Download PDF - COINAtlantic

Visual resource management system for the Oregon Territorial SeaAndy Lanier 1 , Laurel Hillmann 2 & Paul Manson 11 Oregon Coastal Management Program, Deptartment of Land Conservation and Development, Salem, OR, USAAndy.Lanier@State.or.us, Manson@pdx.edu2 Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, Salem, OR, USALaurel.Hillmann@state.or.usAbstractThe public process to amend Oregon’s Territorial Sea Plan for marine renewable energy resulted in a flood ofpublic comments related to potential adverse impacts to important aesthetic resources. Oregon’s statewide oceanplanning goal, Goal 19, also recognizes aesthetics as one of the existing beneficial uses that should be protected. Thestate has since adopted a framework for visual resource management that includes the conduct of a visual resourcescenic quality inventory, adoption of visual class standards, and the determination of a review process for the applicationof review standards to be applied in a regulatory process. 144 locations were surveyed during the scenicquality evaluation process, for use in determining visual resource class values. Those values, applied to their associatedviewsheds and adopted standards will help Oregonians understand the potential impacts of any new proposeddevelopment.IntroductionThe Oregon Coast in the U.S.A. is an internationally recognized tourist destination. Over 20 million visits occurto our coastal parks each year. Scenic enjoyment is the 3 rd most commonly stated primary recreational activity (followingwalking and stationary relaxing) that visitors say they engage in on Oregon’s coastal beaches (Shelby andTokarczyk, 2002). In addition, the Oregon Coast highway (Pacific Coast Scenic Byway) has been federally recognizedby the National Scenic Byways program, established by Congress and administered by the U.S. Department ofTransportation’s Federal Highway Administration. Oregon’s coastline is also unique in that it has over 70 state parksrunning along the highway, providing “public access and resource protection in a way that is unrivalled by any otherU.S. coastline park system” (CH2M Hill, 1997, p. 9)Oregon’s Statewide Planning Goal 19 states that agencies, through programs, approvals, and other actions, shall“protect and encourage the beneficial uses of ocean resources such as […] aesthetic enjoyment.” This is reiterated inPart 5 of the Territorial Sea Plan (TSP). Oregon’s Ocean Shore Management Plan, a FERC approved “comprehensiveplan” notes that Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) “may identify important ‘scenic features’that should be protected from development or other impacts for their scenic value” (OPRD, 2005). Public testimonyand feedback during meetings underscored the importance of considering aesthetic (e.g., viewshed) impacts formarine renewable energy siting. As such, the Oregon Coastal Management Program (a division of the state’s landuse planning program) co-managed a project with OPRD to develop and implement a system for the managing thevisual seascape of the Territorial Sea, as part of its effort to plan for marine renewable energy development. This isone of the first implementations of a visual resource management system in the ocean environment, and the goal ofthis paper is to present the methods of our system to other states and nations who may be facing similar challenges.MethodsThere are several accepted methods for managing scenic resources used by federal land management agencies(BLM, 1980; USFS, 1995). These methods involve conducting inventories of scenic resources and evaluating potentialchanges based on established criteria and objectives. The degree to which a renewable energy facility (or otherdevelopment) in Oregon’s Territorial Sea impacts aesthetic recreational resources depends on a variety of factors,many of which are very similar to those used in the land-based scenic impact assessments. Modeling and slightlyadapting these visual subordination standards for projects proposed in the Territorial Sea will allow the state to“provide time-tested qualitative benchmarks that can be measured using objective methods” (Apostol, 2009, p. 11).The Visual Resource Management System (VRMS) can be thought of as two discrete processes, the PlanningPhase and the Project Phase. During the planning phase, work is done to collect baseline information and to adopt1