SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

III. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND IMPACTSI. AESTHETICSIn addition, the Management Plan includes other actions that when incorporated along with theroads and facility design guidelines described above, would further reduce the aesthetic effect ofnew roads and facilities. Action veg1 requires that disturbed areas be screened and restored withan appropriate mix of native vegetation species. Action veg7 requires erosion control BMPs forall construction activities in order to retain existing vegetation wherever feasible, and tominimize the total area and duration of soil exposure. Implementation of Actions veg1 and veg7ensures that only a minimum area would be devegetated for facilities construction, and thatdevegetated areas would not remain bare following the construction period.Implementation of design guidelines and vegetation protection and restoration activities, asdescribed above and in Section IV.I, would reduce the potential aesthetic impact associated withthe installation of new facilities and roads to a less than significant level. Therefore, mitigationmeasures are not required. No unavoidable significant program-level aesthetic quality impactsrelated to installation of new facilities have been identified in this EIR. However, the SanFrancisco Planning Department would require examination of many specific management actionsproposed in the Management Plan at the time they are proposed for implementation to determineif further environmental review at a more detailed project-specific and site-specific level werenecessary. Table II-1 identifies the specific management actions that are likely to require suchstudy.Vegetation Clearing ActivitiesThe fuel management projects to be implemented as part of Action fir8 include tree pruning,vegetation understory removal, prescribed burns, and other activities that could disturb relativelylarge portions of vegetation in the Watershed and create devegetated, blackened areas. Actionwil7 also includes use of prescribed fire to enhance wildlife habitat. The aesthetic changeassociated with implementation of Actions fir8 and wil7 would be potentially significant. Thedegree of aesthetic change for each fuel management project would depend on the size andlocation of the disturbed area, which would be determined prior to project implementation. Theaesthetic change would be significant if the disturbed area were located within the publicviewshed and if the disturbed area were not restored. However, it should be noted that withoutimplementation of Action fir8, a catastrophic fire could occur on the Watershed, which couldresult in more severe aesthetic effects.Removal of invasive exotic plant species under Action veg6 would also result in devegetatedareas and a potentially significant aesthetic change. Action wil7 would also result in devegetatedareas through use of vegetation treatments. The degree of aesthetic change would depend on thesize and location of the disturbed area, which would be determined prior to projectimplementation. The aesthetic change would result in significant degradation of scenic views ifthe project were large in scale, conducted in areas visible to the public, and/or if restoration ofthe devegetated areas did not occur.Table III.I-2 links those management actions that could result in physical effects with the fullrange of management actions that could be required to reduce the potential effects. Under theManagement Plan, the most important means of reducing potential aesthetic impacts associatedNOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan III.I-9 ESA / 930385January 2001