Questionnaire to Determine Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) Level

Project Information

Regulatory Framework

Visual Change and Sensitivity

Change to Visual Environment

1. Does the project’s aesthetic approach appear to be consistent with applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, policies, or standards?

   Although the State is not required to comply with regional and local planning ordinances and other regulations, these documents are critical in understanding the importance that communities place on visual resources. The Caltrans Environmental Planning branch may have copies of the planning documents that pertain to the project. If not, this information can be obtained by contacting the local planning department.

   Select a Response (Score) Low Consistency (4 points) Moderate Consistency (3 points) High Consistency (2 point) Not Applicable (1 points)

2. Will permits be required by outside regulatory agencies (i.e., federal, state, or local)?

   Permit requirements can have an unintended consequence on the visual environment. Anticipated permits, as well as specific permit requirements may be determined by talking with the project Environmental Planner and Project Engineer. Note: coordinate with the Caltrans representative responsible for obtaining the permit prior to communicating directly with any permitting agency.

   Select a Response (Score) Yes, both federal and state, or multiple permits required (4 points) Yes, either federal, or state, or federal and local, or state and local (3 points) Yes, local or multiple local only (2 points) No (1 point)

3. Will the project character be compatible with the visual character of the existing landscape?

   Consider the types of adverse changes to the scenic integrity of the landscape caused by the project. Evaluate the scale and extent of the project features compared to the surrounding scale of the community. Is the project likely to give an urban appearance to an existing rural or suburban community?

   Select a Response (Score) No Compatibility (4 points) Low Compatibility (3 points) Moderate Compatibility (2 point) High Compatibility (1 points)

4. Will the project contrast adversely with the memorability (vividness), natural harmony and/or cultural order (unity) of the existing landscape?

   Evaluate the scale and extent of the project features compared to the scale of the visual elements within the surroundings. Is the project likely to change the appearance in a way that is contrasting with the line, color, form, and texture of the existing landscape visual character?

   Select a Response (Score) High Adverse Contrast (4 points) Moderate Adverse Contrast (3 points) Low Adverse Contrast (2 point) No Contrast (1 points)

5. Will the project, when viewed together with other past or foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative adverse change in the visual quality or character of the existing landscape?

   Identify any projects in the area (both Caltrans’ and others’) that have been recently constructed and/or are reasonably foreseeable and/or currently planned for future construction. The window of time and the extent of area applicable to possible cumulative impacts should be based on a reasonable anticipation of the viewing public’s awareness of cumulative change.

   Select a Response (Score) Project may result in substantial adverse cumulative visual impacts (4 points) Project will result in noticeable adverse cumulative visual impacts (3 points) Project is unlikely to result in noticeable adverse cumulative visual impacts (2 points) Project will not result in cumulative impacts (1 point)

6. Will the project produce a new source of substantial light or glare, which will adversely affect daytime or nighttime views within the area?

   Identify new sources of lighting and glare and how day- and nighttime visual conditions may change.

   Select a Response (Score) High potential for adverse effects (4 points) Moderate potential for adverse effects (3 points) Low potential for adverse effects (2 point) No potential for adverse effects (1 point)

7. What is the potential that the project proposal will be controversial within the community?

   Assess the level of public concern by talking with local agency management and staff familiar with the affected community’s sentiments as evidenced by past projects and/or current information.

   Select a Response (Score) High Potential that project will be controversial (4 points) Moderate Potential that project will be controversial (3 points) Low Potential that project will be controversial (2 points) No Potential that project will be controversial (1 point)

8. How sensitive are potential viewer groups likely to be regarding visible changes proposed by the project?

   Consider among other factors who the viewer groups represent, the number of viewers within the group, probable viewer expectations, activities, viewing duration, and orientation. The expected viewer sensitivity level may be scoped by applying professional judgment, and by soliciting information from other Caltrans staff, local agencies and community stakeholders familiar with the affected community’s sentiments and demonstrated concerns..

   Select a Response (Score) High Sensitivity (4 points) Moderate Sensitivity (3 points) Low Sensitivity (2 points) No Sensitivity (1 point)

9. What level of local concern is there for the types of specific project features (e.g., bridge structures, large excavations, sound barriers, or median planting removal) and construction impacts that are proposed?

   Certain project improvements can be of special interest to local citizens, causing a heightened level of public concern, and requiring a more focused visual analysis.

   Select a Response (Score) High Level of Concern (4 points) Moderate Level of Concern (3 points) Low Level of Concern (2 points) No Concern (1 point)

10. Are there federally, state, locally designated scenic or historic resources, or other visual resources within the project area of visual effect (i.e., viewshed)?

    For example: protected viewsheds, visually sensitive public use areas, national historic/scenic trails, historic sites or structures, scenic designated viewpoints, wild and scenic rivers, state scenic highways or federal scenic byways, or potential visual resources such as stands of trees, rock outcroppings, etc.

    Select a Response (Score) Multiple designated scenic resources (4 points) Multiple potential visual resources or a single designated scenic resource (3 points) One potential visual resource (2 points) No identifiable scenic resources (1 point)

11. Will the project sponsor or public benefit from a more detailed visual analysis in order to help reach consensus on a course of action to address potential visual impacts?

    Consider the proposed project features, possible visual impacts, and probable environmental commitments.

    Select a Response (Score) High Benefit (4 points) Moderate Benefit (3 points) Low Benefit (2 points) No Benefit (1 point)

12. Will the project likely require design changes to reduce the extent of visual resource impacts?

    Consider design changes and enhancements such as realignment, additional alignment alternatives, vertical profile adjustments, extensive landscaping, architectural treatment, color and texture treatments and/or lighting of aboveground structures.

    Select a Response (Score) Extensive changes and/or redesign (4 points) Some redesign or minimization measures (3 points) Minimal design changes (2 points) No design changes (1 point)

It is recommended that you print a copy of these calculations for the project file.

Project Score: