Assessing the validity and reliability of descriptor variables used in scenic highway analysis

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 66, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 239-255

  Clay, Gary R ^a   Smidt, Robert K ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Scenic beauty; Scenic highways; Visual assessment

Indexed keywords

CORRELATION METHODS; HIGHWAY ENGINEERING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

SCENIC QUALITY;

URBAN PLANNING;

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; PERCEPTION; ROADSIDE ENVIRONMENT; VISUAL ANALYSIS;

CALIFORNIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0842284710     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00114-2     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Amedeo D., Pitt D.G., Zube E.H. Landscape feature classifications as a determinant of perceived scenic value. Landscape J. 8:1989;36-50.
2. Appleton, J., 1975. The Experience of Landscape. Wiley, London.
3. Arizona Department of Transportation (Arizona DOT), 1993. Application Procedures for Designation of Parkways, Historic and Scenic Roads in Arizona. Parkways, Historic and Scenic Roads Advisory Committee Publication, Phoenix, Arizona, 82 pp.
4. Bell, S., 1993. Elements of Visual Design in the Landscape. E & FN Spon, London.
5. Brown, T.C., Daniel, T.C., 1984. Modeling forest scenic beauty: concepts and applications to ponderosa pine. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-256. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colo, 35 pp.
6. Brown T.C., Daniel T.C. Context effects in perceived environmental quality assessment: scene selection and landscape quality ratings. J. Environ. Psychol. 7:1987;233-250.
7. Brown T., Keane T., Kaplan S. Aesthetics and management: bridging the gap. Landscape Urban Plann. 13:1986;1-10.
8. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1986a. Visual Resource Inventory. BLM Manual Handbook 8410-1. US Department of the Interior, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, DC.
9. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1986b. Visual Resource Contrast Rating. BLM Manual Handbook 8431-1. US Department of the Interior, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, DC.
10. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 2001. BLM: Falcon to Gonder 345kV Transmission Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement. US Department of the Interior, Battle Mountain, Nevada.
11. Buhyoff G.J., Wellman J.D. The specification of a nonlinear psychophysical function for visual landscape dimensions. J. Leisure Res. 12:1980;257-272.
12. California Automobile Association (CAA), 2001. California's Central Coast. CAA. Costa Mesa, CA, 325 pp.
13. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1995. Environmental Handbook, vol. 1, Ver. 1.5. Environmental Process, Procedures, and Documentation. Online: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/resource/pubs/handbook/vol1/ EnvHandbookVol1.pdf .
14. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1996. Guidelines for Official Designations of Scenic Highways. web site: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/ LandArch/scenic/shpg1.htm .
15. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2001a. The California Scenic Highway Program. Online. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/ LandArch/scenic/scpr.htm .
16. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2001b. Highway Design Manual. Scenic Values in Planning and Design (Chapter 100): http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/hdmtoc.htm .
17. Carr, Robert (2000). California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Landscape Architect. Personal interview.
18. Chenoweth, R.E., Gobster, P.H., 1986. Wildland description and analysis. In: Smardon, R.C., Palmer, J.F., Fellerman, J.P. (Eds.), Foundations for Visual Project Analysis. Wiley, New York.
19. Chenoweth R.E., Gobster P.H. The nature and ecology of aesthetic experiences in the landscape. Landscape J. 9:1990;1-8.
20. Colorado Department of Transportation (Colorado DOT), 2002. Frisco to Breckenridge: State Highway 9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Colorado Department of Transportation.
21. Colorado Scenic and Historic Byways Commission, 2002a. Colorado Scenic and Historic Byways Program. Colorado Department of Transportation. Program History/Nomination Package.
22. Colorado Scenic and Historic Byways Commission, 2002b. Design Guidelines for Visual Resources Along Scenic and Historic Byways. Colorado Department of Transportation.
23. Colorado Scenic and Historic Byways Commission, 2002c. Peak to Peak Scenic and Historic Byway: Visual Intrusion Reduction Plan. Colorado Tourism and Recreation Program.
24. Corbett, M.R., 1983. Greenline Parks, Land Conservation Trends for the Eighties and Beyond. National Parks and Conservation Association, Washington, DC.
25. Craik K.H., Zube, E.H., 1976. The constructs of perceived quality in scenic and recreational environments. In: Craig, K.H., Zube, E.H. (Eds.), Perceived Environmental Quality. Plenum Press, New York.
26. Daniel, T.C., 1976. Criteria for development and application of perceived environmental quality indices. In: Craig, K.H., Zube, E.H. (Eds.), Perceived Environmental Quality. Plenum Press, New York.
27. Daniel, T.C., Boster, R.S., 1976. Measuring Landscape Aesthetics: The Scenic Beauty Estimation Method. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO.
28. Daniel, T.C., Vining, J., 1983. Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In: Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F. (Eds.), Behavior and the Natural Environment. Plenum Press, New York.
29. Deardon, P., Sadler, B., 1989. Themes and approaches in landscape evaluation research. In: Deardon, P. (Ed.), Landscape Evaluation: Approaches and Applications, Western Geographic Series, vol. 25. Victoria, British Columbia.
30. Dilsaver, L.M., 1994. America's National Park System. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc., Lanham, MD, 470 pp.
31. Feimer, N.R., Craik, K.N., Smardon, R.C., Sheppard, S.R., 1979. Appraising the reliability of visual impact assessment methods. In: Elsner, G., Smardon R. (Eds.), Proceedings of Our National Landscape. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, CA, pp. 286-295.
32. Federal Highway Administration (FHA), 1991. An Analysis and Summary of the 1990 National Scenic Byways Study Inventory. FHWA-PD-91-014. US Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
33. Federal Highway Administration (FHA), 1999. Byways Beginnings: Understanding, Inventorying, and Evaluating a Byway's Intrinsic Qualities. National Scenic Byways Program Publication, Washington, DC, 80 pp.
34. Galliano, S.J., Loeffler, G.M., 2000. Scenery Assessment: Scenic Beauty at the Ecoregion Scale. Technical Report PNW-GTR-472. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.
35. Godfrey, M., 2002. Chair and Utah Department of Transportation's representative on the State Scenic Byway Committee. E-mail correspondence.
36. Iverson W.D., Sheppart S.R., Strain R.A. Managing regional scenic quality in the lake Tahoe basin. Landscape J. 12:1993;23-39.
37. Jackson, J.B., 1997. Landscape in Sight. Yale University Press, New Haven.
38. Jakle, J., 1987. The Visual Elements of Landscape. The University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst, Massachusetts.
39. Kaplan R., Kaplan S., Brown T. Environmental preference: a comparison of four domains of predictors. Environ. Behav. 21:1989;509-530.
40. Kent R.L. Determining scenic quality along highways: a cognitive approach. Landscape Urban Plann. 27:1993;29-45.
41. Kent R.L., Elliot C.L. Scenic routes linking and protecting natural and cultural landscape features: a greenway skeleton. Landscape Urban Plann. 33:1995;341-355.
42. Kopka S., Ross M. A study of the reliability of the Bureau of Land Management visual resource assessment scheme. Landscape Plann. 11:1984;161-166.
43. Landscape Institute, 1995. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. E & FN Spon, London, 126 pp.
44. Little, C., 1990. Greenways for America. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
45. Litton, R.B., 1968. Forest landscape description and inventories: a basis for land planning and design. UDSA Forest Service Paper DSW-49. Pacific SW Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, CA.
46. Litton, R.B., 1979. Descriptive approaches to landscape analysis. Presented at The National Conference on Applied Techniques for Analysis and Management of the Visual Resource. Incline Village, Nevada.
47. Litton, B.R., 1982. Visual assessment of natural landscapes. In: Sadler, B., Carlson, A. (Eds.) Environmental Aesthetics: Essays in Interpretation. Western Geographical Series, vol. 20. Victoria, British Columbia.
48. Magill, A.W., 1992. Managed and natural landscapes: what do people like? Research Paper PSW-213. Pacific SW Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, UDSA, Berkeley, California.
49. Magill, A.W., Schwartz, C.F., 1989. Searching for the value of a view. Research Paper PSW-193. Pacific SW Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, UDSA, Berkeley, California.
50. McCelland, L.F., 1998. Building of the National Parks. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
51. Melnick R.Z. Protecting rural cultural landscapes: finding value in the countryside. Landscape J. 2:1983;83-96.
52. Minnesota Department of Transportation (Minnesota DOT), 2001. Aesthetic Initiative Measurement System: Final Report. Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul.
53. Murphy, D., 2002. National Scenic Byways Designation. Telephone interview.
54. New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, 2001a. Online. Scenic Byways. Available: http://www.nmshtd.state.nm.us/scenicbyways/ scenicbyways.asp .
55. New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, 2001b. Draft Environmental Impact Statement: US 70: Ruidoso Downs to Riverside. AC-MIP-070-4(35)264. CN 3393. Santa Fe, NM.
56. New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, 2002. New Mexico Scenic and Historic Byways. UNM Printing Services, Alburquerque, NM.
57. National Park Service (NPS), 1993a. National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda. Chelsea Green Publishing Company, Post Mills, Vermont, 142 pp.
58. National Park Service (NPS), 1993b. Visual Quality of Built Environments in National Parks. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
59. National Park Service (NPS), 2000. Management Policies 2001. US Department of the Interior. NPS D116. Washington, DC, 137 pp.
60. Oregon Department of Transportation (Oregon DOT), 1999. 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. ODOT Transportation Development Division, Salem, OR, 244 pp.
61. Ribe R.G. A general model for understanding the perception of scenic beauty in northern hardwood forests. Landscape J. 9(2):1990;86-101.
62. Schroeder H.W., Daniel T.C. Predicting the scenic quality of forest road corridors. Environ. Behav. 12:1980;349-366.
63. Shafer E.L. Jr. Perception of natural environment. Environ. Behav. 1:1969;71-82.
64. Shafer E.L. Jr., Hamilton J.F. Jr., Schmidt E.A. Natural landscape preferences: a predictive model. J. Leisure Res. 1:1969;1-19.
65. Shuttleworth S. The use of photographs as an environment presentation medium in landscape studies. J. Environ. Manage. 11:1980;61-76.
66. Steele, F., 1981. The Sense of Place. CBI Publishing Company Inc., Boston.
67. Ulrich, R.S., 1983. Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In: Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F. (Eds.), Behavior and the Natural Environment. Plenum Press, New York.
68. US Department of Transportation (US DOT), 1981. Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects. Federal Highway Administration Publication DOT-FH-9694, Washington, DC, 89 pp.
69. US Department of Transportation (US DOT), 1991a. An Analysis and Summary of the 1990 National Scenic Byways Study Inventory. Federal Highway Administration Publication FHWA-PD-91-014, Washington, DC, 137 pp.
70. US Department of Transportation (US DOT), 1991b. National Scenic Byways Study. Federal Highway Administration Publication PD-91-010, Washington, DC, 94q pp.
71. US Department of Transportation (US DOT), 1999. Community Guide to Planning and Managing a Scenic Byway. Federal Highway Administration Publication, Washington, DC, 76 pp.
72. US Forest Service, 1974. National Forest Landscape Management, vol. 2. Handbook 462. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
73. US Forest Service, 1995. Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for Scenery Management. Agriculture Handbook Number 701. U.S.D.A., Washington DC.
74. Utah Travel Council, 2002. Utah Scenic Byways and Backways. Salt Lake City, 88 pp.
75. Van den Berg A.E., Vlek C. The influence of planned-change context on the evaluation of natural landscapes. Landscape Urban Plann. 43:1998;1-10.
76. Washington State Department of Transportation (Wash DOT), 1996. Roadside Classification Plan: 1996. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 44 pp.
77. Washington State Department of Transportation (Wash DOT), 2001. Scenic Byway Designation Process Report. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 36 pp.
78. Washington State Department of Transportation (Wash DOT), 2002. State Route 97 - Pateros to the Canadian Border: Scenic Byway application Visual Analysis Discipline Report. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 71 pp.
79. Wohlwill, J.F., 1976. Environmental aesthetics: the environment as a source of affect. In: Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F. (Eds.), Human Behavior and the Environment, vol. 1. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 37-86.
80. Zube, E.H., 1973. Scenery as a natural resource: implications of public policy and problems of definition, description, and evaluation. Landscape Architech. January, 126-132.
81. Zube E.H. Greenways and the US national park service. Landscape Urban Plann. 33:1995;17-25.
82. Zube E.H., Sell J.L., Taylor J.G. Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landscape Plann. 9:1982;1-33.