Portraying the Forest Service Image—Applying the Built Environment Image Guide to Administrative Sites
Thinking Before Doing
The Forest Service is a "can do" organization. Give us a problem or challenge, and we jump right in and attack it. Unfortunately, we sometimes jump before considering where we want to land. In the long run, a little time spent identifying and recording the project requirements, constraints, and influences will save time and resources. The result will be structures that are easier and cheaper to manage and maintain and that are better suited to their purposes.
Of course, any structure must be the right size and have the appropriate features to be useful. But that's not enough. Forest Service structures also should be durable, efficient, kind to their occupants, gentle on the land, and portray an appropriate Forest Service image. The following tools and practices can help designers make better decisions. They work together with the BEIG to describe how a structure should look, where it should be located, and how it should be constructed. They can also help guide operations and maintenance decisions.
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classifications identify settings appropriate for various activities on National Forest System lands and sites along a spectrum of settings from primitive to urban. Descriptions of the appropriate settings within each classification provide guidance on how much development is acceptable at any given site. Most National Forest lands have been classified using the ROS. Maps showing the ROS classifications should be available at ranger district or forest supervisor's offices.
Most large new administrative sites probably should be within urban or rural ROS classes. Some smaller administrative sites may be in areas classified as roaded natural or roaded modified. Any development planned for sites within semiprimitive motorized, semiprimitive nonmotorized, or primitive ROS classifications should prompt some serious discussions with decisionmakers about the location of the development and the validity of the ROS classification.
Chapter 4 and appendix C of the BEIG, available electronically at /recreation/programs/beig/, explain how facility design should be guided by the ROS. More information about the ROS is available electronically on the Forest Service's internal network at http://fsweb.wo.fs.fed.us/eng/facilities/recopp.htm.
Scenery Management System
The Scenery Management System (SMS) provides guidance concerning desired scenic integrity on national forest lands. Most Forest Service lands were evaluated and classified years ago. Maps showing landscape character goals should be available at ranger district or forest supervisor's offices.
The SMS uses the framework of regional landscape character, place attachment, and scenic classes to identify the form, line, color, and texture that will allow a structure to "fit" within the landscape. Any proposed development that doesn't conform to the site's landscape character goals should be discussed with the unit's landscape architect and decisionmakers to determine whether the project should be changed.
A printed copy of Agriculture Handbook 701, Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for Scenery Management, should be available at most Forest Service offices. An electronic copy is not available. The SMS is complex. Your unit landscape architect can help you understand what it means for your site.
Universal Design and Accessibility
All new and reconstructed Forest Service facilities and programs must be accessible to people with disabilities. Universally designed facilities meet the needs of most people without "special" segregated features for persons with disabilities. The result of universal design is independence, integration, and dignity for everyone. It is easy to incorporate accessibility and universal design principles into a new structure. It may be more challenging to bring existing structures up to standards.
All existing structures that are not already accessible must have an accessibility evaluation survey and transition plan. Surveys and transition plans should have been completed in the early 1990s, and should be available at each Forest Service unit office. For existing structures, measures identified in transition plans should be incorporated whenever building modifications are made. More information on universal design, accessibility, accessibility evaluation surveys, and transition plans is available in the Accessibility section of the Facilities Toolbox at http://fsweb.mtdc.wo.fs.fed.us/toolbox/acc/.
Facilities Sustainability
The goal of sustainable development is to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Sustainable structures lay lightly on the land, allowing the natural environment to remain as intact as possible. They use renewable manufactured materials that don't take a lot of energy to make or transport. Their systems are designed to minimize energy and water use. People occupying sustainable buildings enjoy natural lighting and a connection with the outdoors. These factors have been shown to increase productivity.
Sustainable development is required for all Federal agencies. More information on sustainability is available in the Sustainability section of the Facilities Toolbox at http://fsweb.mtdc.wo.fs.fed.us/toolbox/sus/.
Site and Landscape Planning and Design
Site and landscape planning and design often are ignored until the very end of the design or construction process and then treated as "prettying up" around the outside of a building. This approach bypasses benefits that can be realized when landscape planning and design are considered at the beginning of the design process. Site conditions such as soils, slopes, climate, solar orientation, views, proximity to roads, and existing vegetation should be identified and included in the project design prospectus, so the building can be designed to take maximum advantage of the opportunities at the site. Doing so can lead to a structure that is more sustainable and has a lower operating cost.
Good landscape design places plant materials and other site elements where they reduce a building's energy consumption. Visitors can be guided to the places they need to go and discouraged from going where they shouldn't without the use of unattractive or unfriendly devices. Landscape design even can present or reinforce important messages about the Forest Service or the environment (figure 3). It is important to identify landscape and site requirements and include the landscape architect on the design team from the time the project is begun.
Figure 3—The supervisor's office at South Lake Tahoe, serving the
Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit in the Pacific Southwest and
Intermountain Regions, was set carefully among the existing trees
and landscaped deftly using native plants. Visitors can't help but
notice how well this structure fits into the natural environment.
Electrical and Mechanical Design
Similarly, electrical and mechanical design often are ignored until the building layout and structure have been determined. A better approach is to involve mechanical and electrical engineers from the earliest stage of design. Basic building configuration provides the most opportunity for energy and lighting efficiency. Less than optimal configuration choices can double or triple energy use and the cost of necessary mechanical systems. It is difficult to incorporate comprehensive energy-saving systems after the basic building layout and structure have been determined.
Life-Cycle Cost Effectiveness
Due to limited funding, Forest Service designers and facilities managers traditionally have focused on minimizing initial costs. Unfortunately, this practice often has produced inefficient, short-lived structures with unnecessarily high operations and maintenance costs. The initial cost is only about 10 to 40 percent of the total cost of building ownership. Over the life of the building, operations and maintenance cost more than initial construction. With energy costs on an upward trend and most Forest Service buildings long past their low maintenance early years, ignoring ongoing operations and maintenance costs when making design and replacement decisions does not make sense. Durable, efficient materials and systems frequently cost much less over the entire life of the structure than materials and systems that cost less initially. This is true both for new construction and for major maintenance and improvement projects.
Life-cycle cost estimates use maintenance and replacement information to estimate the total cost of owning a building for its expected life. Although private industry commonly plans for a 30-year building life, more than 60 percent of Forest Service buildings are more than 30 years old. In fact, about 10 percent of Forest Service buildings are more than 75 years old, and a few are more than 100 years old. From a practical standpoint, this suggests that it may be wise to select a structure life well beyond 30 years when comparing life-cycle costs of alternatives for Forest Service structures. If the Forest Service is going to continue to use old buildings, new buildings should be designed to be sound and useful at an advanced age. Executive Order 13327 of February 4, 2004 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040204-1.html), recognizes the wisdom of making decisions based on life-cycle costs and requires that life-cycle cost estimates be used for priority investment decisions and actions.
Getting the Best Value
In 1943, Larry Mills, working for General Electric, developed a systematic process for evaluating an item, a project, or a system to achieve the required function at the lowest cost. The process has been refined over the years and is described by terms such as value engineering, value management, or value analysis.
A value analysis (VA) is performed by a team of trained people with a broad range of technical expertise who have not been involved in the project and can take a fresh look at it. They break the project down into its constituent objectives and quickly evaluate a wide range of possible ways to accomplish the objectives. They look for a combination of the most effective methods and lowest cost. A competent VA team will produce recommendations for performance improvements and cost savings that "pay" the cost of the VA many times over.
In the Forest Service, decisionmakers are not bound by the recommendations of the VA team. Factors unknown to the VA team may make some recommendations unworkable. Decisionmakers must document their reasons for rejecting VA team recommendations.
Information about VA is available in the Value Management section of the Facilities Toolbox at http://fsweb.mtdc.wo.fs.fed.us/toolbox/uva/. Use of the process is required by Forest Service Manual section 1300, chapter 1349— Value Management (/im/directives/fsm/1300/1340.doc) for projects over $1 million to help ensure that scarce facilities capital investment funding is well spent. Some regions have more detailed guidelines for the use of VA. Check with your region or station's value management coordinator for requirements in your area (http://fsweb.mtdc.wo.fs.fed.us/toolbox/uva/documents/vmcoord.doc).
Historically Significant Structures
Special requirements govern how the Forest Service must treat historically significant structures. A summary of these requirements is available in the Historic Facilities section of the Facilities Toolbox at http://fsweb.mtdc.wo.fs.fed.us/toolbox/his/. The historical status of each Forest Service building is recorded in the INFRA (infrastructure application) database. The BEIG builds on these requirements by using local historical architectural character, such as intact historically significant structures, as one of the main guides for determining the desired architectural character of new structures. Whenever work on a significant historic structure is contemplated, consult the unit's archeologist or architectural historian. They maintain files on each historic structure and can provide valuable guidance and assistance.
Utilitarian Structures
It is not reasonable to design utilitarian structures such as warehouses or utility buildings to the same standards of detail and finish as public buildings, such as offices or visitor centers. The primary considerations for utilitarian structures should be sturdiness and practicality. However, that doesn't mean that BEIG requirements should be ignored completely. Even utilitarian structures that are out of public view should have scale, rooflines, color, texture, and architectural style similar to adjacent public buildings and to those identified in the local design theme (figure 4). Utilitarian structures that are in public view must incorporate more of the detailing and other image standards that have been established for the site (figure 5).
Figure 4—The three-bay engine garage and office on the Sayler
compound in the Lower Trinity Ranger District of the Six Rivers
National Forest in the Pacific Southwest Region is a well-designed
utilitarian structure. It is a cost effective preengineered structural steel
building with cement fiber siding and steel roofing. Although the scale
is larger than the surrounding historic offices and residences, the
materials, colors, and roofline are appropriate for the site. The translucent
exhaust skylights at the peak of the roof would be inappropriate
if the structure was next to the road and in plain view of the public.
Figure 5—The new three-bay engine garage and office at Oak Grove
in the Palomar Ranger District of the Cleveland National Forest
in the Pacific Southwest Region is more architecturally detailed
than the Sayler garage because it is in full public view. The structure
echoes elements of the historic 1930s-era ranger station.
E-mail: 