University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
|
|
This section includes information representing our group's rating scale for visually assessing and qualifying an urban environment.
VISUAL QUALITY ASSESSMENT PARAMETERS FOR AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT
Also see : The Visual Evaluation Criteria developed by the class by concensus
This visual evaluation pertains to alternative land uses for urban floodplain areas in East St. Louis. The following information is categorized by major subject areas, i.e. vegetation, landform, etc. Each of these major subject areas is then categorized, by section, into individual land uses.
Residential Housing
As a new development, the vegetation will be minimal with new plantings being present. A rating of 3 would apply. As time passes the rating would improve to a 4 or 5 as the plantings will increase in size, giving the appearance of lush mature growth. However, as time progresses, the rating could potentially decrease to a -2 if the plantings were not maintained in an orderly manner.
Recreational Use
An initial rating of 3 would be given to this development plan. A few years later the visual rating would potentially move up to a 5 because the design is for a park-like setting with moderate maintenance to the recreational area and trails.
Floodzone
After the trees and herbaceous plantings are in place, this development plan would attain a rating of 5. This design is intended to require minimal maintenance to the walking trails and the variety of xeric and mesic plantings.
Residential Housing, Recreational Use, and Flooding Zone
For all three land use options, a rating of 5 would be assigned. This would only be valid if a variety of shapes and forms were uniquely integrated into the initial design of each development scheme.
Residential
A score of 3 would be given for this land use. This is largely based on the fact that the development is funded by the government for low income housing does not readily lend itself to having a maximum amount of amenities compared to a higher income community.
Recreation And Flooding
A score of 5 would be given to these two plans of development because they would include walking trails, restrooms, picnic area, recreation area, and park benches, all conveniently located through the site.
Residential
A score of 0 would be given since this is a new development and there would be no cultural, historical, or architectural significance. The probability of this rating increasing in the future could happen if the residents of this area strived to develop a community with a strong cultural adherence - thereby creating a sense of cultural and historical significance.
Recreation
This land use would rate a 3 because the creation of a park is a landmark that everyone can recognize and identify. In the future, the rating could increase to 5. As a park, the site lends itself to being an ideal setting for the placement of a statue, monument, or fountain commemorating a historical or culturally significant person or event.
Flooding
This land use theme would be rated as a 5 because it has historically been a floodzone. An interpretative sign could be placed near this area stating that it has historical significance with a promise that it will be protected from urban development for future generations to behold and enjoy it in its natural undisturbed state.
INFLUENCE OF ADJOINING LAND USE
Residential
This area would be given a rating of 4 because it would be developed in adherence to the zoning laws of the surrounding community. Therefore, it would be undifferentiated and homogenous.
Recreation
This area would be rated a 5. It would blend in well with the neighborhood surroundings and at the same time create a buffer zone in the area. The placement of a park in the community would differentiate the site due to its coloring and spatial variety of plantings and structures.
Flooding
This area would be given a rating of 5. The presence of this open undeveloped space is very compatible within the community as it serves as a storage area for floodwater. The spatial variety of xeric and mesic vegetation types on the site would form within the community a unique design that would be aesthetically pleasing.
Residential
The housing development would acquire a rating of 0 for water since it is not incorporated into the design. It does not include a commons lake or detention pond. However, during times of flooding, the rating would drop to a -5 from the presence of water ponding. As the flood waters recede, there would also be an accumulation of debris and silt that has a tendency to leave behind an unpleasant odor.
Recreation/Floodzone
Both of these land uses would rate a 5 for they will be designed and maintained to adequately handle the natural seasonal cycle of hydrological fluctuations. However a decline in rating may occur given that these land uses are located within an urban setting and may have polluting influence from urban and agricultural runoff.
Residential
This development plan would initially rate a 5 because the color scheme and amenities of the new construction would be harmonious in visual organization. In the future, there is the probability that the rating may decline if the housing complex is not properly maintained or covenants of the housing development are not properly followed.
Recreation
This land use would rate a 5 for its appeal of visual order as it takes on a variety of shapes and colors that accompany seasonal change. A possible decline in rating may occur in the future if the recreation area is not able to sustain the demand of heavy use and has a lack of proper maintenance.
Flooding Zone
This land use would garner a rating of 5 for its aesthetically pleasing quality of being a natural setting that will stay relatively free of human influences. Nature has a way of creating its own visual order. A potential decline in rating may occur over time if litter is allowed to accumulate.
Residential, Recreation, Flooding Zone
All three of these land use classes would be given a rating of 5 from the onset of development. It is idyllic to desire all three categories to continue to maintain this high rating. Realistically, it requires an economically and financially stable city, combined with a strong cohesion of civic pride that demands a clean, healthy, orderly, maintained city and surrounding neighborhood environments.
LA/UP 341 CONSENSUS EVALUATION PARAMETERS
ALTERNATIVE
LAND USES FOR URBAN FLOODPLAIN AREAS
Document
author(s) : Mark, Avinash, Jean, Nandita
HTML by : Avinash
Last modified: November 27, 1996
