HomeMy WebLinkAboutBradley Lake Visual Resources Mitigation Plan 1986RETURN TO BRADLEY O&M FILE
AsskaPowerAu~orHy
VISUAL RESOURCES MITIGATION PLAN
BRADLEY LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
PROJECT NO. P-8221-000
Prepared By
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
March, 1986
AmskaPowerAu~orny
VISUAL RESOURCES MITIGATION PLAN
BRADLEY LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
PROJECT NO. P-8221-000
Prepared By
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
March, 1986
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VISUAL RESOURCES MITIGATION PLAN
1.0
2.0
3.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.2 Relationship to Other Reports
1.3 Approach and Methodology
1.4 Summary and Conclusions
BASELINE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Landscape Character
2.2 Existing Visual Condition
2.3 Visual Resource Importance
PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION ISSUES & MITIGATIVE
MEASURES
3.1 Access and Staging Facilities
3.2 Construction Camps, Associated Buildings and
Permanent Housing
3.3 Bradley Lake Reservoir
3.4 Powerhouse and Related Facilities
3.5 Cumulative Effects
4.0 FIGURES
5.0 APPENDIX A
VISUAL RESOURCE METHODOLOGY
iii
2-340-JJ
PAGE NO.
1-1
1-1
1-1
1-1
1-4
2-1
2-1
2-6
2-8
3-1
3-3
3-8
3-10
3-12
3-14
LIST OF TABLES
1-1 Visual Condition (VC)/Visual Resource
Importance
3-1 Monthly Average and Monthly Extreme
Reservoir Elevation Values
3-2 Project Feature and Mitigation Measures
A-1 Criteria for Use Volume Ratings
A-2 Criteria for Assessing the Extent and Nature
of Public Concern Over Change in the
Appearances of the Landscape
A-3 Matrix for Determining Visual Sensitivity
Levels
A-4 Matrix Relating Scenic Quality, Sensitivity,
and Distance Zones to Determinations of
Visual Resource Importance
iv
2-340-JJ
LIST OF FIGURES
2-1 Project Location
2-2 Physiographic Provinces of Alaska
2-3 Aesthetic Resource Study Area and Landscape
Character Types
2-4 A Steep, Rocky Shoreline Characterizes the
Lower Lake Edge
2-5 The Peaks of the Kenai Mountains Surround
the Lake Basin
2-6 Closed Spruce Forest on the East Side of Fox
River Valley
2-7 Tidal Flats and an Estuarine System Occur in
the Lower Fox River Valley
2-8 Rock Outcrop in the V-Shaped Bradley River
Drainage
2-9 The Lower Bradley River Meanders Toward Upper
Bay
2-10 Closed Coniferous Forests Cover the Hills
Southwest of Caribou Lake Which is Just Visible
on the Right Side of the Photograph
2-11 Caribou Lake is Surrounded by Low Forested
Hills and Meadows, The Kenai Mountains Form
the Background
2-12 Drainageways and Irregular Ponding at Low Tide
Within Lower Fox River Valley
2-13 Low, Flat Bluffs on West Side of Fox River
Valley are Shown in the Middleground, The
Rolling Terraine of Sheep Point in the
Foregound
2-14 A 2.5 Mile Stretch of Road Affords Critical
Viewing of Project Vicinity
2-15 Visual Resource Importance Ratings for Study
Area
v
2-340-JJ
LIST OF FIGURES
(Continued)
3-1 Bradley Lake Barge Dock, Waterfowl Nesting
Area and Airstrip
3-2 Bradley Lake Permanent Facilities
3-3 Bradley Lake Powerhouse and Permanent
Facilities
3-4 Bradley Lake Powerhouse Tailrace and
Permanent Facilities
vi
2-340-JJ
SECTION 1.0
INTRODUCTION
VISUAL RESOURCES MITIGATION PLAN
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
The purpose of the Report on Visual Resources Mitigation is to show
compliance with Article 39 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
License and its requirements. This report updates previously supplied
information provided as part of Exhibit E in the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission License Application for the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project. Visual impact concerns are addressed as part of
the Project Final Design effort and overall Project Mitigation
Planning.
1.2 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER REPORTS
The Visual Resources Mitigation Plan is one element of the Project
Mitigation Plan. The analyses in this report are based upon the
designs being developed as part of the final design phase for the
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. The visual resources of the
Project area enhance recreational opportunity, and indigenous fish,
wildlife, and botanical resources.
1.3 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
With a few modifications, the methodology described below is a
synthesis of the visual resource management systems developed by the
U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
(USFS 1977, BLM 1980). The methodology is used to perform a visual
characterization and assessment of the area.
The visual resources of the area are defined as the aggregate of inher-
ent features that give aesthetic character to the landscape. Landscape
2-340-JJ 1-1
is defined as any area with an identifiable visual character. The
setting for visual resources may include natural appearing landscapes
(formed by nature, with little human intervention), as well as rural
and urban environments.
The following is a brief summary of the approach and methodology used
in this report. A more detailed description appears in Appendix A.
1.3.1 Attributes
The visual resource is considered to have three basic attributes,
landscape character, visual condition, and visual resource importance.
Visual resource importance itself is defined by three attributes de-
scribed below: scenic quality, visual resource sensitivity and
distance zone.
o Landscape character is a descriptive inventory of the landforms,
water surfaces, vegetative patterns,
that lend to the landscape its
characteristics.
and man-made modifications
common, distinguishing
o Visual Condition (VC) is an indication of the degree to which man
has modified the landscape. When used to describe the current
level of landscape modification, this attribute is termed Existing
Visual Condition (EVC); modifications expected to occur in the
future result in Future Visual Conditions (FVC). There are five
classes of visual condition that, from VC I to VC V, describe
increasing degrees of landscape changes (Table 1-1).
o Visual resource importance (VRI) is a function of three
attributes: scenic quality, which is a relative measure of
intrinsic aesthetic value of area within the characteristic
landscape being analyzed, visual resource sensitivity, which is
measured at the degree of user interest in scenic quality and
concern over changes in landscape features, and distance zone,
which is a general measure of how visible the landscape is (Table
1-1).
2-340-JJ 1-2
Scenic quality, visual resource sensitivity, and distance zone together
serve in ascribing relative value or importance (VRI) to area within
the landscape. There are four VRI Classes, each defined in terms of
the maximum degree of introduced contrast that is appropriate given the
relative importance of the resource. Each is defined in Appendix A
found at the end of this report.
1.3.2 Measurement of Effects
When conducting baseline environmental studies, the areas of the land-
scape presently falling in each Visual Condition class are identified
(Existing Visual Condition--EVC). The future visual conditions (FVCs)
estimated to occur should the proposed or alternative actions be imple-
mented are compared to the EVCs. The estimated change in visual con-
ditions represents the potential direct visual effects of taking the
actions considered.
Project actions may cause indirect effects by inducing changes, over
time, in Visual Resource Importance. Scenic quality is generally
considered to be a stable attribute, but the other indices of VRI
(sensitivity, distance zone) may shift with time. Of the two factors
for sensitivity (see Appendix A) public concern is assumed in this
report to be stable (the BLM and USFS methodologies do not address
change in public attitudes). Change in the other attribute of sensi-
tivity, volume of use, can occur and may be predicted with some confi-
dence. Therefore changes in sensitivity ratings would be due only to
(1) increases or reductions in the volume of use for key areas and
travel routes or (2) the creation of new travel routes and use areas.
Visual resource importance may also respond to changes in distance
zones. Distance zones can change if observer positions were to become
key, which may occur if the sensitivity of the landscape seen from
those viewpoints increased to a moderate or high level.
in the importance of observer positions, relating
2-340-JJ 1-3
Such changes
to shifts in
sensitivity, are a function solely of change in the occurrence and
volume of traffic or use area visitation (since public attitudes are
treated as being stable).
1.3.3 Determination of Significance
The purpose in evaluating VRI is to assess the significance of impacts
on the visual resource. It is assumed that impact significance is a
function of the duration of the effect and the importance of the land-
scape in which it occurs. Where proposed actions can cause long term
future visual conditions exceeding the maximum level of contrast com-
patible with the landscape's VRI Class rating, the effect can be con-
sidered significant. For example, where current visual conditions
rated as EVC II shift to FVC III or IV in a landscape rated as VRI II,
the effects would be significant, if they are also long term.
Where effects are either long or short term and cause a level of con-
trast equal to or less than the maximum allowed, the effects are not
significant (an EVC I shifting to FVC II or III in a VRI Class III or
IV area, for instance).
1.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Power Project is located near the south-
ern tip of the Kenai Peninsula several miles from upper Kachemak Bay.
The landscapes in the region are highly diverse and predominantly
unmodified by man. Massive mountains, numerous glaciers, many lakes
and rivers, rugged shorelines, fjords, and varied wildlife provide
highly scenic resources.
The study area falls within two distinct landscape character types:
the Cook Inlet-Susitna Lowlands and the Kenai-Chugach Mountains. The
Caribou Hills Region is within the Cook Inlet-Susitna lowlands. Com-
pared to other landscapes within the character type, the part of the
study area near Caribou Lake is considered to be a landscape of the
2-340-JJ 1-4
highest quality (scenic quality class A). Visual Resource Sensitivity
is low here, indicating a Visual Resource Importance (VRI) rating of
Class III (moderately important, medium value).
The Fox River valley and Bradley Lake basin both occur within the
Kenai-Chugach Mountain character type. By USFS guidelines, the mid-
to-upper valley is considered to be moderately scenic (scenic quality
class B), while the lower valley is rated as Class C. Coupled with low
Visual Resource Sensitivity ratings, the valley landscape is accorded a
VRI rating of Class IV (minimal importance, low value).
The features within the Bradley Lake basin are moderately diverse when
compared to other alpine basins within the Kenai-Chugach Mountains.
Using USFS standards, the basin landscape is rated as Scenic Quality
Class B. Visual Resource Sensitivity is low here, indicating a VRI
rating of Class IV (minimally important, low value).
The existing visual condition (EVC) for the part of the study area
potentially affected by Project construction and operation is EVC I (no
evident landscape changes). For adjacent areas, some modification by
man is apparent. Within the Fox River valley, the Russian villages
along the western valley edge and a few cabins on the east side cause
visual conditions for small areas to be rated EVC II (evident changes)
and III (changes attract attention). Trends in development do not
suggest that visual conditions will change markedly in the forseeable
future.
During Project construction, no significant impacts will occur.
Construction impacts individually and collectively are short-term; also
the degree of contrasts introduced does not exceed the maximum
relative to the importance of the affected landscape. Furthermore,
only infrequent public viewing will occur given the remoteness of the
project site.
During operation, most Project facilities individually and collectively
will alter current visual conditions (FVC r--na apparent landscape
2-340-JJ 1-5
modification). In the future most changes in the landscape will be
evident, attract attention, but be subordinate to the dominant
landscape features (EVC III). These changes will be long term, but
will not exceed the maximum degree of contrast compatible with the
landscape affected, given its relative importance (VRI Class IV).
Where the transmission lines cross the Fox River valley and the Caribou
Hills Region, the current unmodified appearance will change slightly,
with the lines and supporting structures being visually evident but not
attracting attention (FVC II). The affected landscape is rated as
moderate to low importance (VRI Class III and IV); therefore the
effects are not significant.
No agency concerns related to visual impacts or recommendations have
been expressed to date. Also, based on attitudes expressed at public
hearings, the potential effects of the Project on visual resources
presently appear not to be a public issue. Recent public comments with
regards to the aesthetics of the area have indicated a preferrence to
minimize the cutting of trees associated with the transmission line
between the powerhouse and the Fox River Valley. The Power Authority
will take steps to minimize the clearing of trees. For these reasons,
and because overall visual effects are not expected to be significant,
mitigation is not extensive, nor an issue with respect to visual
resource impacts. Adequate mitigation, however, is proposed within
Project plans. The primary mitigation involves removal of project
facilities and rehabilitation of areas used only during construction
(Martin River Borrow access road, disposal areas, Martin River Borrow
Area; Construction Camp and Staging Area); location of some permanent
facilities underground or underwater (diversion tunnel, power tunnel,
intake structures, intake and control gate shafts); location of
facilities out of line of sight from Kachemak Bay (access road from
construction camp to the dam site, riprap quarry, disposal areas); and
reduction of the cutting of trees associated with the transmission line
corridor. Permanent residences are architecturally blended with their
2-340-JJ 1-6
setting and buffered from view to the extent possible by retention of
vegetative screens. Permanent facilities will be painted with
earthtone colors to reduce reflection of metallic surfaces and so that
facilities will blend with the colors of the surrounding terrain.
2-340-JJ 1-7
VC I
VC II
VC III
VC IV
vc v
TABLE 1-1
VISUAL CONDITION (VC)/VISUAL RESOURCE IMPORTANCE (VRI)
Primarily, only natural ecological changes have occurred.
Past activities of man have not introduced visually evident
characteristics.
The activities of man may be visually evident but do not
attract attention.
The activities of man are evident, attract attention, but are
subordinate to the inherent features of the established
landscape.
The activities of man are evident, attract attention, are
dominant over the inherent features of the established
landscape in terms of scale, but may have visual elements
similar to those inherent to the landscape.
The activities of man demand attention, are dominant over
the inherent features of the established landscape in terms
of scale and contrast, and have no visual elements similar
to those inherent to the landscape.
VRI Lands in this class are sufficiently important that the
Class I introduction of any visually evident cultural modification
would be considered inappropriate.
VRI Lands in this class are valued to the extent that the
Class II introduction of cultural modifications may present visually
evident features contrasting with those of the established
landscape, but they should not attract attention.
2-340-JJ 1-8
TABLE 1-1 (Continued)
VISUAL CONDITION (VC)/VISUAL RESOURCE IMPORTANCE (VRI)
VRI Lands in this class are moderately important; cultural
Class III modifications may offer visually evident, contrasting
features attracting some attention, but the incongruous
features must be subordinant to the features inherent to the
established landscape.
VRI Lands in this class are of minimal importance as a visual
Class IV resource. Contrasting features of cultural modifications
may be allowed to dominate the established landscape in
terms of scale, but should have some visual elements similar
to those inherent to the landscape.
2-340-JJ 1-9
SECTION 2.0
BASELINE DESCRIPTION
2.0 BASELINE DESCRIPTION
2.1 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER
This section presents a descriptive inventory of characteristics
common to the landscape within and adjacent to the Project area and
serves as a framework for later analyses.
2.1.1 The Region
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Power Project will be located in south-
central Alaska near the head of Kachemak Bay, a major embayment at the
southern tip of the Kenai Peninsula (Figure 2-1). The landscape in
the region is highly diverse, attractive, and predominantly natural
appearing. Massive mountain ranges, numerous glaciers, abundant lakes
and rivers, rugged shorelines, fjords, and many species of wildlife
provide some of the most scenic resources in the world. More than
half the State's population lives in southcentral Alaska, but
primarily in or around Anchorage. Apart from some resource
development, a few scattered small towns and linking roads, the rest
of the region has an unmodified, wilderness-like character.
The landscape character of the region is broadly defined by two
physiographic provinces (Figure 2-2): the Coastal Trough Province and
the Pacific Border Ranges Province (Wahrhaftig 1965).
The Coastal Trough Province is a belt of lowlands extending the length
of the Pacific Mountain System. The western two-thirds of the Kenai
Peninsula is within the Cook Inlet-Susitna Lowland subsection, a gla-
ciated lowland with areas of ground moraine, stagnant ice topography,
drumlin fields, eskers, and outwash plains. Most of the lowland is
less than 500 ft. above sea level and relatively flat, with local
relief of 50 to 250 ft. Rolling upland areas near bordering mountain
ranges rise to about 3000 ft. Over 1000 small, irregular lakes, bogs
and ponds occur due to poorly-drained soils and discontinuous
2-340-JJ 2-1
permafrost. On the north side of the Kenai Peninsula, small streams
meander through narrow, winding marsh-covered plains. On wet sites,
black spruce and sphagnum mosses are the most common vegetation, with
white spruce, paper birch, and aspen dominating the dry sites.
The Pacific Border Ranges Province encompasses a crescent of mountains
from Kodiak Island to southeastern Alaska. The Kenai-Chugach
Mountains section form a massive barrier along the north coast of the
Gulf of Alaska. High segments of the mountains are dominated by
extremely rugged east-trending ridges from 7000 to 13000 ft. in
elevation. Low segments of this range consist of discrete, massive
mountains five to ten miles across and 3000 to 6000 ft. in elevation.
Valleys and passes from one half to one mile wide separate these
mountains. The entire range has been heavily glaciated, the
topography being characterized by horns, cirques, and many U-shaped
valleys such as the Kenai River, Portage, Seward, and Fox River
valleys. The flat valley bottoms permit relatively easy access and
dispersed viewing positions throughout much of the area. The valley
bottoms, foothills, and the high-elevation relief of background
snow-icefield ridges of the Kenai and Chugach Mountains present highly
varied landforms. Rocky crests, peaks, river-cut banks, and complex
gravel bar configurations add variety and interest. The south coast
is deeply incised by fjords and sounds, and ridges extend southward as
chains of islands.
The drainage divide, generally an ice divide, is commonly only a few
miles from the Pacific Ocean. The Harding Icefield and many glaciers
at high elevations occur, but there are also several striking examples
of tidewater glaciers. Streams are short and swift, most being fed by
glaciers; several carry glacial silt which diminishes their
attractiveness. Large lakes fill the many ice-carved basins
throughout the Kenai Mountains and, as with some streams, several have
a milky hue due to suspended glacial silt.
Because of the varied elevations and climatic conditions throughout
the Kenai-Chugach Mountains, vegetation is highly varied by Alaskan
2-340-JJ 2-2
standards. Tree line is generally at 1000 to 1200 ft., although
dwarfed tree species in some locations grow at 3000 ft. (USFS 1979).
Alpine areas feature grass meadows, shrub tundra, bare rock, and
snowfields. Sitka, black and white spruce, mountain hemlock, birch,
aspen, balsam poplar, alder, varied groundcover, grasslands, and
willow meadows grow in the valley lowlands and on low-elevation
slopes.
2.1.2 The Study Area
The criteria for defining the study area for assessment of impacts on
visual resources are described as follows:
o As seen from key observer positions, the study area includes that
part of the landscape within the normal range of vision (30-to
40-degree width of field), when attention is directed toward
sites for proposed Project-related activities and facilities.
For distant viewing positions, the depth of field includes areas
of the landscape sufficient as a context for assessing the visual
effects of Project impacts.
o When viewed from many potential, dispersed observer positions,
the study area is to include that part of the landscape within
middleground distances relative to Project-related activities and
facilities. The middleground distance selected is variable, but
areas of the landscape included were though sufficient in extent
to provide a context for assessing the visual effects of Project
impacts.
Based on the above criteria, the study area for visual resource impact
analyses includes the Bradley Lake basin; the lower drainages for the
Martin River and Battle Creek; the lower half of the Fox River valley;
and the Caribou Hills Region (Figure 2-3). The Bradley Lake basin,
the slopes and drainages of Kenai Range bordering the southeast edge
of Fox River valley, and the Fox River valley lie within the
Kenai-Chugach mountains section of the Pacific Border Range Province.
The Caribou Hills region and the bluffs along the northwest edge of
the valley are part of the Cook Inlet-Susitna lowlands.
2-340-JJ 2-3
2.1.2.1 Bradley Lake Basin
Peaks from 5000 to 6000 ft in elevation surround Bradley Lake, which
lies in a basin at about 1100 ft. Compared to other mountains within
the province, the Kenai Range is not high, but it is extremely rugged
and the Nuka and Kachemak Glaciers are scenic. A forbidding, massive
rock shoreline dips steeply to the waters edge around much of the lake
surface, with only the upper end of the lake having a gentle,
accessible shore (Figure 2-4 and 2-5) .
The patterns of vegetation in and around the Bradley Lake basin are
subtle. At the higher elevations, low-growing shrub tundra, gives way
to rocky, uneven ridges or to glaciers and ice fields. Lower down,
alder stands with a low shrub understory occur on south-facing slopes.
North and south of the Bradley River Canyon, vegetation is a mosaic of
tall alder, herbaceous-sedge grass, shrub tundra and open coniferous
forest. In the lower Kachemak Creek valley there are low willows
mixed with herbaceous-sedge grass.
Streams are generally inconspicious, glacier-fed, and meandering as
they cross outwash plains. Suspended solids from glacial action
impart a milky cast to streams and lake waters.
2.1.2.2 Fox River Valley
The Fox River valley is a broad, flat, steep-walled valley shaped by
glacial action and a braided river system. Towards its mouth it is
from two to four miles wide and contains the main tributaries to the
upper bay (Fox River, Bradley River and Sheep Creek). Low bluffs,
sharply incised drainages and alluvial fans define the west side of
the valley.
Alders and grasses are found on the slopes, with alders growing along
the alluvial fans and partly up the canyons. Slopes on the east side
vary from gently rolling to steep, and feature a closed spruce forest
from about 150ft to 1000-1500 ft above sea level (Figure 2-6).
2-340-JJ 2-4
The upper valley is characterized by a mosaic of coniferious woodlands
which grades into groves of balsam poplar, alder thickets, meadows and
freshwater marshes in the middle valley. The lower valley hosts open
expanses of grass, sedges, and salt-tolerant forbs. At the mouth of
the valley is an estuarine system with a broad intertidal zone
inundated twice daily by tides occasionally exceeding 27 ft (Figure
2-7). Vegetative diversity here is low due to the harsh environment
of this estuarine area (COE 1982).
The Bradley River flows swiftly through a highly scenic gorge charact-
erized in places by vertical rock outcrops contrasting sharply with
spruce-forested slopes (Figure 2-8). Upon reaching the valley, the
river slows considerably to meander toward the upper bay (Figure 2-9).
The lower reaches of the Martin River and Battle Creek emerge from a
closed spruce forest out upon flood plains occasionally vegetated with
a mix of balsam poplars, spruce, tall willow and alder.
2.1.2.3 Caribou Hills Region
The part of the Caribou Hills region in the vicinity of the proposed
transmission line corridor is a rolling upland of rounded hills and
broad, flat valleys within the Cook Inlet-Susitna Lowlands. Relief is
gentle with elevations generally varying from 1000 to 2000 ft above
sea level. The Boxcar Hills and Caribou Hills just north of Caribou
Lake are the locally dominant topographic features; their elevations
range from 2200 to 2800 ft (Figure 2-10). Much of the area is poorly
drained, but in places tributaries flowing south and east have cut
deep, relatively narrow ravines through bluffs bordering Kachemak Bay
and the Fox River valley. The lowlands are characterized by
sedge-grass meadows, tall and low shrub communities. A closed
coniferous forest covers the lower mountain slopes and some hilltops,
while shrub tundra occurs at the higher elevations. The dominant
water feature in this part of the study area is Caribou Lake (Figure
2-11) •
2-340-JJ 2-5
2.2 EXISTING VISUAL CONDITION
2.2.1 The Region
From 10-20 percent of the Kenai Peninsula falls within Existing Visual
Condition Class I, since the past activities of man have introduced
visually evident characteristics in only a few areas. The peninsula
landscape is largely unmodified because it is sparsely populated, and
most of it is poorly accessed. Also, comparatively little of the
peninsula is affected by extractive industries having great potential
for modifying the landscape.
The majority of the State's residents live in southcentral Alaska,
primarily in or around Anchorage, which had a 1980 population of
180,740. The remainder live in small, dispersed towns. For instance,
within the Kenai Peninsula Borough, the 1980 population was 25,282,
only 5 percent of the State's population. For the major Kenai
Peninsula Borough cities, populations ranged from 239 to 4300 in 1980,
with most living on the southern or eastern border of the peninsula.
Urban development on the peninsula is, therefore, inconspicuous and
isolated. Further, although the economy within the Peninsula includes
mining, timber harvesting, and oil and gas production, the effects of
these are intensive in comparatively limited areas. Timber harvesting
on the peninsula is minimal; on the Chugach National Forest, it has
never reached 10 million board-feet (mbf) annually. Although the USFS
proposes to increase harvests to 16 to 17 mbf, the future market may
not justify the increase (J. Tellericko, Chugach National Forest,
pers. comm. 1983). But even the greater level of production amounts
to a low intensity of harvest activities. The most conspicuous
man-made features on the peninsula are those relating to oil and gas
exploration and development, principally roads and seismic lines. A
thousand miles of seismic lines have been cleared during exploration
for oil and gas. Although these clearings and the network of
associated roads are most obvious generally only from the air, in
places these linear features are visually evident from on-the-ground
observer positions and attract attention. The existing visual
2-340-JJ 2-6
condition in areas of concentrated oil and gas explorations would be
considered to be EVC III, or in limited areas EVC IV.
2.2.2 The Study Area
2.2.2.1 Bradley Lake Basin
Apart from one USGS structure, within the basin there are no visually
evident features which have been introduced by man. The existing
visual condition is, therefore, rated as a Class I.
2.2.2.2 Fox River Valley
The valley has few obvious alterations. There are three small Russian
villages and a small airstrip along the northwest edge of the valley,
and a few cabins along the southeast edge. Due to the scale of the
valley and the small extent of the modifications, the area has a
predominantly unmodified appearance. When seen as part of the
middleground (1/2 to 3 to 5 miles from the viewer), the villages would
be visually evident, might attract attention but would be subordinate
to the features inherent to the valley. For a limited area around the
villages, the existing visual condition is, then, Class III.
The cabins on the other side of the valley might be evident when
viewed from a "middleground" distance, but would have to be pointed
out to most observers. The landscape around these structures would,
therefore, be rated as EVC II. The great majority of the valley,
including the vicinity of the proposed Project facilities near the
valley mouth, is unmodified and would be rated as EVC I.
2.2.2.3 Caribou Hills Region
From the air, seismic lines and the tracks of all-terrain vehicles on
the lowlands are obvious and extensive but their visibility from on-
the-ground viewpoints will be considerably less. Cabins and agricul-
tural modifications near the bluffs occur but are isolated. Taken
2-340-JJ 2-7
together, the landscape modifications are evident but will not attract
attention from "middleground" observer positions. The landscape is
therefore rated as being within VC II.
2.2.3 Trends in Visual Conditions for the Study Area
Without the Project, no changes in visual condition are expected in
the Bradley Lake basin or its surrounding landscape. Within the Fox
River valley, though, some continued expansion of the Russian villages
may occur. The area around these communities is expected to be rated
at lower than the present EVC III. Development of some public land
near the center of the lower valley may also occur. Due to the
unpredictable pattern of growth, the future visual condition for the
landscape near the sites of potential development is difficult to
estimate. But due to the scale of the valley, when seen as part of
the middleground, potential modifications are unlikely to dominate the
landscape. In the worst case, the future condition of the landscape
in limited areas might change from EVC I to FVC III.
In the Caribou Hills Region, development is not expected. The visual
condition for the area will probably remain unchanged.
2.3 VISUAL RESOURCE IMPORTANCE
The relative value of the aesthetic resources within the study area is
a function of scenic quality, visual resource sensitivity, and
distance zones and is termed Visual Resource Importance (VRI) (see
Appendix A).
2.3.1 Scenic Quality
For natural appearing landscapes, scenic quality is a comparatively
stable attribute of the landscape and is a function of inherent
feature diversity (Appendix A). Evaluations of scenic quality are
made subjectively and are relative to landscapes within the character
type. In the case of this report, scenic quality ratings for the part
of the study area within the Kenai-Chugach Mountains were based upon
2-340-JJ 2-8
criteria established for National Forest Lands in Alaska (USFS 1979).
Two rating units within this section were identified, the Bradley Lake
basin and Fox River valley. The Caribou Hills Region is a separate
rating unit lying within the Cook Inlet-Susitna Lowlands.
2.3.1.1 Bradley Lake Basin
The scenic features of the lake basin have been generally described in
Section 2.1.2.1. The area is enclosed by the watershed divide,
forming a discrete visual experience dominated by terrain and water
forms. Peaks surrounding the basin are moderately to highly defined
(Figures 2-4 and 2-5), craggy and penetrated by glacial troughs. Few
distinct geologic features are present (prominent escarpments, large
rock outcrops and boulder accumulations, spires, etc.). The notable
exception is the massive, steep-walled shoreline near the lake outlet.
The Kachemak and Nuka glaciers are scenic but not impressive when
compared to others in the region, especially those within Kachemak Bay
State Park (Grewingk, Portlock and Dixon Glaciers). The muted vege-
tation patterns have a more or less uniform appearance, except in the
local drainages where willow and alder occur. The waters of the lake
and its tributaries have a milky hue diminishing their attractiveness.
Compared to other lake basins within the character type, the scenic
features are not among the most distinctive, and yet are moderately
scenic. Based upon rating standards and photographic examples of
scenic quality classes for the Kenai-Chugach Mountains (USFS 1979),
the Bradley Lake Basin is judged to be a Class B area (Appendix A).
2.3.1.2 Fox River Valley
The Fox River valley is an example of a braided river system, with the
many channels of the Fox River, Bradley River and Sheep Creek creating
sinuous patterns across its broad, flat expanse. Figure 2-9 shows the
Bradley River finding its way to the upper bay. The landscape is made
more dynamic by the occurrence of the tides ranging to 27 ft. At low
tide the many drainageways are exposed, and irregular ponding on the
flats creates interesting reflective surfaces (Figure 2-7, 2-9, 2-12).
2-340-JJ 2-9
Vegetative diversity at the mouth of the valley is low. Little grows
in the estuarine flats, and slopes on the east side host a uniformly
closed spruce forest. Some vegetative diversity is apparent on the
west side where alders and grasses work their way up alluvial fans,
but most occurs midway up the valley where balsam poplars, alders,
meadows and freshwater marshes grade into a mosaic of coniferous
forests.
Low bluffs on the west side of the valley are sharply incised by
drainages but are generally flat and uniform in appearance (Figure
2-13). The terrain on the east side is occasionally steep, but near
the site for the proposed powerhouse, airstrip, and barge basin, it is
gently rolling (Figures 2-12 and 2-13). Aside from occasional drum-
lins, the form of the valley itself is flat and featureless.
Although the patterns created by the tides and tributaries to the
valley are strong, due to the expanse of the valley the patterns are
fully discernible only from elevated, distant viewing positions. The
low vegetative and landform diversity in the lower valley and
difficult-to-appreciate stream and tidal patterns provide minimal
diversity within the lower valley. This area is judged to be a Class
C landscape. The added diversity of vegetative patterns in the
mid-to-upper valley, coupled with generally muted adjacent landforms
but varied stream courses, defines this area as a Class B landscape.
Within the lower valley, the study area encompasses the Bradley River
drainage. The rough gorge is characterized by occasional sharp rock
outcrops within a V-shaped valley. The flow characteristics are
varied, being tumultuous in places and meandering in others. Because
the water is milky colored, though, the drainage is rated as a Class B
landscape.
2.3.1.3 Caribou Hills Region
The features of this area are described in Section 2.1.2.3. Compared
to the rest of the Cook Inlet-Susitna Lowlands, the landscape features
2-340-JJ 2-10
here are highly varied. Much of the lowlands has little relief (50 to
250 ft), is low in vegetative diversity and has numerous small,
nondescript bogs, ponds, and small lakes. By contrast, the Caribou
Hills Region has relatively defined relief (Caribou Hills, Boxcar
Hills), strong patterns of coniferous forests and the moderately large
Caribou Lake. In the vicinity of the lake, the scenic rating is
judged to be Class A, with the outlying gentle hills to the south, in
the absence of strong water features, being within a Class B
landscape.
2.3.2 Visual Resource Sensitivity
Visual Resource Sensitivity is a function of public interest in, and
concern over, the aesthetic resource and is indicated by the frequency
with which the resource is seen and the intensity of expressed
attitudes toward change in the landscape (Appendix A). Judgments
concerning sensitivity in this study were based upon BLM guidelines
(BLM 1980).
Viewing frequency is a function of the volume of traffic along key
travel routes (trails, rivers, highways, etc.) and volume of use in
critical areas (developed recreation areas, vistas, resorts, etc.). A
travel route or use area is "key" if it receives moderate to high use
and it affords sustained viewing of the landscape being evaluated.
Within and adjacent to the study area there are two travel routes
which can be considered "key." One road from Homer (East Road) leads
northeast along the bay for about 20 miles. The Project area may be
viewed from this road along a 2.5 mile stretch starting about 13 miles
out of Homer (Figure 2-14). The view is panoramic and includes the
peaks and glaciers from Kachemak Bay State Park northeast well past
the upper bay.
Criteria for rating the volume of use have been established by BLM
(1980) (Table A-1 in Appendix A). The average daily traffic along
East End Road has been estimated to be over 200 vehicles per day (J.
Keiser, City of Homer, pers. comm. 1983); which is considered to be
high.
2-340-JJ 2-11
Predominant use of this road is by area residents. Also key is marine
access to the northwest corner of the upper bay. Several hundred
Russians live in the area and travel to the villages may exceed 2000
visits annually; but it is assumed that the number of annual visits is
fewer than 20,000. Use is judged to be moderate at its greatest.
There are no particular routes by which recreationists enter the des-
ignated wilderness surrounding Bradley Lake and that part north and
east of Caribou Lake. Also, pedestrian and equestrian access along
unmarked trails into the Bradley Lake basin and the adjacent
wilderness is thought to be infrequent, and probably is well under
2000 visits annually (low volume). Therefore, no currently used
routes are considered to be key.
Considering future routes, the proposed Boxcar Hills State Trail would
lead to a point near Caribou Lake. The exact route has not been
selected and this trail has the lowest priority of any State
recreation projects considered for the Kachemak Bay area. Due to its
tentative status, this proposed trail was not considered to be a
future key travel route in analyses of sensitivity.
With respect to critical use areas, no developed recreation sites,
vistas, resorts, or other intensively used areas are within or
adjacent to the study area. Several hundred people live in the three
Russian villages, which would qualify these sites only as low-volume
use areas. Also, few people enter wilderness adjacent to the study
area. Therefore, no current use areas are considered to be
significant. The proposed Cottonwood-Eastland State Recreation Area
is sited close to the key observation point along East End Road. The
view from this site is the same as that from the road, requiring no
additional observation point to be identified. Further, the site has
a low priority for development. Therefore the proposed Recreation
Area was not considered in the analyses of sensitivity.
2-340-JJ 2-12
Sensitivity is a function not only of volume of use, but also of atti-
tudes toward change held by the public. For this report, qualitative
data about public attitudes were derived from agency contacts,
previous reports, and limited discussions with Homer area residents
familiar with the study area.
Based upon expressed public attitudes toward the Bradley Hydroelectric
Project, the potential effects on visual resources are mitigatable.
Concern had been expressed over the visual intrusion of the
transmission lines as routed in one COE alternative, but rerouting of
the lines alleviated this concern. Regulatory agencies contacted
during ongoing consultation have reported no public concern over
visual effects of the Project. Recent public concern has been
expressed regarding the non-utilization of timber cut from the
transmission line corridor. Since it is not economically viable to
salvage all timber from the transmision line clearing, the final
alignment of the transmission line will minimize the cutting of timber
further reducing visual impacts.
Based upon BLM guidelines and the Licensees consultations, the degree
of public concern over potential effects on the aesthetic resource may
best be characterized as low for all travel routes and use areas.
Final sensitivity ratings are based upon BLM guidelines presented in
Tables A-1 and A-2. They are as follows. A high volume of use
coupled with a low degree of public concern indicates medium
sensitivity for lands viewed from East End Road. The sensitivity of
lands viewed solely from the marine access routes to the Russian
villages (moderate use, low concern) and from the villages themselves
(low use, low concern), is low. Low-volume use and low concern
indicate low sensitivity for lands viewed only from the unmarked
trails into Bradley Lake basin, use areas within the basin, and from
use areas within the Caribou Hills.
2-340-JJ 2-13
2.3.3 Distance Zones
All other factors being equal, visual resources which are closer to
the viewer are considered to be more important than those at some
distance. Distance zones are judged relative to representative view-
points along routes or within use areas of medium or high sensitivity
(BLM 1980). By this criterion, the determination of distance zones is
relevant only for viewpoints along East End Road. Figure 2-14 shows a
representative viewpoint on this road. From the selected viewpoint
the visible Project features are between 8 and 9.5 miles away. Areas
greater than five miles from the viewer are considered to be in the
background distance zone.
2.3.4 Visual Resource Importance
Visual Resource Importance (VRI) is a relative measure of the
intrinsic value of areas within the characteristic landscape being
analyzed and serves in determining the significance of effects on the
visual resources.
Based upon the foregoing analyses of scenic quality, visual resource
sensitivity and distance zones, VRI ratings were determined and mapped
(Figure 2-15). Except for the vicinity of Caribou Lake, the VRI Class
rating for the study area is Class IV; around Caribou Lake it is VRI
Class III. In addition to location, the map shows the coding of the
factors determining VRI class for each area.
2-340-JJ 2-14
SECTION 3.0
PROJECT IMPACTS,
MITIGATION ISSUES,
AND MITIGATIVE
MEASURES
3.0 PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION ISSUES AND MITIGATIVE MEASURES
The Bradley Lake Project will have effects on the visual resources of
the study area. The way in which effects are measured is described in
Section 1.3.2. Changes in the visual condition of the landscape due
to Project implementation are considered to be direct effects, while
shifts in Visual Resource Importance (due to induced change in
sensitivity levels and distance zones) are indirect effects. Visual
Conditions are generally determined from the observer positions
initially used to assess Visual Resource Importance. The exception
will be in the cases where VRI is expected to change due to increased
resource sensitivity (greater use, greater public concern) and altered
distance zones; here the new key observer positions will be used to
estimate future visual conditions.
In the case of this Project, VRI is not expected to change. Due to
improved marine access via the barge dock, as well as the access to
the Bradley Lake basin afforded by the construction road, recreation
use of the upper bay and lake basin is expected to increase. But for
the VRI to change from the current Class IV rating, sensitivity will
have to increase from its current low rating to a high rating for the
upper bay area (Scenic Quality, Class C) and to a medium rating for
the lake basin (Scenic Quality, Class B). Given the low user attitude
rating (which is not treated as variable) for both areas, such shifts
in sensitivity could not occur because: (a) a high sensitivity rating
for the upper bay requires at least a moderate user attitude rating,
and (b) a medium sensitivity rating for the lake basin will require a
high volume of use, given the low public attitude rating. Annual
visits exceeding 200,000 are not considered possible given the local
area regional population, current recreation patterns and trends.
Because VRI is not expected to change, the observer position along
East End Road is expected to remain the only key viewpoint in the
future.
2-340-JJ 3-1
The construction roads, airstrip, barge basin, borrow pit,
construction camps and permanent housing, and powerhouse and related
facilities have been evaluated from the East End Road position only.
In areas of low sensitivity (Bradley Lake Basin, Caribou Hills Region)
it is the convention to evaluate visual impacts of project features as
seen from "middleground" distances--1/2 to 3-5 miles away--relative to
likely travel routes and use areas (BLM 1980).
Where the predicted visual condition is long-term and compatible only
with a VRI class rating lower than the current or predicted future VRI
class for the evaluated landscape, the effect is considered to be a
significant impact.
The impact analyses first addresses the visual effects of the
individual project facilities, or related facilities, as if they were
to be viewed independently from each other. Both the direct and
indirect effects associated with the construction and operation of
each major project component are described. Construction impacts are
considered to be those resulting from the activities of construction
rather than those contributed by the appearance of facilities once
built. Operation impacts embrace not only the activities and effects
relating to the use of the facility, but also its appearance once
constructed. Many Project facilities will be seen together in a
single field of view; the impacts of aggregations of facilities are
discussed in Section 3.5, Total Project Effects in this report.
Figure 3-4 shows the location of the main Project facilities.
To summarize the visual effects, no significant impacts are expected
to occur, either due to individual facilities or to aggregations of
facilities. Where they occur, construction impacts individually and
additively are short term and negligible, being compatible with VRI
Class ratings higher than those presently ascribed to the affected
part of the study area (VRI IV). During operation, most Project
facilities
2-340-JJ 3-2
individually and additively are expected to change the visual
condition from the current EVC I to FVC III; however, the VRI rating
is Class IV for nearly all of the study area affected and therefore
the effects in such areas are not significant. Where the transmission
lines cross the Fox River valley and the Caribou Hills Region, the
visual condition will change from EVC I to FVC II. Here the VRI
rating is Class III; therefore the effects are insignificant.
3.1 ACCESS AND STAGING FACILITIES
3 .1.1 Roads
Primary access roads required to support Project construction and
operations will consist of four permanent segments: from the airstrip
to the powerhouse; from the powerhouse to the lower camp; from the
lower camp to the upper camp; and from the upper camp to the dam. A
temporary haul road leading from the Martin River borrow area will
also be constructed, but removed upon completion of the construction
phase of the Project. The width of the road from the powerhouse to
the lower camp will be 28 ft, as will the segment from the upper camp
to the dam. The road leading from the lower camp to the upper camp,
and that connecting the airstrip to the powerhouse will be 18 ft wide.
All segments, except the haul roads, will be gravel roads, with the
maximum gradient being 14 percent.
The road segment connecting the lower and upper construction camps,
the longest of the five, will be a combination of cut and fill
construction, with the sections that occur in steeper terrain being
almost entirely of cut construction. From the upper camp to the dam,
both cut and fill will be required.
3.1.1.1 Construction
The activities associated with road construction generally will not be
apparent as viewed from the key observor position on East End Road.
Occasional blasting might briefly introduce dust to the air, but such
effects are ephemeral and insignificant.
2-340-JJ 3-3
3.1.1.2 Operation
Where road segments traverse steep terrain, extensive rock surfaces
will be exposed in places. The entire cut slope will be a
consolidated rock surf ace, so revegetation will not occur quickly.
But natural screening by the forest on the downhill side of the road
is expected to obscure part of the cut slopes. Where visible, these
surfaces can be expected to contrast highly with the surrounding dark,
spruce forest. At higher elevations above tree line, the cut slopes
will be less visible. From East End Road, the road cuts might be
visually evident and appear unnatural, but probably will not, by
themselves, attract attention.
The predicted direct effect is that the visual condition of the land-
scape near the roads will change from EVC I to FVC II. The change
will be long-term and irreversible.
The indirect effect of the road system will be to create a new
pedestrian travel route and to increase the volume of pedestrian use
within the Bradley Lake basin. The improved access into the Bradley
Lake basin after construction activities have ceased will make
trail-related activities possible. Entry by all-terrain vehicles will
be prohibited, but pedestrian access by the public allowed. Given the
interest on the part of Homer area residents in the development of
trails in the Kachemak Bay State Park, some undetermined level of
pedestrian use of the road system by ar.ea residents is expected
(out-of-area recreationists are not expected to use the access road).
Summer use of the Bradley Lake basin will likely increase, with
additional sightseeing and backpacking occurring. Visual resource
sensitivity, though, is expected to remain low, with use of the basin
not exceeding 2000 visits per year. This estimate of visitation is
based on conversations with Alaska Department of Natural Resources
(ADNR) park planners and area residents. Visual Resource Importance
is therefore not expected to change.
2-340-JJ 3-4
A secondary indirect effect of improved access relates to induced
demand for recreation facilities. The recreation plan for meeting
Project-induced demand calls for several camp sites near the barge
basin and the dam site. Visually, these facilities will be low key,
unobtrusive, and negligible.
3.1. 2 Airstrip
The landing strip will be located north and adjacent to the powerhouse
site, be 2,200 ft long and have a centerline elevation of 16 ft
(Figure 3-1). The runway will be gravel surfaced and both sides of
the airport road will be riprapped.
3.1.2.1 Construction
The activities associated with constructing the airstrip by themselves
will have negligible visual effects. The movement of machinery might
be discernible from East End Road, but the effect will be short term.
3.1.2.2 Operation
The linear shape and raised gravel surface of the airstrip might be
minimally evident from East End Road, will appear unnatural but will
not, by itself, attract attention. Figure 3-1 shows the airstrip.
From East End Road, the distance (nine miles) and angle of view will
greatly reduce the visibility of the feature. The airstrip is
therefore expected not to attract attention, by itself. At worst the
visual condition of the area near the feature is expected to change
from EVC I to FVC II. The effect is long-term.
3.1.3 Barge Dock Facility
A small harboring facility, or barge dock (Figure 3-1), will be
required to serve sea-going barges supporting Project construction.
After Project construction, this basin will be available to the public
for use by small boats. Features associated with the barge basin will
be the channel marker piles which will guide boats safely into the
basin; a 200 ft by 50 ft wood dock to which boats may tie up; off
2-340-JJ 3-5
loading facilities; a materials laydown area; and a small boat ramp.
In addition, a slough channel will be excavated to bypass existing
slough flow around the dock.
3.1.3.1 Construction
The visual effects of construction and dredging activities associated
with the barge basin will be small in magnitude, short-term and insig-
nificant. Dredging equipment and other heavy equipment will be
visible from East End Road for several months and will contrast with
the nearly featureless lower estuary.
might attract attention, but will be
Equipment and their movement
subordinate to the features
inherent to the overall landscape. For a brief period, the effect
will be to change the visual condition from EVC I to FVC III in the
vicinity of the barge basin. The site for dredge disposal will be
altered, but the dredged material introduced to the site will result
in minimal contrast with the surrounding area. Moreover, the disposal
site will not be visually evident as seen from East End Road due to
its location and the angle of view.
3.1.3.2 Operation
The linear shapes of the barge basin, and the dock and ramp structures
will introduce form and line elements contrasting with those inherent
to the landscape. The low angle of view from East End Road and the
nine-mile viewing distance will substantially diminish the degree of
introduced contrast. Coupled with the visible movement of large
barges and tugs during construction, the short-term effects will be to
alter the visual condition from EVC I to FVC III in the vicinity of
these features. The effect will be short-term and intermittent. In
the long term, after Project completion, public use of the basin for
docking small boats will not be an activity attracting attention.
Without barge and tug traffic in the future, the channel basin, marker
piles, dock and ramp and occasional small boats will not attract
attention, due to the scale of the landscape, but will be at least
minimally evident. The visual condition will probably change from EVC
I to FVC II and be a long-term, irreversible effect.
2-340-JJ 3-6
3.1.4 Martin River Borrow Pit
Granular fill, select gravels, and concrete aggregate will be taken
from the Martin River borrow pit. The excavated area will have an
irregular shape, be from 10 to 15 ft deep, and will expose gravels and
aggregate found within the alluval deposits of the Martin River.
After construction, the pit will be rehabilitated. The pit will be
converted into three ponds with connecting spillways, some islands,
and irregular edges to enhance habitat quality. A dike riprapped with
natural material will keep the Martin River from diverting through the
ponds.
3.1.4.1 Construction
During the period that the pit is serving the construction needs of
the Project, its features and the movement of heavy equipment will
introduce moderate contrasts with the form, line, and texture of the
elements inherent to the landscape. To a lesser extent, the color of
the aggregate and gravels will contrast with the tidal flats around
the site. The haul road will have light rip-rap and will present
negligible contrast in line and form. As viewed from East End Road,
the borrow pit and haul road will be minimally visible but will not by
themselves attract attention, given the angle of view and distance
from which seen. The visual condition around the road and pit will
change from EVC I to FVC II. At the end of construction the haul road
will be removed and the area rehabilitated to its original character.
Also, the appearance of the borrow pit will be mitigated as a result
of rehabilitating the area from an open pit material site to a pond
for rearing fish. Therefore, the effects will be negated.
3.1.4.2 Operation
Plans call for rehabilitation of the pit to benefit fish and wildlife.
When complete, the habitat improvement will substantially mitigate the
appearance of the area when viewed from foreground distances. Due to
the dike and configuration of the ponds, the pit could still appear
somewhat unnatural. Viewed from East End Road, the rehabilitated pit
2-340-JJ 3-7
may be evident but will not attract attention by itself. The visual
condition for the immediate area could be expected to change from EVC
I to FVC II with the effects being long term.
3.2 CONSTRUCTION CAMPS, ASSOCIATED BUILDINGS, AND PERMANENT HOUSING
Two temporary construction camps of modular single story construction
are proposed for the Project, each housing about half the workforce.
The lower site will provide 240 beds for the work force, as well as
recreational and mess facilities, an office and housing for the
management staff. The lower camp will be served by a generator
located at the staging area. The upper camp is a temporary facility
providing 210 beds, offices, recreational and mess facilities.
Permanent facilities adjacent to the powerhouse site include four
single-family residences, a 12-bed bunkhouse, warehouse, machine shop,
storage areas, and parking for heavy equipment.
3.2.1 Lower Camp and Maintenance Buildings
3.2.1.1 Construction
No appreciable visual effects will result from the lower camp during
construction activities. The presence of heavy equipment might be
visually evident but will not draw attention when viewed from East End
Road nine miles away.
3.2.1.2 Operation
Lower camp facilities will be temporary, as will the powerlines from
the temporary generator. From East End Road these facilities and
associated equipment should not attract attention. The visual
condition for the area around the lower camp will be expected to
change from EVC I to FVC II. The effects will be long-term but
substantially reversible.
2-340-JJ 3-8
3.2.2 Upper Camp
Because the site for the upper camp will not be visible from East End
Road and is a temporary facility, no visual effects will result either
during construction or operation.
3.2.3 Permanent Housing
3.2.3.1 Construction
No appreciable visual effects will result from construction activities
associated solely with constructing the four residences.
3.2.3.2 Operation
The bunkhouse, machine shop, storage and parking areas, as well as the
heavy equipment for Project maintenance located near the powerhouse,
will all be permanent site features. The permanent facilities have
been designed so that their geometrical shapes, color and materials of
construction will aesthetically blend with the natural landscape
character.
The residences will be separated from each other and from the
warehouse, bunkhouse, and other permanent camp facilities. The houses
will be designed to blend with the wooded setting adjacent to the camp
site and above the floodplain. Several colors for the siding and
roofing of the permanent facilities were evaluated to determine which
was aesthetically pleasing and blended well with the surroundings. A
shade of brown was chosen (Figure 3-2) • The permanent camp shall
require limited clearing of the closed coniferous forest adjacent to
the access road to site the warehouse, office/residence building and
two duplexes. The proposed clearing will maintain a tree buffer to
minimize the visual impacts from Kachemak Bay. These dark spruce
trees provide for greater visual cover of a disturbed area. Natural
rock cuts will be exposed as the area is cleared. This natural rock
will also be used as riprap. The land will be scarified to allow for
natural revegetation. From East End Road the residences will not be
2-340-JJ 3-9
visually evident. Keeping the permanent facilities in close proximity
to one another minimizes the lengths of the permanent telephone and
electrical lines (Figure 3-3).
3.3 BRADLEY LAKE RESERVOIR
3.3.1 Dam, Intake and Outlet
The dam will be a concrete faced, rock-filled structure with a crest
elevation of 1190 ft and top length of 610 ft. The maximum dam height
above its foundation will be 125 ft, the lake surface being raised to
a maximum elevation of 1180 ft (100 ft above its present level).
Fluctuations will occur with a maximum drawdown of 100ft (Table 3-1).
The spillway, including its adjacent concrete abutments, will be about
230 ft long with a crest elevation of 1180 ft and crest length of 165
ft. The intake channel will be 50 ft by 360 ft long and will be
excavated down to elevation 1030. Excavation will result in a 120-ft
bench-cut slope west of the intake channel.
3.3.1.1 Construction
By BLM standards, visual contrast ratings for Project features
proposed for low sensitivity areas are judged as they will be
perceived in the middleground (1/2 to 3-5 miles away). Blasting, the
movement of heavy equipment, the presence of aircraft, and other
construction activities will be visually evident and will attract
attention when seen as part of the middleground. The scale of the
massive landscape features within the Bradley Lake basin will dwarf
the construction activities making their effects subordinate to the
natural features. The visual condition during construction will
therefore decline from EVC I to FVC III. However, the effect will be
short term.
3.3.1.2 Operation
The visual effects of the dam, intake and outlet are closely linked to
fluctuations in the elevation of the reservoir, and are discussed
under Section 3.3.4.
2-340-JJ 3-10
3.3.2 Middle Fork Diversion
3.3.2.1 Construction
The construction activities for the diversion will have negligible
visual effects; they will not be visible from areas and routes
receiving the majority of use within the basin.
3.3.2.2 Operation
The facilities will have negligible visual effects; they will not be
seen from the areas and routes predominantly used within the basin.
3.3.3 Nuka Glacier Flow Diversion
The diversion of the Nuka Glacier flow will require minimal blasting
and earth movement. The existing rock channel outlet on the upper
Bradley side of the terminus pool will be deepened and a low dike
placed at the headwaters of the Nuka River.
3.3.3.1 Construction
No appreciable effects on visual resources will occur. Heavy
equipment for construction will be flown into the unvegetated site and
will be removed upon completion of the diversion.
3.3.3.2 Operation
Given its low profile design, the diversion is expected to introduce
only slightly unnatural characteristics to the vicinity. The small
extent of the modification and the use of natural materials suggests
that the effect will be negligible.
3.3.4 Reservoir Operation
The principal effects of operating the reservoir relate to the timing
and degree of drawdown. During the peak
through October), drawdown will introduce
barren, muddy shoreline. At a maximum,
recreation months (July
an unnatural appearing,
during this period the
drawdown will vary from 38 to 59ft, averaging 7 to 25ft (Table 3-1).
2-340-JJ 3-11
Vegetation inundated for extended periods will die, leaving a barren
mudflat during periods of drawdown. From July through October, due to
the gentle slope of the upper lake shoreline, from 0 to about 400
acres of barren flats and lake shore will be exposed on the average,
with as much as from 600 to 1000 acres being exposed under the worst
of conditions for those months. On the lake side of the dam, from
July through October average vertical exposure of the darn face will
vary from 17 to 35 ft; of the spillway, from 7 to 25 ft; and of the
cut slope above the intake channel, from 69 to 84 ft. The intake
structure will be under water, but the visibility of the other
structures and the unnatural appearance of the shoreline will alter
the visual condition of the basin.
Introduced contrast will be evident and will attract attention, but
will be subordinate to the features inherent to the landscape
character. The visual condition for the basin will decline from the
EVC I to FVC III with the effects being long term.
3.4 POWERHOUSE AND RELATED FACILITIES
3.4.1 Tunnel
3.4.1.1 Construction
The effects of constructing the tunnel will be the same as those for
constructing the dam, the spillway and the intake channel. Blasting,
the movement of heavy equipment, and other construction activities at
the lake will attract attention when seen as part of the middle
ground. By themselves, these activities will be dwarfed by the scale
of the massive landscape features within the Bradley Lake basin. The
visual condition during construction will change from EVC I to FVC
III. However, these effects will be short-term.
3.4.1.2 Operation
Because the tunnel will be underground, it will not be visible and
therefore will not affect the visual resources of the basin.
2-340-JJ 3-12
3.4.2 Powerhouse and Related Facilities
The powerhouse will be the single most visible feature of the Project,
being a large low structure located near the shore. The tailrace will
be an excavated, rip-rap lined channel approximately 200 feet long and
extending into the tidal flats. From this point,
will be allowed to cut a channel to the bay.
powerhouse flows
Adjacent to the
powerhouse will be a construction laydown area later serving as the
site for the substation. The substation will be a compact gas
insulated substation (CGIS) in which the entire substation would be
located indoors in a controlled environment. A view of the power-
house, tailrace and substation is shown in Figure 3-4.
3.4.2.1 Construction
Blasting, the movement of heavy equipment, and other activities asso-
ciated with constructing the powerhouse will be visually evident but
should not, by themselves, attract attention. The scale of the panor-
amic view from East End Road is such that these activities will be
negligibly evident. For the area near the powerhouse the visual
condition will be expected to change from EVC I to FVC II with the
effects being short term.
3.4.2.2 Operation
The linear form of the powerhouse, and its size, will cause it to be
visible for some distance. The substation facilities and tailrace
will serve to further draw attention to the powerhouse. Figure 3-4
shows the powerhouse and related facilities at a relatively close
range; the view depicted overemphasizes the visual impact of these
structures. From a distance, the powerhouse and its related
facilities will be less visible but will contrast sharply with the
dark, muted forest backdrop. Though attracting some attention, these
facilities will be subordinate to the massive mountains and glaciers
which command the panoramic view from East End Road. From East End
Road on a 35 mm photograph taken with a 55 mm lens, the powerhouse
would be a dot 0.03 inches wide, but one that will be noticed. The
visual condition will, therefore, change from EVC I to FVC III for the
area immediately around the powerhouse.
2-340-JJ 3-13
3.4.3 Transmission Line
The final visual impact assessment and mitigation plan
transmission line is being developed at this time and
for the
will be
submitted as a separate report prepared in response to FERC License
Article 40.
3.5 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The impact analysis to this point has dealt with the visual effects of
individual Project facilities, or related sets of facilities, as if
they were to be viewed independently from each other. However, from
the key observer position along East End Road, a number of Project
features will be seen together within a single field of view. At a
minimum, the width of field is considered to vary from 30 to 45
degrees for purposes of visual analysis, more than enough to include
in a single view the construction roads, airstrip, barge basin, borrow
pit, lower construction camp, powerhouse and permanent housing and
related facilities.
The context for judging the degree of introduced contrast (future
visual conditions) is, for the East End Road viewpoint, much larger
than the width of field for a single view. The visual experience from
the selected observer position includes the nearly 180-degree panorama
embracing most of Kachemak Bay, as well as the Kenai Mountains lining
the horizon. The degree to which introduced contrast is visually
evident, attracts attention, and competes for dominance with features
inherent to the landscape is relative to the entire visual experience
from this key position.
The following discussion first deals with the additive visual effects
as assessed from East End Road. The additive visual effects
experienced within Bradley Lake basin are evaluated second. There
will be no such effects in the upper Fox River valley and the Caribou
Hills Region.
2-340-JJ 3-14
3.5.1. East End Road Observer Position
3.5.1.1 Construction
Blasting, the movement of heavy equipment, aircraft, barges, tugs and
other construction activities will be contrasting features attracting
attention for brief, irregular periods until completion of Project
construction. The tidal flats in the upper bay and the uniform spruce
forests offer little visual absorption capacity for Project elements
and activities occurring at the forest edge or on the flats.
Construction activities for the airstrip; barge basin; borrow pit and
haul road; lower construction camp; permanent houses; and the
powerhouse and related facilities will combine to change the visual
condition from EVC I to FVC III. Construction activities will be
evident and attract some attention, but be small in scale. The
effects will be short term, intermittant and will occur in VRI IV
area; therefore, they are insignificant.
3.5.1.2 Operation
The construction road cuts; the airstrip; barge basin; borrow pit;
lower construction camp and permanent housing will, were each to be
evaluated independently from the other, change the existing visual
condition from EVC I to FVC II. The powerhouse and related
facilities, though, by themselves will change the present visual
condition from EVC I to FVC III for the area adjacent to their site.
Taken as a group, the other facilities just noted will also be
evident, and attract some attention. But due to the breadth of the
panoramic landscape and the scale of its massive features, the group
of Project features will be subordinate even if noticeable.
Therefore, the additive effects of the Project features seen from East
End Road will be to change the visual condition from EVC I to FVC III
for the facility sites and the landscape in their vicinity. The
effects will be long-term, but the VRI for the landscape is now, and
will remain in the future, a Class IV. Therefore, the effects will
not be significant.
2-340-JJ 3-15
Because no visual effects anticipated are considered to be
significant, mitigation is not an issue with respect to visual
resource impacts. Some mitigation is part of the Project plans,
though, and other simple measures would be taken to reduce the visual
contrast caused by selected facilities (Table 3-2).
Where facilities are used only during construction, plans call for
their removal and/ or the rehabilitation of the site (upper
construction camp, haul road and borrow pit, and dredge spoil disposal
site). Permanent residences are to be designated to blend with the
forested setting and to be set back from the tidal flats, thereby
reducing visual contrast with the setting. Most features causing
primary contrast (powerhouse and related facilities, airs trip, barge
basin, dam and its outlet and intake, and the drawdown zone) cannot be
feasibly designed or sited to reduce visual contrasts. But the
permanent facilities near the powerhouse will be of wood construction
or painted to reduce reflection of metallic surfaces and to blend with
the colors of the surrounding terrain (Figure 3-3).
3.5.2 Bradley Lake Basin
3.5.2.1 Construction
The activities associated with constructing the Middle Fork and Nuka
Glacier flow diversions are not expected to add appreciably to those
associated with construction of the dam, its intake and its outlet.
No additive effects will be expected.
3.5.2.2. Operation
The appearance of the dam, its outlet and intake, and the drawdown
zone may be considered together as additive effects. The area of
biggest disturbance due to the drawdown zone--the upper end of the
lake--generally will not be viewed in conjunction with the dam and its
outlet and intake. The part of the shore exposed during the drawdown
and viewed along with the dam and related structures will be small in
extent, not adding appreciably to the visual effect. The visual
2-340-JJ 3-16
condition in the basin will, due to additive effects, not decline
below FVC III from the current EVC I. Because the basin is rated as a
VRI Class IV area, the effects, though long-term, are not considered
to be significant.
3.5.3 Nuka River Basin
3.5.3.1 Construction
The construction of the proposed Nuka Glacier diversion will not
adversely effect the recreational aspects of the Kenai Fjords National
Park or visitor use of the Nuka Pass area. Construction of the
Bradley Lake Project could possibly increase recreational use of the
park.
An evaluation of potential impacts (alterations of existing physical
conditions) on the Upper Nuka River was made using existing color air
photography (2000 scale) and 35mm color slides (taken at ground level
and from the air). The description of the native vegetation and
visual resources of the Nuka Pass and Nuka Glacier has been described
previously (FERC Application for the Bradley Lake Project, Volume 3).
The current evaluation is limited to an assessment of potential
impacts of visual rsources of the Upper Nuka River by the proposed
Nuka Glacier Diversion.
It is anticipated that the headwaters of the Upper Nuka River will
receive reduced flow with the construction of a gravel diversion dike
across the Upper Nuka River near the western outlet of the Nuka Pool.
The results of this action will be the gradual encroachment of
riparian vegetation in the inactive section of the streambed. This
change would occur very gradually over time, most likely requiring 10
to 15 years to develop new riparian vegetation along the margins of
the stream channel. Examining various color photography of the area
indicates instances of natural vegetation growth occurring in adjacent
low flow or intermittent flow streambeds. In many cases these older
streams support vegetation. There appears to be sufficient ground
moisture to support plant growth due to seepage and surface water
runoff.
2-340-JJ 3-17
It is expected with the construction of the Nuka Glacier diversion
dike and the reduced flow in the upper stretch of the Upper Nuka
River, some changes will occur to the existing vegetation now
supported by the river. Projections of potential changes that might
be expected to occur are based on similar, natural occurring reduced
streamflow events that have occurred in the immediate area.
Should similar changes occur in the Nuka River Channel, the changes
would not be noticeable to the average recreation visitor. The
changes will take place gradually over a long period of time. The
presence of adequate soil moisture will most likely sustain the
existing vegetation. Impacts on the visual resources of the
potentially effected area will be minor owing to the fact that
naturally occurring growth in low flow streambeds already are present
reflecting the results of natural processes. The impacts over time
will provide a vegetative regime similar to what already exists in the
immediate vicinity.
3.5.3.2 Operation
The diversion of the present Nuka Glacier flow contribution to the
Nuka River could possibly result in some changes to the existing
vegetation presently supported by the river. These changes will occur
very gradually over time; requiring 10 to 15 years to develop. These
slow occurring changes would be unnoiticeable to the average visitor.
The long-term resulting vegetative regime will be similar to what
alrady exists in the valley area. Visual impacts of the proposed
diversion structures will be minimal, due to their low profile design,
use of native material and the existence of natural land formations
similar to the proposed structures.
2-340-JJ 3-18
Month
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
2-340-JJ
TABLE 3-1
HONTHLY AVERAGE AND MONTHLY EXTREME
RESERVOIR ELEVATION VALUES (FT)
Min. Max. Avg.
1142.4 1180.0 1173.1
1137.9 1180.0 1168. 9
1131.1 1174.6 1163. 1
1122.8 1168.6 1156.6
1112.1 1161.8 1149.6
1100.4 1156.8 1141.7
1084.4 1154.3 1133.1
1080.0 1160.5 1129.6
1107.5 1169. 7 1139.2
1121.4 1180.0 1154.6
1126.1 1180.0 1166.5
1140.0 1180.0 1172.6
3-19
TABLE 3-2
PROJECT FEATURE AND MITIGATION MEASURE
FEATURE EXISTING RATING/FUTURE RATING
Access Roads
Airstrip
Barge Dock
Martin River
Borrow Pit
Lower Construction
Camp & Maintenance
Buildings
Upper Camp
2-340-JJ
EVC I/FVC II
EVC I/FVC II
EVC I/FVC II
EVC I/FVC II
EVC I/FVC II
Temporary
MITIGATION MEASURE
o Martin River Borrow
access road rehabili-
tated after
construction. Natural
revegetation.
o Access roads located
behind tree buffer and
out of sight from
Kachemak Bay.
o Natural rock used as
riprap on both sides
of strip.
o Gravel surface.
o Minimal dredging,
minor filling, side
slopes riprapped with
natural rock.
o Connect the ponds to
each other and to the
Martin River.
o Rehabilitate to create
rearing and over-
wintering habitat for
fish.
o Dike with natural rock
riprapped sides
constructed between
borrow site and river
channel.
o Single story construc-
tion.
o Removed upon com-
pletion of
construction and
restoration of area.
o Removed upon com-
pletion of
construction and
restoration of area.
TABLE 3-2 (Continued)
PROJECT FEATURE AND MITIGATION MEASURE
FEATURE EXISTING RATING/FUTURE RATING MITIGATION MEASURE
Powerhouse and EVC I/FVC III 0 Powerhouse is low &
Permanent Facilities is one story above
ground.
0 Permanent facilities
color & materials of
construction will
aesthetically blend
with natural land-
scape.
0 Tree buffer will be
maintained.
0 Natural rock will be
used as riprap.
0 Natural revegetation
will be allowed to
occur.
Dam, Intake EVC I /FVC II I 0 Intake located under-
& Power Tunnel water.
0 Tunnel located under-
ground.
2-340-JJ
SECTION 4.0
FIGURES
I
I
I
I
I .
C:::::, ARCTIC OCEAN
I
I ,.. ...
GUlF OF ALASI<A
ALASKA CANADA
BFRING SEA
~IFIC OCEAN
100 ? W 2ffi m 498 WOMUS
I
I
I
I PROJECT LOCATION
I
I
i:''
• I ,~. ~~ ,.,.·:.· . )-
-.: t'· /. ·~ .1 ·-. ~ ,[ .... ~ .... , '"'
. /, · . .) . ·") . .. , -4~ -.
,_ .... -... ' ~ -r; •• '-~-l\. (; . ~-t ' 2 "'-· \)\., / ~ /Y:·.IIl _s •
/(._ l!r . ---~J/;;/6 ~
FIGURE 2-1
• • N
" .. . .'lao.
LEGEND
I. ARCTIC COASTAL PLAIN
2. ARCTIC FOOTHILLS
3. ARCTIC MOUNTAINS
4. NORTHERN PLATEAUS
5. WESTERN ALASKA
6. SEWARD PENINSULA
7. BERING SHELF a. AHKLUN MOUNTAINS
9. ALASKA ALUTIAN
10. COASTAL TROUGH
II. PACIFIC BORDER RANGES
12. COAST MOUNTAINS
PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF ALASKA
(U.S. DEPT. OF INTERIOR 1980)
FIGURE 2-2
I
LEGEND
-Study Area Boundary ·rz:a ·cook Inlet-Susitna Lowlands .. _----------_·-_ -_-AESTHETIC. RESOURCE STUDY AREA
·Landscape Character [OJ Kenai-. Chugach Mountains o ----._--.. • ..n•.,.. ..-.AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER TYPES
Type .... ,. •. a.a-... u. _., ,.,. . . .. . . . .
L----------~---------------FIGURE 2-3---..
-... ,..,. -----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A STEEP, ROCKY SHORELINE
CHARACTERIZES THE LOWER LAKE EDGE
~--------FIGURE 2-4 ........
I
I
I
·I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.·-::.:-, ··).-."""
THE PEAKS OF THE KENAI MOUNTAINS
SURROUND THE LAKE BASIN
..._. ________ FIGURE 2-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CLOSED SPRUCE FOREST ON THE EAST SIDE
OF FOX RIVER VALLEY
,..__ ________ .FIGURE 2-6
I
I
·I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TIDAL FLATS AND AN ESTUARINE SYSTEM
OCCUR IN THE LOWER FOX RIVER VALLEY
.._---------FIGURE 2-7 ___.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.I
I
.ROCK OUTCROP IN THE V-SHAPED
BRADLEY RIVER DRAINAGE
...__ ___________ ---FIGURE 2-8 ......
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
THE LOWER BRADLEY RIVER
-MEANDERS TOWARD UPPER BAY
(NOTE DRUMLIN IN MIDDLEGROUND)
.__---------FIGURE 2-9 ......
I
I
I
CLOSED CONIFEROUS FORESTS COVER THE HILLS
SOUTHWEST OF CARIBOU LAKE WHICH IS JUST VISIBLE
ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH
.__--------FIGURE 2-10 _...
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
CARIBOU LAKE IS SURROUNDED BY LOW
FORESTED HILLS AND MEADOWS
THE KENAI MOUNTAINS FORM THE BACKGROUND
(VIEW LOOKING EAST)
......_... ________ FIGURE 2-11
I
I
I
I DRAINAGEWA YS AND IRREGULAR PONDING
AT LOW TIDE WITHIN LOWER FOX RIVER VALLEY I (VIEW LOOKING SOUTHEAST)
I
I
I .___---------FIGURE 2-12 ___.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
·I
LOW, FLAT BLUFFS ON WEST SIDE OF FOX RIVER VALLEY
ARE SHOWN IN THE MIDDLEGROUND, THE ROLLING TERRAIN
OF SHEEP POINT IN THE FOREGROUND
......_ ____________ --FIGURE 2-13 ,-
I
I
I
I
I
I
r-------------
/
-r-+ +
0
0
-
. .. ·r·-... ~-... , . . ., . .,.. .";.; . . . . -.,. .. .~-~
.. ~ ~ ... 4'J.'._,~I ...... . ,.:r ... ··
-.. ..... ., -.... 11.,110 .... -~---_----------:=::-.===--..... .... -.. . ..,...
•••,..•~-ueoeuau• ..._...,,...,
A 2.5 ··MILE STRETCH OF ROAD AFFORDS
CRITICAL VIEWING OF PROJECT VICINITY
~----------------------------------------------------FIGURE 2-14
-. , .
I
I
I
I
..
·-~""--r.-~ ---------+--7 ------~-----• ._ .. :-. : :. . ...
' . .. i. 4.. \ ..
~I/'· / ~
..... • 4
... ---~~----·:---f,.:------~H-------1'+ ..
: ,/. : . / _.._......... . . . .
. /"".:.
-~--.. ':'"' .....
·-·
J,"' ·-
)f"I>:)UI\L "RESOURCE IMPORTANCE
· \;~se~)ectlona 1 ~3.1 an~. 1.3.3
-··:.:.!;:., ·I= VRI Class l.; Critically
, -:~:·· . Important Landscape
1I =·· VRI Class
DISTANCE ZONE
r -. F~oreg:rouna ---
MG=Middleground
BG=Background ·
SS:Seldom Seen
~ ~ENSI"T~ViTY q:VE~.·-. ."r : ~:·-_, --~:~!-.. · ;.
1 1 =High . ;. ·:~ · · · /-· ~ -· · · ' ~ ,;~_;
1 2=Medium . _.-:~~~~r ·h ,\~1 \\\':)t/: :-~-y~ ~ I .~_,._,_._~_,;,.:.-.... --~· .. : -,, n ~JlY ' :.. . .-_ .. _ ~-o ... ·:...,.: : -~ ~-,
m-_VRI Class lit, Moder~teiY SCENIC. QUALITY RATING 0 ____ :·":..,~ II,IIO -.... VISUAL RESOURCE IMPORTANCE
-• I
!mportant Lan~scape . ·A=D•stance o - - ----ecou • .,.. ~ .... RATINGS FOR STUDY AREA nr ~ ... VRI Class Dr; Min_imally B:Moderate ' •• .,. ..... _ ... II I_., PUT . 2 1 5
1 Important Landscape C:Low FIGURE ---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BRADLEY LAKE BARGE DOCK,
WATERFOWL NESTING AREA
AND AIRSTRIP
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH, ALASKA
BRADLEY LAKE BARGE DOCK, WATERFOWL
NESTING AREA AND AIRSTRIP
ARTIS-rs RENDITION
FIGURE 3-1 DATE 2/14/86
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BRADLEY LAKE
PERMANENT FACILITIES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH, ALASKA
BRADLEY LAKE PERMANENT FACUTIES
ARTISrS RENDITION
FIGURE 3-2 DATE 2/14/86
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
BRADLEY LAKE POWERHOUSE
AND PERMANENT FACILITIES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH, ALASKA
BRADLEY LAKE POWERHOUSE AND
PERMANENT FACILITES
ARTIST'S RENDITION
FIGURE 3-3 DATE 2/14/86
I
I
I
I
I
I ·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BRADLEY LAKE POWERHOUSE,
TAILRACE, AND PERMANENT
FACILITIES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH, ALASKA
BRADLEY LAKE POWERHOUSE TALRACE
PERMANENT FACILITES
ARTIS"rS RENDITION
FIGURE 3-4 DATE 2/14/86
SECTION 5.0
APPENDIX A
2-340-JJ
APPENDIX A
VISUAL RESOURCE
METHODOLOGY
A-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The visual resource is treated as having three basic attributes:
Landscape Character, Visual Condition, and Visual Resource Importance.
1.1 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER
Landscape character is the identity of the resource, a descriptive
inventory of the features considered inherent to the structure, function
and formative processes of the landscape. Four categories of features
are analyzed: landforms, water surfaces, vegetative patterns, and
cultural modification (the landscape features introduced by man in the
development of his culture).
In the context of visual resource impact analyses, landscape character
is not variable; only over the broadest time span may features evolve
and become established as characteristics of the landscape. For natural
landscapes, that time span is many millenia.
1.2 VISUAL CONDITION
Visual condition (VC) is a measure of the degree to which the activities
of man have .introduced features contrasting with those inherent to the
visual resource. Since the degree of contrast may increase or diminish
with time, visual condition is a variable. Each rated area within the
landscape is designated as falling within one of five VC Classes, which
are presented below in order of increasing magnitude of contrast:
VC Class I. Primarily, only natural ecological changes have occurred.
Past activities of man have not introduced visually evident characteris-
tics.
VC Class II. The activities of man may be visually evident but do not
attract attention,
2-340-JJ A-2
VC Class III. The activities of man are evident, attract attention, but
are subordinate to the inherent features of the established landscape.
VC Class IV. The activities of man are evident, attract attention, are
dominant over the inherent features of the established landscape in
terms of scale, but may have visual elements similar to those inherent
to the landscape.
VC Class V. The activities of man demand attention, are dominant over
the inherent features of the established landscape in terms of scale and
contrast, and have no visual elements similar to those inherent to the
landscape.
1.3 VISUAL RESOURCE IMPORTANCE
Visual resource importance (VRI) is a function of three attributes:
scenic quality, which is a relative measure of intrinsic aesthetic value
of areas within the characteristic landscape being analyzed; visual
resource sensitivity, which is measured as the degree of user interest
in scenic quality and concern over changes in landscape features; and
distance zone, which are a general measure of how visible the landscape
is.
1.3.1 Scenic Quality
The scenic quality of landscapes ordinarily does not change within the
time span relevant to analyses of visual resource effects, but repre-
sents an evaluation of the established landscape features. For natural
appearing landscapes, scenic quality is considered to be a direct
function of the visual diversity of inherent features (landform, water
surfaces, and vegetation).
Diversity is described in terms of four basic visual elements (form,
line, color, and texture) and is a function of how conspicuous they are.
Areas with the same landscape character are compared and ranked accord-
ing to three classes of diversity (scenic quality): Class A areas,
2-340-JJ A-3
those with features having the most striking and distinctive array of
visual elements; Class B areas, those that are moderately varied and
interesting; and Class C lands, those offering the least diverse and
appealing landscape.
Through much landscape analysis, the BLM and USFS have developed guide-
lines--photographic examples, narratives--for making scenic quality
determinations; the evaluations represent a consensus among landscape
architects within the agencies. When applicable, these agency guide-
lines have been followed in this report.
1.3.2 Visual Resource Sensitivity
As with visual condition, for a given area sensitivity can vary over
time. New transportation routes and recreation use areas might increase
the number of people seeking out scenic values or call greater attention
to the resource. Sensitivity to change in the visual condition of
certain areas therefore might increase.
The evaluation of sensitivity is a three-set procedure. First, the
annual volume of use for each key area (urban, developed recreation
sites, designated vista, resort, etc.) and travel route (trails, rivers,
highways, etc.) is identified. Traffic volume is measured as average
daily traffic (ADT) and area use volume as visitor days. Second, the
part of the landscape visible from key observer positions within each
area or along each route is determined. The last step is to access
public attitudes (through surveys, public meetings or professional
judgement) toward change in the parts of the landscape viewed from the
key viewpoints identified in the second step.
Analyses of use volume and public attitude are considered together in
ascribing sensitivity ratings to the areas within the landscape iden-
tified in step two. The ratings are scaled, using predetermined crite-
ria, and result in designations of high, medium, or low sensitivity.
Tables A-1, A-2, and A-3, show the criteria used by the BLM in judging
use volume, public concern, and final sensitivity ratings.
2-340-JJ A-4
1.3.3 Distance Zones
Scenic quality and sensitivity levels being equal, areas which are
closer to the observer are considered to offer visual resources of
greater importance than those farther away. Foreground areas are seen
more frequently and in greater detail than those at some distance; most
often they dominate the visual experience, and change in such areas is
more readily noticed. Distance zones may vary through time as new
transportation routes and use areas are developed.
Distance zones are measured relative to key observer positions within
use areas or along travel routes from which moderate to highly sensitive
landscapes may be seen. Three such zones are mapped: fore ground,
middleground, and background. Foreground area include the part of the
landscape in which details of vegetation, landform, water surfaces and
structures are seen. Usually the foreground extends no further than 1/4
to 1/2 mile away from the observer. Middleground views are those in
which the texture and form of individual features are no longer appar-
ent, but the aggregate of features form discernible patterns. General-
ly, such views start about 1/2 mile from the viewer and extend to from
three to five miles away. Background views usually include areas no
further than 15 miles from the viewer and present at least the outline
of major landforms, with vegetation seen as patterns of light and dark.
As noted, evaluations of scenic quality, visual resource sensitivity and
distance zones are considered together in ratings of visual resource
importance (Table A-4). Visual resource importance is an attribute
which, for a given area, is potentially variable because although scenic
quality is almost always stable, both sensitivity and distance zone may
be altered. As sensitivity increases and areas within the landscape
become more visible, the visual resource becomes more important.
With respect to the matrix in Table A-4, note the following:
0
2-340-JJ
Along the left side of the matrix, in addition to the scenic
quality classes, there is another category for "special
A-5
areas". These areas are considered to have outstanding scenic
quality, are scarce or unique, and therefore merit careful
attention. No such areas occur within the study area.
o Where the landscape is viewed from multiple vantage points,
VRI ratings are made relative to the most critical observer
position.
o Seldom seen lands are those not visible from key observer
positions (those along key travel routes or within key use
areas).
o Where sensitivity is low, VRI is a function solely of scenic
quality.
There are four VRI Classes, each defined in terms of the degree of
contrast with established characteristics considered appropriate to the
Class designation:
2-340-JJ
VRI Class I: Lands in this class are sufficiently important that
the introduction of any visually evident cultural modification
would be considered inappropriate.
VRI Class II: Lands in this class are valued to the extent that
the introduction of cultural modifications may present visually
evident features contrasting with those of the established land-
scape, but they should not attract attention.
VRI Class III: Lands in this class are moderately important;
cultural modifications may offer visually evident, contrasting
features attracting some attention, but the incongruous features
must be subordinant to the features inherent to the established
landscape.
VRI Class IV: Lands in this class are of minimal importance as a
visual resource. Contrasting features of cultural modifications
A-6
may be allowed to dominate the established landscape in terms of
scale, but should have some visual elements similar to those
inherent to the landscape.
2-340-JJ A-7
TABLE A-1
CRITERIA FOR USE VOLUME RATINGS (BLM 1980)
Criteria
Use volume (total
use) -no
distinction
between types)
d . 1 cars an tra~ns
Use volume -
trails, rivers,
water bodies,
2 trams
Note:
High
Segments of travel
routes, use sites
or population
centers which
receive 200,000 or
Medium
Segments of
travel routes,
use sites or
population
centers which
Low
Travel route seg-
ments with less
than 20,000
visits/yr. or
less than 20
more visits/yr. or receive 20,000 to vehicles/day (ADT
more than 200
vehicles/day (ADT
year round), or
comparable degree
of use on a
seasonal basis.
20,000 or more
visits/yr.
200,000
visits/year or 20
to 200 vehicles
per day (ADT year
round), or a
comparable degree
of use on a
seasonal basis.
2000 -20,000
visits/yr.
year round).
less than 2,000
visits/yr.
1. Select highest of two criteria in arriving at final determination
for use volume criteria.
2. Information should be obtained from most reliable source -ADT
counts from State transportation plan, BLM transportation plan,
etc.
2-340-JJ A-8
::P'
1..0
TABLE A-2
CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING THE EXTENT AND NATURE OF PUBLIC CONCERN
OVER CHANGE IN THE APPEARANCES OF THE LANDSCAPE (BLM 1980)
Criteria
Percent of group holding
the value
Intensity of relationship
between group and place
or objecta
Degree of value/concern
placed on visual
resouces in general by
the group
Uniqueness of object or
area of value
Recreational value of
area
2-340-JJ
H
(2/3 and over indicates
high or moderate concern)
(relationship is highly
emotional--threat to
visual quality would cause
drastic emotionally based
response)
(concern is deep and wide-
spread among the group)
(non-transfer--visual
value is unique to one
place or object)
(significant recreational
values present)
Magnitude of P11blic Concern
M
(2/3 to 1/3 indicate high
or moderate concern)
(relationship is emotional
threat to visual quality
would cause strong but not
drastic response)
(concern is of moderate
degree and extent)
(limited transfer--visual
value can be transferred
to some other similar
areas within the region)
(recreational values
present are of moderate
significance in that
region)
L
(1/3 or less indicate
high or moderate
concern)
(relationship is not
emotional--threat to
visual quality would
cause a strong
response)
(little concern or
value toward the
visual resource is
expressed)
(unlimited transfer--
visual values can be
transferred to many
other similar areas
within the region)
(recreational values
present area of
little significance
in that region)
!J::'
1-'
0
TABLE A-2 (Cont'd)
CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING THE EXTENT AND NATURE OF PUBLIC CONCERN
OVER CHANGE IN THE APPEARANCES OF THE LANDSCAPE (BLM 1980)
Criteria
Relationship of
recreational values to
the survival of the group
or activity
H
(complete dependence--
activity or group survival
requires maintenance of
present visual values)
Magnitude of Public Concern
M
(some dependence--activity
or group will be impaired
by loss of visual values)
L
(no dependence--
activity or group
will not be affected
by loss of visual
values)
NOTE: These criteria are not mandatory if a local variation appears more objective. The grouping together
of similar objects or groups having the same socio-cultural value is permissible if the integrity of
analysis is maintained. The perspective for rating can be national, regional, or local.
8 Determined by the relative percent of repsonses indicating a HIGH concern for change in visual quality for
the area, additional comments made by respondents, level of public use, level of public idenetification
the area, past issues surrounding the area, value of scenic resources in general by the group, etc.
bThis criteria is used as a relative context within which to judge group responses.
2-340-JJ
2-340-JJ
High Sensitivity
TABLE A-3
MATRIX FOR DETERMINING VISUAL
SENSITIVITY LEVELS (BLM 1980)
User Attitude
H
H
M
H
Medium Sensitivity L
M
M
Low Sensitivity L
L
A-ll
Quantity
of Use
H
M
H
L
H
M
L
M
L
Special
Areas 1
Scenic
Quality
Class
Distance
Zones
TABLE A-4
MATRIX RELATING SCENIC QUALITY, SENSITIVITY, A~~ DISTANCE
ZONES TO DETERMINATIONS OF VISUAL RESOURCE
IMPORTANCE (AFTER BLM 1980)
High Medium
I I I I I I
A I II II II II III
B II II III III III IV
c III III IV IV IV IV
2
fg mg bg fg mg bg
Low
I
III
IV
IV
ss
1 Special Areas are those characterized by outstanding scenic quality
and which are in scarce supply or are unique.
2 Distance Zone abbreviations: fg=foreground; mg=middleground;
bg=background; ss=seldom seen. (lands not visible from key observer
positions)
Note: See Section 1.3.lc for definitions of VRI Classes I-IV.
2-340-JJ A-12