or observation points. The foreground/ middle ground zone includes
areas that are less than three to five miles from the viewing location. The foreground/ middle
ground zone defines the area in which landscape details transition from readily perceived to
outlines and patterns. The background zone is generally greater than five, but less than 15,
miles from the viewing location. The background zone includes areas where landforms are the
most dominant element in the landscape, and color and texture become subordinate. In order
to be included within this distance zone, vegetation should be visible at least as patterns of
light and dark. The seldom-seen (s/s) zone includes areas that are usually hidden from view as
a result of topographic or vegetative screening or atmospheric conditions. In some cases,
atmospheric and lighting conditions can reduce visibility and shorten the distances normally
covered by each zone (BLM 1986b).

Viewing

distance

zones

Foreground-Middle ground Zone.


0 to 1.0 km from viewer; maximum discernment of detail, texture and contrast, Outer boundry
defined as the point where the texture and form of plant are no longer apparent in the landscape,
Atmospheric conditions can reduce visibility and shorten the distance normally covered by each
zone

Background Zone.
1.0 to 8.0 km from viewer; emergence of overall shapes and patterns, with some texture and color still
evident, Area which can be seen from each travel route to approximately 15 miles, Not include areas in
the background which are so far distant that the only thing discernible from the outline, Included within this
distance zone, vegetation should be visible at least as patterns of light and dark

Seldom-Seen Zone.
More than 8.0 km from viewer; outlines of general shapes and patterns, with little discernible texture and color,
and strong sense of overall perspective.
Zone includes areas that are usually hidden from view as a result of topographic or vegetative screening or
atmospheric conditions. Area that are not visible within the foreground-middle ground and background
zones and area beyond the background zones

Foreground-Middle ground Zone.

Background Zone.

Seldom-Seen Zone.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986. Visual Resource Inventory Manual H-8410-1

CHART OF VISUAL QUALITY FOR DISTANCE ZONES

Conclusion
In conclusion, visual quality is one important aspect of the broad, multi-faceted concept of
integrated forest resource management. Visual quality management can enhance visual
quality of forested lands for recreational users which results in a healthy tourism economy,
enhance public acceptance of forest management and timber harvesting, therefore, helping
to sustain a healthy forest products industry, minimize the visual and audible impacts of forest
management activities on tourists and other recreational users, minimize visibility of harvest
areas by limiting apparent size of harvest, minimize visual impact of slash, minimize the impact of
landing operations on recreational viewers and users.
The degree to which an activity affects the visual quality of a landscape depends on the
visual contrast created between a project and the existing landscape. The contrast can be
measured by comparing the project features with the major features in the existing landscape.
The basic design elements of form, line, color, and texture are used to make this comparison
and to describe the visual contrast created by the project.

REFERENCES:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986. Visual Resource
Inventory Manual H-8410-1
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/Information_Resources_Management/policy/
blm_handbook.Par.31679.File.dat/H-8410.pdf
Ocotillo Wind Energy Facility EIS/EIR. (2011). Visual Resources Appendix E2
ftp://ftp.co.imperial.ca.us/icpds/eir/ocotillo-express/63appe2-visual-resources.pdf

Clean Water Coalition H-2 Systems Conveyance and Operations Program Draft EIS.
(2005). Visual Resources Appendix H
http://www.nps.gov/lake/parkmgmt/upload/SCOP_AppendixH.pdf
Forest Practices Branch. (1997). Visual Landscape Inventory Procedures & Standards Manual.

You might also like