Showing posts with label Viewshed protection. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Viewshed protection. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Subtle Reflections

Every February, the rising sun reflects off the cross in the picture at the correct angle so that its light hits my front yard (where I took this photo yesterday morning). On a sunny morning, the glimmer is lost in the morning glare. However, on a morning with low fog (such that the cross is in the sun), the reflection is the only light penetrating the fog.  I first noticed this reflection two or three years ago on a foggier day when I couldn't discern the shape of the cross. My first impression on seeing it then was "Darn it! Someone added another overly bright, un-aimed light blazing into the sky." But I soon noticed it wasn't an obtrusive light, rather, a reflection seen at the right time and place, that will dissipate in minutes, and not return for a year. Yesterday was the first time since then that the angle of the sun, quality of cloud cover, and my being present, have all been aligned.


I don't share this for religious reasons, though the subject is more meaningful to many because of it's religious symbolism. Rather, I share this to celebrate understatement and subtlety when creating monuments. I enjoy a unique and rare view of anything, regardless of it's content, over the obtrusive seen-from-everywhere and at-any-time features that some institutions and cities put up.

jg

Friday, January 13, 2012

The "State" defends property rights

On July 3, 2009, I was hiking up the Santa Rosa escarpment and saw a smoke plume three miles away. The plume was from a brush fire, small by California standards. The fire stayed small because firefighters and aircraft quickly arrived to put the fire out.

The firefighters were protecting the very homes that provoked the moratorium on construction on this ridge(seen in the 3rd photo below). Two weeks later I photographed the area. The photos below can be spliced together for a complete picture of the scene. They show homes on the ridgeline, some recently built or under construction, and a burn line that stops just short of these properties -- a testament to the concern and quality of state and county fire fighters.

This defense of these properties should be remembered everytime one of these property owners acuses efforts to impose development standards as governmental intrusion on their property rights.




jg

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Failure for Viewshed Protection; Moratorium on Santa Rosa Escarpment lifted

The Californian reports that the Riverside County Board of Supervisors has lifted the moratorium on construction on the Santa Rosa Ridgeline:

Lifting Santa Rosa Ridgeline Moratorium

I'm disappointed that no plan to develop protections for this scenic area was made and that Supervisor Stone's suggestion to create an ordinance was not supported by the other supervisors. Controlling development on the ridgeline, and the broader issue of view-shed protections, brings up the issue private property rights. As reported, many citizens whose homes or plans are affected by the moratorium and would-be ordinance cite the intrusion on their property rights. Yet these same people, because of their location, are highly dependent on services from the county and state. Below is my collection of recent fires on the Santa Rosa escarpment.  (Click for full size)

Fire fighters take great risk protecting homes on top of these hillsides, where steep hills, a hot and dry climate, strong updrafts, and shifting winds make for exceptionally dangerous and unpredictable fires. Three times in the past 4 years I've watched airplanes drop fire retardants to keep hillside fires from overtaking homes on these slopes. I can’t image that the small number of property owners could ever maintain the fire-fighting protections they need. (I could add road construction and other services to that list.) In light of these risks and services, it's not asking too much for residents on these slopes to work within some aesthetic guidelines.


One homeowner commented about having to look at the red-tiled roofs of the valley. I believe this was a rhetorical point and not to be taken as his thoughtful opinion, but it is a fair consideration. I detest when a developer destroys the natural contour of the land in the valley or above it. But if this resident truly doesn't want to look at the houses in the valley, he should build a ways back from the edge, which is what a view-shed ordinance would require.

jg