INTER-RELATIONSHIPS OF LAND USE PLANNING AND CONTROL
TO WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING
Environments for Tomorrow
Washington, D. C.
Prepared for
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C.
Contract No. 68-01-0750
-------
EPA Review Notice
The contents of this report do not necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use. This report, which was
originally completed in 1973, was used in developing
EPA guidance for areawide water quality management
planning. It is intended to be used only as a ref-
erence and should not be interpreted as official
EPA guidance.
-------
ABSTRACT
This document presents information collected and developed during a
study of the interrelationships of land use planning and control to water
quality management planning. The purpose of the study was to present
information which is useful in better comprehending basic land use/
water quality relationships and the land use strategies which can contrib-
ute to improved water quality management.
The report attempts to provide answers, based upon current literature
and experience, to the following questions:
1. How does land use impact water quality?
2. How do water quality conditions affect land use?
3. What is the current extent of consideration given to land use
in water quality management planning?
4. What land use strategies can be used to manage water quality?
5. How can the water quality management planning process be made
more responsive to land use considerations?
Numerous references and examples are cited regarding the discussion
of both problems and innovative practices. The report concludes with a
suggested set of guidelines for formulating water quality management
plans which encourage improved land use/water quality relationships.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-01-0750
under the technical direction of the Planning Branch, Office of Water
Programs of the Environmental Protection Agency.
111
-------
CONTENTS
Chapter
Abstract iii
Preface ix
Conclusions 1
I Overview 11
II Effects of Land Use on Water Quality 29
III Effects of Water Quality on Land Use 61
IV Guidelines 91
Acknowledgements 161
Bibliography 162
Appendix A A-l
IV
-------
FIGURES
Page
1. Schematic Diagram of the Land Use/Water Quality
Relationship 12
2. Relations Between Source and Type of Water
Pollution 31
3. Non-Point Pollution Impacts by Land Use 40
4. Urban Runoff Loading - Tulsa, Oklahoma 45
5. A Frequency Distribution of Diurnal Temperature
Changes on Clearcut Watersheds 46
6. Effect of Urbanization on Mean Annual Flood for a
1-Square-Mile Drainage Area 48
7. Relationship of Drainage Area, Sediment Yield, and
Construction Activity 55
8. The Role of Land Use Planning and Control in Water
Quality Management 95
9. Assessment of and Implementation Requirements .... 96
10. Water Quality Management Planning Process:
Approach #b 100
11. Water Quality Management Planning Process:
Approach #c 102
12. Analysis Components of an Environmental Carrying
Capacity Approach . . 103
13. Techniques Overlaying Selected Natural Features on
Composite Map 114
14. Environmentally Sensitive Areas 119
15. Planning Considerations for Major Critical Uses .... 128
16. Erosion & Sediment Control Measures for Construction
Sites 138
-------
Page
17. Sample Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan . . 139
18. Sample Watershed: Proposed Development Plan . A-2
VI
-------
TABLES
No. Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
A Summary of State Land Use Laws and. Pending ,
Action
Typical Domestic Sewage Composition
Per Capita Raw S.ewage Loading
Commercial Water Use
Liquid Waste Loads for Selected Industry Groups:
New York Metropolitan Area
Summary of Industrial Waste
Provisional Maximum Recommended
Temperatures
Land Use Load Generating Factors
Land Use Runoff Coefficients
Channel Enlargement Effects of Land Uses ....
Agricultural Pollutional Loads
Erosion Rates Reported for Various Sediment
Sources .....
Preferred Limits for Several Criteria of Water
Used in Industrial Processes
Summary of Classifications of Irrigation Waters .
Tentative Guides for Evaluating Recreational
Waters
Estimated Influence of Water Quality on Swimming
Activity at Public Beaches, Lake Erie Basin . . .
Water Conservation Plumbing Devices Ranked by
Water Saving Cost Effectiveness
Calculation of Non-Point Areal Loading
Calculation of Areal Constituent Loading Rates . .
Permissible Loading Levels for Total Nitrogen
and Total Phosphorus
24
30
32
33
35
36
38
44
47
50
51
54
64
67
70
' 71
136
A-5
A-6
A-8
Vll
-------
PREFACE
The Council on Environmental Quality recently reported that the nation's
rivers and waterways are dirtier than ever and that the costs of pollution
control are going up. It is increasingly suggested by both environmental
specialists and laymen that one of the more significant reasons for this
continued water quality degradation is our failure to deal with the non-
technological aspects of pollution. The approach to date has assumed
that one alternative, "end of the pipe" treatment technology, will be able
to control pollutant discharges to the degree necessary to meet
established water quality standards. It assumes that processes to treat
water-borne residuals, such as screening, activated sludge and chemical
oxidation, will allow standards to be met. Implicitly, this approach has
been based on the idea that there is no relationship between water
quality and the location and density of population, the use of land and the
rate of growth.
Proponents of land use planning and control strategies claim that the
technology approach has been inadequate on four counts. First, control
technologies have not been able, at the current level of funding, to keep
pace with the growth in waste loads. Second, control technologies are
not available for all sources. For instance, sediments, nitrates and
phosphates resulting from land runoff are not practically susceptible to
treatment at this time. Third, even the most effective technologies
seldom achieve 100 percent removal, which may be necessary to sustain
environmentally sound growth in some urban/industrial centers. (At this
time, even 90 percent removal effectiveness is still an outstanding
achievement. ) Fourth, the exponentially increasing costs associated
vm
-------
with higher removal rates may impose economic burdens upon govern-
ments and private firms which are beyond current financial capacity.
In the search for alternative methods for improving water quality, land
use strategies loom as a promising complement to treatment technology.
The way we guide and manage the use of land is pivotal to the entire
pollution problem. Without environmentally sensitive land use planning
and control, investments in waste-water treatment facilities can easily
be squandered. With well conceived and administered land use controls,
reasonable levels of growth can be accommodated with minimal resource
degradation and with a more favorable cost-effectiveness rate.
The 1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act show
a strong emphasis on land use. Section 208 encourages the establish-
ment of area-wide waste management agencies whose plans must give
attention to land use/water quality conflicts and to the use of land use
controls as one method for managing water quality. Section 304 requires
EPA dissemination of information describing guidelines, for identifying
and evaluating non-point sources of pollutants and methods of controlling
pollution resulting from particular land use activities (i.e. , agriculture,
silvaculture, mining, construction, landfills, etc. ). Section 306
prescribes state control over the performance of new wastewater sources
locating in the state. This section may be interpreted to mean that
states may initiate land use controls to insure compliance with water
quality standards. Finally, EPA is mandated by Section 201 to encourage
waste treatment management which combines open space and recreational
considerations with such management.
If cost effective plans and programs are to be achieved, the consideration
of land use strategies and land use impacts must be an integral part of
IX
-------
the planning and management processes. That is the subject which is
addressed in this study.
The purposes of this report are threefold:
1. To present information describing the relationships between
land use and water quality; and,
2. To identify strategies and techniques for better integrating land
use and water quality at both the planning and implementation
levels
3. To propose guidelines for incorporating land use considerations
within the water quality management process.
These three study purposes, of course, tie into the larger and more
critical objective of utilizing all possible controls and techniques in the
effort to control water pollution.
Chapter I provides an overview of the water quality problem, the
institutional setting for management and current planning approaches.
Chapter II summarizes the current state of knowledge regarding the ways
in which land use impacts water quality. Chapter III deals with the same
relationship but from the opposite perspective -- namely, the ways in
which water quality affects land use. Chapter IV sets forth a suggested
set of guidelines for formulating water quality management plans which
encourage improved land use/water quality relationships. Implementa-
tion techniques are also discussed, with references made to case examples.
Land use strategies have a significant role to play in reducing water
pollution and its effects. This study represents a beginning step toward
better defining that role. Continued research and aggressive application
of such strategies will make it possible to move closer toward the next
-------
generation of environmental management the one which recognizes
the true interdependence of human and natural processes.
XI
-------
CONCLUSIONS
This study was structured to respond to the following questions:
»
A. How does land use impact water quality?
B. How do water quality conditions affect land use?
C. What is the current extent of consideration given to land use
in water quality management planning?
D. What land use strategies can be used to manage water quality?
E. How can the water quality management process be made more
responsive to land use considerations?
The answers listed below represent the major conclusions drawn from
the study.
A. HOW DOES LAND USE IMPACT WATER QUALITY?
1. Land use impacts water quality through:
a. Generation of domestic point discharges
b. Generation of industrial point discharges
c. Urban stormwater runoff impurities
d. Construction-related runoff
e. Agricultural and forestry drainage
f. Mine drainage
g. Loss of natural ground cover and disturbance of environ-
mentally sensitive areas
h. Stream enlargement, bank erosion and thermal change due
to increased runoff, and
i. Withdrawal of surface and ground water supplies
-------
The extent and relative importance of each of these impacts
varies from area to area and is in great part determined
by natural land, water and climatological conditions, the
rate and type of man-made change, and the nature of
current treatment and conservation practices.
2. The domestic waste loads generated by residential and commercial
land uses are easily predictable. Evaluating the water quality
ramification of industrial land uses, however, is an extremely
case specific task which defies generalization.
3. The thermal effects of stormwater runoff and power plants
can be extremely disruptive, affecting the propogation of
aquatic species, the chemical reaction within the water
environment and the physical properties of water.
4. The effect of urban and agricultural land use on non-point
discharges (i. e. , those pollutional stresses which arise
from dispersed areas) are substantial and careful planning
and control are necessary to prevent both short and long term
degradation from these sources.
5. Despite erosion control efforts to date, it has been estimated that
between 50 and 75 percent of the sediment which washes into the
nationls waters each year comes from crop and pasture lands.
In addition, agricultural land uses generate significant amounts
of fertilizer nutrients, pesticide residues and animal waste.
6. Although affecting a smaller amount of land than agriculture,
erosion rates during urban and highway construction are a very
-------
real threat to all aspects of the aquatic environment. In highly
erosion-prone areas annualized erosion rates on specific sites
can go as high as 50,000 tons/square mile.
7. Resource extraction should be recognized as an activity with the
potential for large scale pollution. The impacts can be diverse
depending upon whether the activity is dredging, drilling, or
mining and upon the degreee of attention being given to pollution
control.
8. Flood plains function as natural safety valves and recycling zones
for the environment. Man's use of flood plains, which usually
includes flood control measures, subverts their ability to trap
runoff and remove sediment and nutrients from streams during
flood conditions.
9°. . Land development within upper tributary areas, estuaries,
wetlands and aquifer recharge areas can have severe water
quality repercussions. Each of these areas is especially
sensitive to the physical, organic and biological impacts of
point and non-point pollution.
B. HOW DO WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS AFFECT LAND USE?
1. With few exceptions, deterioration of water quality does not
have significant impact upon the efficiency of water-using
industries or the geographic pattern of industrial development.
Industry tends to view water quality as secondary or tertiary
importance relative to market, employment, resource and other
economic factors.
-------
2. The impacts of poor water quality can be of serious magnitude
to agricultural land uses, principally livestock operations and
irrigation-dependent crops. The low profit margin of most
agricultural operations usually makes treatment practices
financially infeasible.
3. Water-oriented recreation land uses can be, and often have been,
impacted by poor water quality. Deterioration of fishing areas
and beach closings due to unhealthy water conditions have become
commonplace in spite of the increasing demand for water
recreation opportunities.
4. Land values for property adjacent to water bodies are also
affected by water quality. Some realtors estimate moderate
to substantial loss of resale value due to polluted surface
water bodies.
5. The construction and expansion of water quality treatment facilities
has traditionally been disruptive to surrounding land uses. While
examples of compatible facilities do exist, they are the exception
rather than the rule.
6. The provision of expanded sewer service through new interceptor
sewers and additional treatment plant capacity is increasingly
resulting in negative land use impacts. Growth is often induced
within areas which are either environmentally sensitive or
ill-equipped to handle the public service and land use guidance
problems.
-------
7. The imposition of limitations on sewer hook-ups can be an
effective device in stabilizing waste load generation,- but
several land use impacts can occur and should be carefully
considered.
8. There are increasing examples of potential "second-cycle
pollution, " where clean-up efforts result in an onslaught of
new and unplanned development. The new development
brings with it the threat of ecological damage which exceeds
the original cycle of pollution. Urban areas are already
experiencing the impacts of this phenomenon and signs of a
similar threat are appearing along several scenic rivers in
rural areas.
C. WHAT IS THE CURRENT EXTENT OF CONSIDERATION GIVEN
TO LAND USE IN WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING?
1. This study found no examples of water quality management plans
which have given real consideration to land use strategies,
in spite of the fact that such consideration has been required
by the EPA Water Quality Management. Planning Guidelines
since January, 1.971. Several programs which are underway
or pending application approval, however, do indicate intent
to study the potential impact of land use and zoning controls.
2. For a number of reasons, land use planning regulation and
water quality management have been conceived and operated
independently.
-------
a. There has been a definite lack of "precise knowledge
regarding the effects which land use has upon water quality
b. There are few established procedures and methodologies for
correlating land use and water quality planning processes
c. Up until recently, very few state and local governments have
had the organizational structure, the legal tools and/or the
confidence necessary to enforce the kinds of land use policies
required by the water quality problem
d. The dominance of engineers and the long tradition of the
public works philosophy in water quality work has caused a
preoccupation with hardware solutions
D. WHAT LAND USE STRATEGIES CAN BE USED TO MANAGE
WATER QUALITY?
1. Land use strategies should be based upon the following goals:
a. Balance point discharges with the water quality standards
and assimilative capacity of receiving waters
b. Reduce and balance harmful non-point discharges, and
c. Conserve the natural features and natural systems which
protect water quality and quantity.
2. Planning strategies related to these goals fall into three cate-
gories which range from areawide to site specific.
a. Regional strategies, including the modification of growth rates,
the'distribution of urban growth, the conservation of environ-
mentally sensitive areas and open space, and the special
control of critical use locations
b. Land management strategies, including the control of
construction-related erosion, agricultural conservation
p.ractices, flood plain and shoreline management and control
of resource extraction activities
c. Site development strategies, including improved site location
practices, sensitive definition of project size and use mix and
improved site planning
-------
3. Techniques for implementing these strategies are diverse and
increasingly supportive of environmentally-sensitive land use
control. A large number of states and localities have enacted
new controls, enabling legislation and funding programs which
pave the way toward more realistic implementation of land use
strategies. There is at least one, and often more, prototype
example for every strategy discussed in the report. Planners,
administrators, and lawyers can find adequate precedents for
developing new controls and policies.
4. Regarding the comparative effectiveness and feasibility of these
varied strategies the report concludes that:
a. The primary payoff of most strategies would occur in the
long term future.
b. The best short term impacts upon water quality can be
derived from the use of erosion controls in regulating
new construction, careful evaluation of proposed critical
uses (i. e. , power plants, sewage treatment plants,
industries, etc. ) and more stringent site plan review
procedures.
c. In the long term future, the most positive water quality
impacts can be expected from stricter control of the
location, density, and staging of urban growth, and
protection of environmentally sensitive areas.
d. The most effective land use strategy--reducing the overall
growth rate--is currently of limited value due to poor
implementation feasibility. However, several recent
breakthroughs (i. e. , Lake Tahoe, Boca Raton, Ramapo,
and Fairfax County) indicate that this strategy should not
be disregarded.
-------
E. HOW CAN THE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING
PROCESS'BE MADE MORE RESPONSIVE TO LAND USE
CONSIDERATIONS ?
The most important change which must be made in water
quality management planning is modifying the basic approach.
Current methodologies tend to treat land use simply as a fixed
input to the calculation of future point waste loads. The importance
of the land use/water quality relationship requires that land use
be treated as a management policy. Three alternative
planning approaches are discussed in Chapter IV in an effort
to sketch out the ways in which water quality and land use planning
can be better interrelated.
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
To achieve improved land use/water quality relationships, several actions
should be taken at the federal, state and local levels.
A. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should clearly state
its policy concerning the role of land use in water quality
management. Such a policy should be closely coordinated with
other federal agencies concerned with land use and water quality.
B. Subsequent to the above action, the Environmental Protection
Agency should issue firm guidelines, such as those proposed
herein, for the consideration of land use within water quality
management planning projects.
C. Guidelines should also be formulated regarding evaluation of
the land use impacts of wastewater facility grant applications.
The primary purpose of such guidelines should be to avoid
such facility impacts as overstimulation of growth, second
cycle pollution, and landscape degradation.
D. The Environmental Protection Agency and other federal agencies
should encourage and support further research as a means of:
documenting land use/water quality impacts; testing and
monitoring the effectiveness of land use strategies and controls;
and refining water quality management planning procedures.
While a wide range of research is necessary, the emphasis
should be placed upon action-oriented projects (i. e. , those
research endeavors which generate procedures, guidelines,
9
-------
prototype regulations, and conclusions regarding the effectiveness
of land use strategies). The objective should be to provide
information which will pragmatically assist the planners and
managers who work on the firing line of institutional resistance
to change.
E. Expanded attention should be given to new land use control
procedures at state, regional, and local levels. Water quality
management and land use specialists should combine efforts to
aggressively pursue and lobby for those controls necessary
to the reduction of local water quality problems.
10
-------
CHAPTER I
OVERVIEW
Land and water are two of our most necessary commodities, and they are
scarce. More specifically, good land and good water are scarce. The
competing interests of home builders, industrialists, recreation enthusiasts
and others all vie for the same parcels of land in the same areas. In major
metropolitan areas, where both industry and housing have sought relief in
the suburbs, little relief has been found. Planners and others concerned
with orderly growth and amenable living have recognized many of the problems
of transportation and services associated with the voracious need for land.
The entry of water quality into this milieu is rather new, and it, along with
other environmental factors, has complicated the planning process. In
order to address the relationships between land use and water quality, it is
necessary to understand the general framework of the problem and the
approaches that are currently being followed in both planning and manage-
ment.
A. THE LAND USE/WATER QUALITY PROBLEM
The interrelationships of land use and water quality are numerous and quite
complex. Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of these relationships. Sum-
marily stated, population and economic growth, private market forces,
land use regulations, public services and facilities, and the natural features
result in a particular land use pattern and land consumption rate. This
pattern with its underlying determinants, can cause four types of water
quality problems:
Damaging, and perhaps poorly distributed, point source waste
discharges (i.e., domestic, industrial and power plant
discharges)
Damaging non-point loads generated by urban, and rural land
uses as well as construction activities
11
-------
Figure 1
Schematic Diagram of the Land Use/Water Quality
Relationship
LAND USE DETERMINANTS
POPULATION AND
ECONOMIC
GROWTH
PRIVATE
MARKET
FORCES
LAND USE
REGULATION
PUBLIC
SERVICES
AND FACILITIES
NATURAL
FEATURES
& CONSTRAINTS
LAND USE
PATTERN
FORM
DENSITY
USE MIX
OPEN SPACE
LAND CONVERSION RATE
WATER QUALITY IMPACTS OF LAND USE
WITHDRAWAL
OF SURFACE
AND GROUND
WATER
LOSS OF
NATURAL
GROUND COVER
AND DISTURBANCE
OF ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE AREAS
NET CHANGE
OF STREAM
FLOW
CONSTRUCTION
RELATED
SEDIMENT
LOADS
J
SILVACULTURE
MINING AND
AGRICULTURE
RUNOFF
LOADS
URBAN
RUN OFF
LOADS
1
DOMESTIC
WASTE
LOADS
INDUSTRIAL
WASTE
LOADS
STREAM
ENLARGEMENT
AND EROSION
TOTAL
NON-POINT
LOAD
WATER
QUALITY
STANDARDS &
EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS
TOTAL
POINT
LOAD
WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
QUANTITY
AND QUALITY
OF RECEIVING
WATER PRIOR
TO DISCHARGE
QUANTITY
AND QUALITY
OF DISCHARGE
LAND
DISPOSAL.
WASTEWATER
REUSE, ETC.
RESULTING
QUALITY OF
RECEIVING WATERS
-------
Reduction of the aquatic and land mechanisms for self-
purification (i.e., ground cover, infiltration capacity
and surface water hydrology)
Restriction of established or planned water uses (i. e. ,
water supply, commercial or sport fishing and recreation)
The key land use characteristics which have impact upon water quality
include the form and density of development and the general distribution
of economic activity within a region. Many land use characteristics are
of significance to the quantity and quality of both surface and ground
water resources: the density or the degree of concentration of waste
generating land uses; the particular types of land uses which are prevalent
within the region; the amount of open space and its general location
vis-a-vis the water resource base; and, the land conversion rate with
particular regard to construction-related sedimentation and the capacity
of sanitary sewage disposal plants to keep up with the increasing point
lands.
The result of this process is frequently damage to the natural as well as
the man-made environment and the evolution of water quality problems
which cannot be easily remedied by pollution control technology.
1. Water Quality Impacts
The problems caused by the lack of interface between land use and water
quality management are numerous and are familiar to most land use and
water quality planners. They include;
a. Urban development in or near environmentally sensitive
areas (i. e., flood plains, shorelines, coastal zones,
groundwater recharge areas, land areas with unstable soils,
lakes with slow recirculation cycles or sharp temperature
gradients, watersheds or tributaries with low flow or slow
gradients, and estuaries and other sensitive hydrologic-
ecologic systems).
13
-------
b. Urban development in inadequately serviced areas (i. e. ,
development with on-site or package plant disposal systems
or development in areas with severe financial, natural or
political limitations upon improvement of the capacity of
waste disposal).
c. Development or expansion in areas where discharges already
exceed the assimilative capacity of receiving waters.
d. Agricultural operations generating large volumes of silt,
nutrients, pesticides and animal waste (i. e. , general crop
production, mushroom farms, intensive livestock
operations, etc.).
e. Poorly operated and controlled resource extraction and
construction activities (i.e. , acid drainage from coal mines,
erosion from strip mining, in-stream sand and gravel
excavation, construction site preparation and cut and fill
operations).
f. Recreational areas located, designed and managed without
due regard to the carrying capacity of water bodies, particu-
larly with regard to human waste disposal and the by-products
of recreational boating activity.
g. Inefficient land development patterns causing diseconomies
and extra costs for servicing -- extra funds which could have
been better invested in another type of improvement (i.e. ,
the expansion of the treatment plant, the relocation of an
outfall, etc. ).
2. Land Use Impacts
Conversely, inadequate water quality management has had significant
impacts upon land use activities. For instance, water pollution has
caused damage to recreational areas, restricted agricultural use of
surface water for irrigation and livestock watering, hindered industries
relying upon water for the manufacturing process and has limited the
sources of potable water supply for communities.
14
-------
The management practices used to control and reduce waste loads have
also resulted in land use impacts. Uncoordinated expansion of treatment
plants and sewer service areas has sometimes induced growth beyond
local government's capacity to provide services and land use control.
Waste water treatment facilities are often sited and constructed without
regard for adjacent land uses and downstream water uses. Sewer
capacity allocation policies are often conceived without regard for land
use and socio-economic effects.
Overall, the lack of interface between land use and water quality has
placed severe strain upon both the natural and man made environments.
The true extent of damage and the explicit nature of land use/water quality
relationships, however, has seldom been studied or documented.
3. Causes of the Problem
This lack of coordination may be attributed to the void of knowledge regarding
explicit interrelationships between the two subjects. While this is in fact
a major part of the problem, it is important to acknowledge other causes,
as discussed below.
a. Lack of Institutional Coordination -- Administration of land use and
water quality programs has been fragmented both by function and by level
of government. Not only have land use and water quality been addressed
by separate agencies, but often times by several separate agencies. For
instance federal water quality interest is spread throughout six agencies,
not always the same federal agencies responsible for land use programs.
At both the federal and state levels, chief executives have only weakly attempted
to coordinate these divided responsibilities. At the regional level, the
absence of centralized power has prevented anything more than voluntary
coordination.
15
-------
b. Plan-Implementation Gap -- There has been a large gap between the
practice of land use plan preparation (essentially the responsibility of the
professional planners) and the control of land use (the responsibility of
lay commissioners and elected officials). Land use planning has tended
toward comprehensiveness and the ideal while land use control has
generally leaned toward incrementalism and the art of expediency. Thus,
even where urban plans have supported water quality objectives, the; good
intentions have often been disregarded when a local developer or a new
prospective tax-producing industry asks the city council for a zoning
change.
c. Decentralization of Land Use Controls -- While most metropolitan
areas and non-metropolitan regions have areawide planning programs,
few have the ability to control or influence land use patterns at the area-
wide level. Although the A-95 grant review requirement has given regional
councils some coordinative power over the public facility actions of
balkanized local governments, land use control continues to be essentially
a decentralized power.
d. Narrow Public Service Philosophy -- Sewage collection and disposal
has been viewed as a service growing from the need to protect public health.
As such, a "supply-follows-demand" philosophy has predominated, with
population growth, land development trends and industrial expansion accepted
as givens or independent variables. While the land use-waste load
relationship has been given substantial study, sewage planning and waste
treatment engineering studies have given only brief attention to modifica-
tion of land use patterns and densities.
e. Pre-occupation with Hardware -- Because of the domination of sanitary
engineers in water quality work, solutions have normally focused solely
on the design and construction of facilities. This has been further reinforced
16
-------
by the fact that these engineers, over a period of time, learned to view
land use planners with suspicion due to numerous cases of faulty growth
projections and overly optimistic land use arrangements.
f. Fragmented Waste Disposal Responsibilities --In the interest of
minimizing problems, most local governments have concentrated only
on what was felt necessary from a localized public service standpoint.
Independent industrial discharges, private residential sewage systems,
and non- point wastes were viewed as being beyond local government's
responsibility and capacity. Such responsibilities were normally assumed
by under-manned county and state health departments. The result was a
thoroughly fragmented control system, with no designated responsibility
for viewing the overall relationships, trade-offs and opportunities for
improvement.
g. Newness of Water Quality Management -- The art an^ science of water
quality management is new and significantly broader and more complex
than traditional pollution abatement programs. There have been, therefore,
few opportunities to experiment with and refine methods of interrelating
this approach with land use planning programs.
B. THE CURRENT APPROACH
Water quality and land use have traditionally been controlled by functionally
separate institutions and professions. The legal bases for the two subjcts
are lodged in different levels of government, with land use control being
essentially a local prerogative and water quality management activities
being exercised mostly at the state and federal level. While both subjects
have derived their legal bases for regulation from the need to protect
health and general welfare, the process of planning and control have
17
-------
developed along separate and seldom interrelated paths. To answer the
question of whether land use planning and control and water quality
planning and management can be better related, it is necessary to more
clearly identify the differences and similarities between the fields.
1. Water Quality Planning and Management
The idea that water quality management is a matter of concern for public
health has undergone substantial change. It is not that we are less
impressed with the bilogical effects of degraded water on humans and
other forms of life; rather, it is that the justifications for governmental
intervention to secure satisfactory water quality have become diverse.
Making water more attractive for recreational uses, considerations of
aesthetics and odor, and protection and reclamation of industrial and
agricultural water supplies have joined health as recognized and legitimate
objectives of water quality management. Pollution control is coming to
be viewed as a multi-dimensional environmental and economic issue.
a. The Federal Role -- Although of little significance, federal statutes
have now assumed a position of great importance in the field of water
quality. The principal laws involved are complex, and a large number of
other laws have some direct or indirect relevance.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act is the most significant statute
dealing with water quality. Administered by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), this federal statute in the past concentrated federal regu-
latory activity on cooperative standards-making and the conference
procedure. After a thoroughgoing revision of the Act in 1972, the most
important regulatory device is now to be the discharge permit.
18
-------
All point sources are required to have permits setting forth in detail the
quantities and quality of allowable discharges which are to be set in
accordance with extensive effluent limitations and other requirements
made by EPA pursuant to the Act. A state may secure from the EPA
approval of its own permit system which meets the objectives and required
procedures, and EPA will then refrain from issuing permits in that
jurisdiction (218). Each such permit must be sent to EPA, and if that
agency objects to its provisions, the permit cannot be issued.
It should be noted that states and interstate agencies may make and
enforce effluent limitations, other requirements and standards that are
either equal to or more stringent than requirements in effect pursuant
to the federal law (218).
Planning is given a significant place by the Act. It must be carried on by
state or regional agencies on an areawide basis. The penalty by the
mid-1970's for not engaging in such planning of waste management is to be
ineligibility for federal grants-in-aid for public waste treatment facilities.
Several land use provisions are also mandated by this Act, dealing particu-
larly with non-point discharges from specified land use activities and the
location of independent point sources.
b. The State Role -- Every state has a comprehensive water pollution
control law, and the "permit and orders" provisions of these statutues
have been the principal tool in water quality regulation. Some states also
provide financial assistance for local wastewater projects. In the past,
state water pollution control agencies have been either subordinate units
of departments of ehalth or separate commissions, but recently two types
or organizational changes have been occurring. In some states, the several
waste management or control programs (water pollution, air pollution,
19
-------
solid waste) have been brought together and given major status as environ-
mental departments and may acquit other programs such as noise control
and radiation protection. The other type of state environmental department
is like the first, but it also includes most or all of the functions previously
entrusted to conservation and natural resource agencies such as state
parks, forests, mining and fish and game programs. These are generally
the agencies which have been preparing the state water plans.
Under the new federal legislation, states have a dominant role in both
planning and management of water quality.
c. The Local Government Role -- Local governments have principal
responsibility for all domestic wastewater systems. Whether adminis-
tered by small jurisdictions or special regional sewer districts, this is
where key decisions are made regarding the type, quality and territorial
coverage of domestic sewer services. Traditionally, this function has
been viewed as a public works service with little concern for what happens
to receiving waters. Local governments, usually county health depart-
ments, also share with states the control over septic tanks and package
plant systems.
d. The Role of Areawide Planning Organizations -- As required by both
HUD and EPA legislation, "certified" areawide planning organizations
have had responsibility for both sewer and water planning. Under the
new Amendments to the Water Pollution Control Act, it will be up to the
Governors to assign responsibilities for areawide water quality manage-
ment planning. The same agencies have generally served as "areawide
clearing houses" for review of federally assisted projects and programs
under the provisions of OMB Circular A-95.
20
-------
e. The Water Quality Management Planning Process -- The purpose of
the water quality management planning program is to assist and guide
state and local planning agencies in developing water quality management
plans for basin, metropolitan and regional areas. The state and areawide
agencies have been given the responsibility for developing these plans to
ensure .that the plans reflect the desires of the people in the affected area
and to ensure that they are implemented. The major objectives of the
plans are to meet water quality goals or standards and to maximize the
cost effectiveness of investments in pollution abatement and prevention
actions.
The water quality management plans contain specific proposals (such as
wastewater treatment facilities, zoning, relocation of discharge points,
water reuse) for a cost effective program that will implement water
quality standards or water use goals. The plans also provide the basis for
revising water quality standards, issuing discharge permits, determining
research needs and funding treatment works on a priority basis (acceptable
water quality management plans are a prerequisite for obtaining Federal
construction grant funds).
In addition, the plans delineate: the public and private responsibility for
carrying out the strategy selected, the existing institutional entities and
their responsibilities as defined by the governing regulations, manpower
requirements, funding levels required, and legislative or institutional
changes which would aid in implementation of the plan.
In developing a plan, all feasible alternative means of achieving water
wuality goals are considered, such as:
Land disposal, including septic tanks.
Treatment of wastewater.
Relocation of discharge points.
21
-------
Diversion from basin.
In-stream modification.
Flow regulation.
Water reuse.
Control of wastewater quantities through zoning and/or
planned growth for type and amount of expansion.
In line with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Water Quality
Management Planning Guidelines also encourage public participation
throughout the planning process by requiring that the views of interested
parties be included in the plan. When the plans are completed they are
submitted to metropolitan and regional intergovernmental clearinghouses
where again public views can be made known. Furthermore, before the
plans are certified by the Governor of each state, they are evaluated to
assure that they are not in variance with other state programs.
2. Land Use Planning and Control
Although basically a local responsibility, land use planning and control
has been enabled and encouraged by both the states and the federal
government. Following is a description of governmental roles and
procedures.
a. The Federal Role -- There is no statutory basis for direct federal
land use regulation, although such has been receiving legislative consider-
ation. Furthermore, there is no unified land use policy for the nation as
a whole. Rather, the federal government has developed programs designed
to encourage state and local governments to do various kinds of land use
and functional planning and to employ land use controls. Grants-iri-aid,
administered through the HUD 701 Program and other federal programs.
have been used to stimulate comprehensive planning. In addition, the 1966
22
-------
Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act added strength to
state land regional planning agencies by empowering them to review appli-
cations for federal grants from private and public bodies. Congress now
appears to be on the verge of granting greater responsibility for land use
planning and policy formulation to the states. (S. B. 268 and S. B. 924. )
b. The State Role -- The states of the United States have a major role to
play in land use, but until recently that role has been more potential than
realized. As indicated in Table 1, numerous states are now moving beyond
their traditional function of enabling local land use planning and control.
Ten years ago, Hawaii was the only state with a land use control system.
Now several states (California, Vermont, Maine, Florida, Wisconsin and
Delaware) have asserted strong land use prerogatives and many other
states are focusing on selected land use issues. Current state approaches
to land use innovation have been summarized as follows (141):
"(1) Zoning of all land. So far seen exclusively in Hawaii,
Vermont and Maine's unorganized territories, this ultimate
recognition of land as a finite resource may foreshadow the
planning of the future.
(2) Coastal zone restriction. The noisy controversies over
strong coastal restrictions in Delaware and California attest to
the fact that the coast is where the action really is. Landlocked
states have so far seen little action on state land use planning.
(3) State intervention when localities fail to act. This principle
is the keystone (some say the weakness) of Colorado's statewide
plan, and plays a role in the development controls of other states,
such as floodplain zoning in New Jersey and Montana and coastal
zone management in Washington and Maine.
(4) Environmentally critical areas and regionally significant
development. The backbone of the American Law Institute Model
Land Development Code and of proposed federal requirements for
state land use plans, these two categories of state jurisdiction offer
a compromise with the local planning/zoning ethic. Florida's Land
and Water Management Law is the best example. Maine's Site
23
-------
Table 1. A Summary of State Land Use Laws and Pending Actions
ALABAMA; State has constitutional Jurisdiction In powerplant siting;
surface mining regulated; 1969 law authorizes creation of state planning .and
development districts and allows counties and municipalities to establish
regional planning «nd development districts.
ALASKA; Local governments control planning In their jurisdictions, with
some state supervision of subdivision regulations; Joint Federal-State Land
Use Planning Commission Is preparing planning procedure for most of state;
Federally owned lands cover 97 percent of state.
ARIZONA: State has been studying growth and development policy in
preparation for statewide planning to conserve resources and channel urban
growth; Department of Economic Planning and Development has developed a computer
ode] (Arizona Trade-Off Model) to evaluate and correlate economic development
and environmental effects; state jurisdiction in power plant siting.
CALIFORNIA; Voter-approved 1972 Coastal Zone Conservation Act gives permit
authority over all coastal development within 1000 yards of mean high tide to a
state and six regional .commissions pending 1976 completion of land use plan for
coastal area five Biles Inland and three miles seaward; regulations implementing
State Supreme Court requirement for impact statements on private as well as
public projects expected to define almost all construction and development as
'environmentally significant; legislature again considers state planning for and
acquisition of open space, state regulation of power plant siting.
COLORADO: Land Use Commission has prepared Interim state plan, final plan
due In December, counties expected to maintain rr.ost planning control, although'
Cooalsalon holds rarely used overruling power; Senate Bill 35 (1972) requires
counties to develop subdivision regulations requiring developers to have adequate
water Supply, plans for sewage, utilities, social services (does not apply to
about 2 Billion acres of land that were already for sale).
CONNECTICUT: Coastal wetlands regulated, may be acquired by Department
of Environmental Protection; unique classification of wetlands by vegetation
as well as by hydrology; development on inland wetlands and rivers subject to
municipal regulation with sonp state supervision; utilities must certify need
and environmental compatibility before construction; mining unregulated; farm,
forest, open space lands taxed at decreasing levels as period of ownership
Increases; taxation generally based on actual use.
DELAWARE: Heavy Industry banned within two miles of coast; plan in
legislature for state acquisition and regulation of coastal wetlands to limit
residential and light commercial development would freeze development on about
40 percent of wetlands; offshore bulk transfer terminals barred.
FLORIDA: 1972 Land and Water Management Act authorizes state to zone
critical areas (not to exceed five percent of state) and developnent of regional im-
pact , designates state agency to propose and adopt comprehensive land plan;
voter-approved 1972 Land Conservation Act authorizes $240 million in bonds for
state acquisition of environmentally endangered coastal lands, recreational
lands; 1972 Water Resources Act directs development of state water use plan,
puts all water resources under state regulation; 1972 law prohibits oil, gas
drilling one mile seaward of coast, provides state review of Federal offshore leases.
GEORGIA: Eighteen Area Planning and Development Commissions with mainly
economic orientation; House of Representatives Subcommittee on State Land Use
and Local Zoning held hearings last year; proposed legislation expected to
concentrate on forcing implementation of regional plans rather than defining
procedures; 1970 Coastal M.irs'nJ.trds Protection Act requires p<3ralt3 /or dredging
or filling in tldelands; legal controversy over Act concerning state zoning
authority and ownership claims.
HAWAII: 1961 law classifies land for use as urban, rural, agricultural,
conservation (counties administer urban lands); one result; higher urban land
prices.
IDAHO: Senate bill 1111 would designate state planning agency with
exclusive authority to permit development in critical areas and development of
regional benefit and Impact (basic industry, transportation systems, power
facilities and water and solid waste systems).
ILLINOIS: Thirteen areawldc planning organizations state-chartered mainly In
urban areas; strip mining regulated; power plant siting legislation pending.
INDIANA: Fourteen planning and development regions created in 1970 cover
state, not yet fully organized; state completing inventory of resources and
present land use, to be followed by development over four years of statewide plan.
IOWA; Legislature considering establishment of Land Use Commission to
recommend policy for enactment; computer model to evaluate and correlate effects
of highway development in preparation.
KANSAS; Land Management Committee of Advisory Council on Ecology studying
state agency land manageuent activities as Initial step toward compliance with
anticipated Federal action.
KENTUCKY: State conservancy districts completing inventory of present use
and capability, water and mineral resources, population and growth patterns;
strip mining regulated.
MAINE; 1970 Site Location Law requires permit for any commercial and
industrial development, developments over 20 acres, mining or drilling, structures
totalling 60,000 square feet floor area; Land Use Regulation Commission holding
hearings to complete classification of unorganized territories covering north
half of state into protection, management, holding, development; Mandatory
Zoning and Subdivision Control Act of 1971 requires localities to zone, but not
necessarily plan for, land within 250 fcot of navigable water by mid-1973
(implementation suffers frcsi fund shortage and confusing advisory guidelines);
legislature considering Coastal Development Corporation Act to Unit coastal
heavy industry to two zones at Portla.-.J and Machiasport, limit oil Industry
.to Portland zone.
MARYLAND: Land use bills in both houses attracting much public attention,
controversy over state role in setting standards for subdivisions, coastal
zone; committee reports expected soon; bill to limit and share development
rights in each subdivision also In committee; 1971 law limits power plants to
state-oi.-ned, certified sites; state regulates coastal wetlands.
-------
MASSACHUSETTS: State agencies working to coordinate Federal grants for
pollution, coastal zone, rural development, community and transportation planning;
1965 Coastal Wetlands Act authorizes state regulation prior to development; 1972
Wetlands Protection Act require* local permits, subject to state veto, for dredging
or filling of Inland wetlands; Zoning Appeals Law allows challenges to zoning
restricting dispersal of low or moderate income housing (court challenge of law
In progress).
MICHIGAN! Thirteen regional planning authorities cover state; bill re Intro-
duced to create land planning agency (would control development In critical areas
and of regional impact), establish tax structure to preserve open space and faro
land; state wetlands plan, comprehensive Detroit shoreline plan In preparation;
five-day unconditional right of reclnsion on purchases from offerings over 10
lots effective April 1.
MINNESOTA: Twin Cities Metro Council provides regional planning, revenue
sharing for public facilities; state-regulated county zoning for land around
waterways, on floodplains.
MISSOURI; Twenty Regional Planning Commissions cover state; state action
in land use planning will occur in response to passage of Federal legislation.
MONTANA; State projects require environmental Impact statements; state
promoting county subdivision regulation, drafting model regulations; counties
Bust regulate floodplaln development or state will step in.
NEBRASKA: Bill 465 would establish commission to draw land use Bap, make
recommendations to legislature; Office of Planning and Programming has general
land use policy designation, can Intervene in planning of other state agencies;
state supervises local floodplaln zonlngs.
NEVADA; Senate Bill 131 would designate state planning agency with
jurisdiction over critical areas, development of regional Impact.
NEW JERSEY: Bills before legislature to reshape planning laws, Institute
county and state review of local plans, 'require permits for any coastal and
offshore development, provide state acquisition and regulation of power plant
sites; state requires floodplaln zoning by December 1973 or will step in;
state permit required for construction on wetlands; controversy raging over
state 30-year plan for Hackensack Meadowlands near New York City.
NEW MEXICO: 1972 laws require county regulation of subdivisions over five
lots (adequate water supply, waste systems, environmental safeguards); strip
Inlng unregulated.
NEW YORK: With strong second-home development pressure, Adirondack Park
Agency preparing land use plan for Park, which contains several local govern-
ments; Agency requires permits for development other than agricultural or
forestry uses; state regulates power plant siting; 1971 law provides
assessment of agricultural land by actual use; 1972 voter-approved $175 million
bond issue for state purchase of open space land.
NORTH CAROLINA: State study calls for action on land use policy, recommends
no comprehensive state control over land use decisions, recommends no further
growth be encouraged in urban centers.
OHIO: Bill would create office of state land planning in governor's office.
OKLAHOMA; Land use information system proposed in anticipation of Federal
and state legislation.
OREGON: Son.itc Bill 100 would establish commissions to regulate local,
st.ito planning process, regulntc aroas and activities of critical state concern;
co:n.ilttee acendir.':nt.s will probably rr-rr.ove state regulatory authority over county
pl.ins, critical areas; 1969 law requires county comprehensive plans, zoning of
unzoned areas.
PENNSYLVANIA: State-level studies on land use, no legislation yet;
Department of Environmental Re-sources beginning 50-year master plan; officials
say nany small operators avoid strip nine permit law; legislature considering
revised farm taxation.
RHODE ISLAND: Statewide Planning Program is only regional planning agency;
Coastal Resources Management Council has permit authority over all development on
wetlands, no master plan completed, no review of lor.il plans at zoning required.
SOUTH CAROLINA: Interagency Work Group on Land Use appointed to recommend
system for state; Interagency Council on Tldelands developing zoning plan for
public, private tldelands.
SOUTH DAKOTA: Six substate planning districts created in 1970, three
operational; strip mine law exempts many small operators.
TEXAS; Twenty-one planning regions, 24 Councils of Governments cover whole
state; State Interim Coastal Zone Study Commission considering program including
ban on sale or lease of coastal lands until land use plan developed, wetlands
protection lav.
UTAH: Little-used 1970 law gives land use regulation authority to
conservation districts; strip mining unregulated.
VERMONT; Capability and Development plan stating state land use objectives
awaits legislative adoption; public hearings on State Land Use Plan which would
classify all land as urban, rural residential, agricultural conservation (prime
agricultural land), resource and agricultural conservation (secondary agriculture
and forest lands) or reserve; regulations will be drawn for each land type,
permits to be required for sale or development over 10 lots, contingent on
adequate utilities, social services, environmental safeguards; 1972 Revised
Subdivision Code requires sewer permits whenever two lots are sold (exempt: lots
over 10 acres under 1500 feet elevation, lots over 20 acres less than 2500 .
feet elevation); any development over 2500 feet requires review, approval of
district environmental commission; 1966 law places five-year limit on existing
land uses preempted by new zoning; current bills to provide taxation at actual use.
VIRGINIA: State study of critical environmental areas submitted to
Advisory Legislative Committee, which will report on land use next year;
protective taxation for agricultural, forest, open space lands; power facilities
require impact statements, public hearings; local wetland zoning boards required
with state review, landowner appeal.
WASHINGTON: 1972 voter-approved Shoreline Management Act requires local
comprehensive plans and permit authority over state guidelines for development
worth over $1000 within 200 feet of streams, wetlands, lakes, ocean; governor
certifies thermal power plant sites after state study, public hearings, Impact
statements.
WISCONSIN; Minimal state guidelines on floodplain and shore land zoning;
limited state subdivision review; governor's committee last year recommended
state land use control concentrating on areas of regional or state Importance,
emphasizing regional planning.
WYOMING: Not likely to enact state land use program without prior Federal
legislation.
Source: "A Summary of State Land Use Laws", Land Use Planning Reports Vol. 1,
No. I.March 12,1973
-------
Location Law concentrates on regional significance. The many
state wetland laws, often enacted without anticipation of compre-
hensive controls, concentrate on critical environments. "
c. The Local Government Role -- Land has traditionally been viewed as
a local resource. However, constitutionally speaking, local governments
are creatures and subdivision of the state, and they exercise only those
portions of state authority which state constitutions and legislatures confer
on them. Local governments, especially the larger cities and counties,
have a measure of independent identity that makes it necessary to consider
them in their own right as well as in their role as subordinate units of the
state. Because of statutory requirements requiring the linkage of
zoning with comprehensive plans, planning is much more prevalent among
local governments than among the state and federal governments. (The
State of California has gone further than most states by requiring
"conformity" between zoning and comprehensive plans, rather than simply
the existence of comprehensive plans as a prerequisite to zoning). In
spite of the presence of planning at the local level, however, the land use
guidance system does not operate very systematically. The failings of
the system have been well documented and tend to revolve around the
prevalent view that land is a private commodity rather than a community
resource (36). As with the states, however, attitudes are beginning to
change, and selected communities are becoming more aggressive in land
use guidance.
d. The Role of Areawide Organization -- Planning at the metropolitan
and regional level has undergone dramatic change in the last decade.
Over 585 such agencies are now in existence. Although there are
exceptions, the powers of areawide agencies are advisory. Most area-
wide s participate in inter-jurisdictional land use planning, and several
have programs to interrelate regional and local planning efforts. The
26
-------
"areawide clearinghouse function" (A-95) is used to coordinate capital
projects which affect impact land use and other regional resources.
These agencies are also involved in reviews of environmental impact
statements for federally assisted projects.
e. The Land Use Planning Process -- Land use planning is a decision
process as to how land should best be allocated and used based on current
conditions and anticipated future events, i.e. , as expansion, abandonment
and renewal proceed through time. In simpler terms, it is an effort to
anticipate future events and desires so that better decisions can be made
today. The planning process has traditionally been oriented toward
improving the man-made physical environment (i.e. , the location
character and quality of housing, commercial and industrial activities,
transportation, utilities and community facilities). There is a traditional
concern, however, among professional land use planners that "planning
needs to be more ecologically/environmentally oriented. " (36) This
attitude has often been impeded by unresponsiveness from lay planning
commissions and by insufficient data and budgets. The most environmentally-
sensitive land use planning has occurred at the regional planning level where
resource allocation issues can be more easily perceived.
3. Summary of Current Practice
This study found no examples of water quality management plans which
have given real consideration to land use as a control strategy, in spite
of the fact that such consideration has been required by the EPA Water
Quality Management Planning Guidelines (55) since January 1971. Several
programs which are under way or pending funding approval, however, do
indicate intent to study the potential impact of land use and zoning controls.
The Study Design for the Weber River Basin (182) in Utah is a unique
example.
27
-------
Similarly, land use plans for regions and communities have seldom given
more than superficial attention to impacts upon water quality. Where
such attention has occurred it has generally been within the framework
of special project planning and plans for land use within environmentally
sensitive areas. The plans for Lake Tahoe (154), the Fox River Watershed
(139), the Brandywine Watershed (169), the Valley's (105), and the
Skippack Watershed (67) are cases in point.
At the land use control level, there has been some progress in relating
land use to water quality and other environmental problems. Erosion
control regulations are being instituted in several locations to control the
runoff from construction projects. Wisconsin has implemented a strong
program to protect flood plains and shorelines. The land use control
programs of many other states promise to have significant potential for
reducing land use/water quality problems.
Croke, et. al. (36 ) are cautiously optimistic about increasing the
responsiveness of land use planners and water quality engineers to each
other's concerns. Recent trends and requirements have broadened the
outlook of professionals dealing with both subject areas. Integration of
land use and environmental protection, however, requires substantially
increased inter-professional dialogue, improved planning techniques,
broadened technical and budgetary inducements to state and local govern-
ments and, most importantly, a unified and strengthened EPA policy
relating land use and environmental protection.
28
-------
CHAPTER II
EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON WATER QUALITY
This chapter provides broad quantitative assessments of the pollutional
loads generated by man through his use of land. Nature strives for
equilibrium amongst her species, and therefore, as man changes the use
of the land he sets in motion a series of events which may permanently
change the natural balance within the water environment. It is those
changes which are recognized under the title of water pollution. There-
fore, the basic tenet of this section is that man's use of the land will
cause some type of change. The planner wishes to minimize the harmful
aspects of this change.
There are three steps in defining the pollutional potential of a land use
plan. The first step is to assess the loads that each land use category
exhibits. The second is to ascertain which of these loads can be captured
and reduced. The third step is to calculate the final loadings on the water-
environment, both free flowing and in impoundments, and to ascertain the
degree with which these loadings will degrade the existing conditions.
This section describes some of the more useful relationships which have
been developed and presents these, in a form which can be employed directly
by the planner. It is not possible, of course, to present the solution to
complex technical problems as a set of simple charts and tables. The
intent, rather, is to describe the ways in which land use changes water
quality to alert the planner to potential problem areas.
As discussed in this chapter, pollutants are classified by six types of wastes:
Organic waste (primarily BOD)
Nutrients (nitrate, phosphorus)
« Sediment
29
-------
Thermal waste
Toxicants
Other types (bacteria, scum, oils, etc. )
These types of pollutants are linked to various sources, as indicated in
Figure 2.
A. EFFECTS OF LAND USES ON POINT DISCHARGES
Point sources for purposes of this discussion, are those sources of
pollution which are collected from fixed localities and delivered to the
watercourse at fixed points. They are amenable to treatment either at
their source or before their final disposition in the receiving water.
There are, in general, four major land use categories that contribute to
the point sources. These are residential use, commercial use, industrial
use, and energy generation.
1. Residential Land Use
The composition of domestic waste varies throughout the United States.
Typical ranges, commonly used for waste load prediction of BOD,
Nitrogen and Phosphorus loading from domestic wastewater on a daily
basis are shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2
TYPICAL DOMESTIC RAW SEWAGE COMPOSITION
Concentration Range (MG/L)
Constituent
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD- 5)
Nitrogen (TOTAL N)
Phosphorus (TOTAL P)
High
300
85
20
Medium
200
40
10
Low
100
20
6
Source: Metcalf and Eddy, Wastewater Engineering. (Ill)
30
-------
Figure 2
Relations Between Source and Type of Water Pollution
SOURCE
TYPE
03
O
O
Q
cu
+-*
t/J
03
o
0>
cn
03
c
_
Q
"S
i_
«-*
o
o
3
CE
c
o
O
o
o
CE
i.
OJ
4-«
03
E
8
CO
CD
O)
03
'Hi
L.
O
Organic Waste
Nutrients
D
Sediment
Thermal Waste
Toxicants
Other Types*
Major or primary factor
Possible major factorvaries with conditions
Includes bacteria, oils, scums, etc.
-------
To determine waste loadings, it is first necessary to estimate the waste-
water flow from the domestic water use sector. As a planning guide, it
may be assumed that 70 percent of the water demanded for internal
domestic use will be returned as wastewater flow. A good figure for
domestic demand is 100 gallons per capita per day. Therefore, ea<
person will contribute seventy (70) gallons a day to the waste stream.
Table 3 gives the yearly per capita loadings, based on the medium values
in Table 2.
TABLE 3
PER CAPITA RAW SEWAGE LOADING
Loading (LBS/CAP/YEAR) (LBS/GAL/YEAR)
Constituent (A) (B)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD-5) 42. 7 .0017
Nitrogen (TOTAL N) 8.5 .0006
Phosphorus (TOTAL P) 2.1 .00008
Source: Metcalf and Eddy, Wastewater Engineering (Hi)
2. Commercial Land Use
Concentrations of waste from the commercial sector are the same as those
applied to the residential sector. The difference is in the waste flows
generated by commercial land use, which varies in magnitude with the
type of commercial establishment. Table 4 presents four general categories
of commercial water use from a study of the Baltimore area (209). Load
generation data are available in standard texts.
The ratio of maximum daily flow to average daily flow may be estimated
as 1. 5.
32
-------
TABLE 4
COMMERCIAL WATER USE
Water Use
Establishment Gal/Sq. Ft. /Day
Office 0. 093
Department Store 0. 216
Restaurant 0.500
Barber Shop, etc. 0. 300
Source: Wolff,et. al. "Water Use in Selected Commercial and Institutional
Establishments in the Baltimore Metropolitan Area". (209)
In an actual planning situation it is usually feasible to construct a few
typical commercial districts, estimate the total point loading from these
typical districts, and then employ these loads in the planning process.
3. Industrial Land Use
Industrial waste ranks as one of the most complex sources of water
pollution. The process of defining industrial waste generation coefficients
cannot be generalized because industrial processes produce a wide and
varying spectrum of pollutional loads. These range from the standard
biochemical oxygen demand to traces of the more exotic metals and toxicants.
The primary factors affecting the waste generation characteristics of an
industry are:
a. The nature of the raw materials
b. The technology of the production process
c. The product mix
d. The level of effluent controls in effect at a plant
33
-------
A study on waste management for the Regional Plan Association of the
New York Region (17) presented information from which the yearly BOD
loadings from industries can be determined. Table 5 presents a partial
summary of the New York Plan process.
Non-organic loads from industry-toxic materials, thermal waste, and to
a lesser extent, nutrients, can be predicted on a case-by-case basis
once a sufficient level of detail has been determined for industrial
patterns in the region. The general characteristics of waste from major
industries has been tabulated by Nemerow as shown in Table 6 (120).
It should be noted that the four digit SIC categories must be known to
capture the true picture of the potential industrial loads in the region.
For this reason this report does not and cannot provide industrial waste
coefficients. A good source of data is the EPA (FWPCA) Industrial
Waste Profile Series .
4. Power Generation Land Use
The primary pollutant arising from the generation of power is waste
heat. This form of pollutional loading, which leads to a temperature
rise in the water body, can produce harmful effects on recreation,
commercial and sport fishing, and, on occasion, will affect downstream
industrial uses.
Thermal effects exhibit themselves in changes in reproduction, develop-
ment and distribution of the fish and other species which inhabit the water
environment, although they sometimes respond to changes in temperature
through acclimatization. They can also survive impulse heat loads for a
34
-------
Table 5
Liquid Waste Loads for Selected Industry Groups:
New York Metropolitan Region
Industry
201 1 Meat packing
2033 - Canned fruits
and vegetables
2037 -'Frozen fruits and
vegetables
2062 Cane sugar refininc
2085 - Distilled liquors
2261 - Finishing plants,
cotton
2262 - Finishing plants,
synthetic
2621 - Paper, except
building
2631 - Paperboard mills
2641 Paper coating and
glazing
2654 - Sanitary food
containers
291 1 Petroleum
refining
Unit
1,00016. of live weight
processed
Tons of fruits and
vegetables canned
Tons of fruits and
vegetables frozen
Short tons of refined
cane sugar
1,000 bushels of grain
processed
1,000 linear yards
1,000 linear yards
Short tons
Short tons
Short tons of paper and
board processed
Short tons of paper and
board processed
1 ,000 barrels of crude
processed
1964
Output/
Employee
225
92
139
633
3
186
162
127
317
49
53
29
Present Waste Load °
Generated
Lb of BOD
12/1000 Ib of live weight
30/ton of raw product processed
30/ton of raw product processed
2/ton of product
0.5/bushel of grain processed
50/1 000 linear yards
20/1000 linear yards
80/ton of product
50/ton of product
30/ton processed
30/ton processed
100/bbl of crude processed
Load
(Lbs/
Employee/
Year)
2,700
2,760
4,170
1,266
1,500
9,300
3,240
10,160
15,850
1,470
1,590
2,900
Source: Bower, era/. Waste Management (17)
-------
Table 6
Summary of Industrial Waste: Origin & Character
Industries
producing wastes
Major characteristics
Chemicals
Detergents
Cornstarch
Explosives
Insecticides
Phosphate and
phosphorus
Formaldehyde
Pulp and paper
Steel
Metal-plated
products
Oil
Rubber
Glass
Naval stores
Steam power
High in BOD and saponified
soaps
High BOD and dissolved organ-
ic matter; mainly starch and
related material
TNT, colored, acid, odorous.
and contains organic acids and
alcohol from powder and cot-
ton, metal, acid, oils, and
soaps
High organic matter, benzene
ring stucture, toxic to bacteria
and fish, acid
Clays, slimes and tall oils, low
pH, high suspended solids,
phosphorus, silica, and
fluoride
Normally has high BOD and
HCHO, toxic to bacteria in
high concentrations
Materials
High or low pH; colored;
high suspended, colloidal, and
dissolved solids; inorganic
fillers
Photographic Alkaline, contains various or-
products ganic and inorganic reducing
agents
Low pH, acids, cyanogen, phe-
nol, ore, coke, limestone, alka-
li, oils, mill scale, and fine sus-
pended solids
Acid, metals, toxic, low vol-
ume, mainly mineral matter
Iron-foundry High suspended solids, mainly
products sand; some clay and coal
High dissolved salts from field,
high BOD, odor, phenol, and
sulfur compounds from refin-
ery
High BOD and odor, high sus-
pended solids, variable pH,
high chlorides
Red color, alkaline non-settle-
able suspended solids
Acid, high BOD
Energy
Hot, high volume, high inor-
ganic and dissolved solids
Industries
producing wastes
Major characteristics
Food and drugs
Canned goods
Dairy products
Brewed and
distilled beverages
Meat and poultry
products
Beet sugar
Rice
Soft drinks
Textiles
Leather goods
Laundry trades
High in suspended solids, col-
loidal and dissolved organic
matter
High in dissolved organic mat-
ter, mainly protein, fat, and
lactose
Acids
High in dissolved organic sol-
ids, containing nitrogen and
fermented starches or their
products
High in dissolved and suspen-
ded organic matter, blood.
other proteins, and fats
High in dissolved and suspen-
ded organic matter, containing
sugar and protein
Pharmaceutical
products
Yeast
Pickles
Coffee
Fish
High in suspended and dis-
solved organic matter, includ-
ing vitamins
High in solids (mainly organic)
and BOD
Variable pH, high suspended
solids, color, and organic mat-
ter
High BOD and suspended sol-
ids
Very high BOD, total organic
solids, and odor
High in BOD, total and suspen-
ded solids (mainly starch)
High pH, suspended solids and
BOD
Apparel
Highly alkaline, colored, high
BOD and temperature, high
suspended solids
High total solids, hardness,
salt, sulfides, chromium, pH
precipitated lime and BOD
High turbidity, alkalinity, and
organic solids
Chemicals
Low pH, low organic content
Source: Nemerow, Theory and Practice of Industrial
Waste Treatment, Addison-Wesley. Copyright 1963
-------
short time. But, on the whole, each species has a preferred range.
A good overview of the aquatic ecosystem is provided in a book by Odum (127)
which is an excellent primer on the general topic. For example purposes.
Table 7 is a list supplied by the National Technical Advisory Committee
of FWPCA (121) showing the maximum temperatures compatible with the
well-being of various fish species and the associated biota.
The second major change is in the chemical reactions within the water,
which center around the speed-up of microbial activity caused by tempera-
ture increase. As a rule of thumb the rate of chemical change doubles for
each 18° F rise in temperature. This can lead to increased oxygen
depletion due to a more rapid and increased BOD stress and can also
induce taste and ordor problems. c
Finally, temperature affects the physical properties of water. The most
significant of these are density, viscosity, vapor pressure and the solubility
of dissolved gasses. Therefore, increase in water temperature increases
evaporation, lowers the ability of the water to hold oxygen, changes the
distributional patterns of sedimentation and may cause stratification in
quiescent water bodies.
The temperature rise in the receiving water is governed by two primary
factors: the waste heat discharged by the plant and the volume of flow in the
receiving stream. The waste heat generated by the plan depends on the
thermal efficiency of the plant and the amount of in-plant losses. The
maximum efficiency realized in fossil fuel plants is 40 percent. In nuclear
plants the upper limit is 33 percent, and 95 percent of the waste heat
1
reaches the cooling water. For fossil fuel plants 85 percent reaches the
cooling water.
37
-------
TABLE 7
PROVISIONAL MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED TEMPERATURES
93 F Growth of catfish, gar, white or yellow bass, spotted bass,
buffalo, carpsucker, threadfin shad, and gizzard shad
90 F Growth of largemouth bass, drum, bluegill, and crappie
o
84 F Growth of pike, perch, walleye, smallmouth bass, and sauger
80 F Spawning and egg development of catfish, buffalo, threadfin
shad and gizzard shad
Spawning and egg deve.
yellow, and spotted bass
Growth or migration rout
ment of perch and smallmouth bass
Spawning and eg
than lake trout)
Spawning and eg
northern pike, sauger, and Atlantic .salmon
Source: FWPCA, Water Quality Criteria (121).
75 F Spawning and egg development of largemouth bass, white,
68 F Growth or migration routes of salmonids and for egg develop-
55 F Spawning and egg development of salmon and trout (other
48 F Spawning and egg development of lake trout, walleye,
38
-------
B. EFFECTS OF LAND USES ON NON-POINT DISCHARGES
The pollutional stresses which arise from dispersed areas are termed
non-point sources. As opposed to point pollution, these loads are not
available for treatment or reduction by man unless they are brought into
some type of collection system. For this reason careful planning is
necessary to prevent both short and long-term effects from these sources.
The major categories for non-point sources are:
e Urban storm runoff
Agricultural drainage
* Construction runoff
Resource extraction
There are two major concepts to keep in mind when dealing with non-point
sources. The first is that the linkages connecting the causes of the
pollutional loads and the end effect, as exhibited by the quantitative mea-
surements of water quality are, in many areas, not well established or
understood. The second is that information concerning these pollutants
is given on a yearly basis which may be misleading since non-point sources
usually impact their immediate environment in an impulse fashion. The
impulse loadings from non-point sources can deplete the oxygen supply
of rivers, causing massive fish kills, and pour tons of nutrients into lakes
and reservoirs which enable algae to flourish. Figure 3 presents a
summary of non-point pollution impacts as derived from various references
analyzed during this study.
1. Urban Storm Runoff
Urban storm runoff affects water quality in two ways. First, it transports
the previously loadlocked refuse of man to the water environment. Second,
the increased magnitude of overland flow due to development causes
changes in the physical configuration of the system.
39
-------
Figure 3
Annual Non-Point Pollutions! Impacts by Land Use
LAND USE
QUALITY PARAMETERS
IMPERVI-
OUSNESS
(DEGREE)
BOD LBS/
ACRE/
YEAR
N LBS/
ACRE/
YEAR
P LBS/
ACRE/
YEAR
P04 LBS/
ACRE/
YEAR
EROSION
TEMPERATURE
CHANGE
NATURAL
FORESTS
(GRASSLANDS)
LOW
SMALL
.89
.089
.3
LOW
AGRICULTURE
(FARMS)
LOW
2.4-
24
.92-
3.88
HIGH
POTENTIAL
SMALL
FEEDLOTS
HIGH
VARYING WITH ANIMAL TYPE.
DENSITY & MANAGEMENT PRACTICES.
HIGH
POTENTIAL
SMALL
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
LOW-
MEDIUM
5.9
MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM
14.
COMMERCIAL
HIGH
43
INDUSTRIAL
VERY
HIGH
23.4
.6
2.5
2.4
3.3
.2
.67
1.3
.56
.6
2.1
3.9
1.7
VARIES WITH
DEGREE OF COVER
REMOVED AND
SURFACES HEATED.
(5° to 15°)
RESOURCE
EXTRACTION
VARIES WITH METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
RECREATION
VARIES WITH INTENSITY OF USE-EXTREMELY
SENSITIVE TO OVERUSE.
URBAN & ROAD
CONSTRUCTION
30,000-
150,000
TONS/ACRE
Source: Author's summary of statistics analyzed within text of this report.
-------
a. Quality Effects -- Since 1950, various investigators have shown an
increasing concern for the water quality impact of urban land use. Major
published studies in the United States include Detroit; Cincinnati; Atlanta;
San Francisco; Seattle; Tulsa; Columbia, Maryland; Ann Arbor, Michigan;
Durham, North Carolina; and the Santa Ana (groundwater) Watershed in
California. Foreign studies of note have been conducted in England, South
Africa, Sweden., Germany, and the Soviet Union. The planner may hope
that this previous work, much of which is excellent, might lead to a
magic wand for divining land use impacts on water quality. Unfortunately,
much of the impetus of previous studies has been towards ascertaining
the magnitude of the problem and not with establishing the linkages between
land use and poilutional loading. R. S. Wiebel has stated in his report on the
Cincinnati study, "it is obvious from the information obtained thus far
that urban storm runoff cannot be neglected in considering waste loadings
from urban sources. Information is needed on a variety of environments
over this country to guide us in estimating urban land runoff loadings, not
only because of the different topographical and land use variables, but also
because of the broad spread in climate and hydrology." (194).
The constituents of urban runoff present a varied picture. They range
from the standard biochemical oxygen demand to the toxic metals. Many
of the less studied pollutants are closely associated with man's transporta-
tion systems or his maintenance of them. In the snow regions, for example,
salt and other snow melt chemicals pose a seasonal problem. Studies
have indicated that salts applied to highways appears in runoff. A study (3)
in Chicago on the Kennedy Expressway indicates that greater than half
the salt applied is washed off. More specific information on effects of
de-icing is available in a recent EPA research report by the Edison Water
Quality Laboratory (47).
41
-------
The residue lead sprayed into the atmosphere by automobiles using leaded
gas causes not only air pollution problems, but also impacts the water
environment. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that in
1968, 181 tons of lead were emitted into the air by gasoline combustion.
This aerosol lead is then returned to the earth by atmospheric dustfall (21)
or rainwater washing.
Grease and oil serve as another source of environmental stress. These
pollutants not only produce unaesthetic responses in the stream, but they
also reduce light penetration, kill fish and other aquatic creatures, and
eventually exert a great oxygen demand.
The environmental effect of some contaminants is a function of both the
magnitude and form of the constituents. Nitrogen bound to hydrogen to
form the ammonia ion (NH«) has a different effect on the environment than
nitrogen in the form of the nitrate ion (NCO. The same is true of elemental
phosphorus and its compounds. Investigators report the nutrients, nitrogen
and phosphorus in various forms. The analysis techniques employed
predicate the degree of refinement in the reported results.
In order to attempt to establish urban pollution potential, the American
Public Works Association (3) on behalf of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration conducted a study of the amount and strength of
street litter found in selected urban areas of Chicago. In this research
the components of the litter are analyzed and the dry weight of soluble
pollutional material presented. The study presents the results in units of
pounds of soluble litter material, mainly dust and dirt, per hundred feet
of curbing. It is obvious that the strength of urban runoff is affected both
by land use and urban hygiene.
42
-------
Table 8 presents the load generating coefficients for four categories of
land use and the atmospheric loading factor for nitrogen. It is suggested
that subjective changes in the table are best reflected in the curb :factor or
in the curb loading factor. A study of dispersed pollution loads in Tulsa,
Oklahoma (27) presents the seasonal loading coefficients for twelve planning
areas of varying size and land use mix. Figure 4 depicts the relative
magnitude for each of the pollutional loads for each of the four land use
categories.
The atmospheric nitrogen loading of 5. 5 pounds per acre year (98)
is applied only to the impervious area in the planning region. This approach,
therefore, assumes that all the atmospheric nitrogen falling on impervious
areas' will become urban runoff in the course of a year. Table 9 gives
estimates of the runoff factor by land use to apply to the atmospheric nitrogen
load. When an area has mixed land use, the runoff factor is the weighted
average of the individual use factors.
Urbanization also affects the thermal properties of receiving waters.
Summer temperature rises of from 10 to 15° F have be'en predicted in
streams in areas undergoing urbanization (95). The causes are increased
temperature of urban runoff, the heating of shallow impoundments, and the
increased direct solar input caused by cutting away bank cover. Figure 5
shows the daily temperature change for a forested area after clear cut
logging: In the logging situation, new growth tends to shade and cool the
area. But in urban areas this growth may not be able to restore itself;
therefore, the change in the temperature regime is permanent. Before
clear cutting, the daily maximum temperature variation is 8° F. One
year after cutting the value of 8° F is exceeded 82 percent of the time.
These are the rates at which the pollution is generated for latter washoff.
Wash off rates are proportional to the incident rainfall and its runoff.
43
-------
TABLE 8
LAND USE LOAD GENERATING FACTORS
Land Use
Single Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Industrial
Atmospheric*
(1)
Curb Loading
Factor
Lbs/ 100 Ft/ Year
255.5
839.5
1204. 5
1677.0
N/A
(2)
Curb Factor
100 Ft. of
Curb/Acre
4. 65
4.65
4. 65
4. 65
N/A
(3)
Areal
Loading Rate
Lbs /Acre/Year
1188.
3904.
5601.
7798.
N/A
(4)
Constituent
Loading Rate -
Lbs/ 1000 Lbs of
BOD N
5.0 .48
3.6 .65
7.7 .42
3.0 .42
Lbs/Acre/Year
N/A 5.5
(3)
P°4
.50
.53
. 69
.22
N/A
^Factor applied to impervious acreage.
Source: American Public Works Association (3).
-------
Figure 4
Urban Storm Runoff LoadingTulsa, Oklahoma
45-
40-
35-
30 -
oc
UJ
cc
UJ
Q.
UJ
oc
o
cc
a
m
25-
20 -
15-
10 -
Land Use:
S - Single family
M Multiple family
C Commercial
I Industrial
Note: Based on area of
1 sq. mi. with a curb
factor of 465 ft/acre
SMC I
BOD
SMC I
N
SMC I
PCX.
Source: Cleveland, et al. Evaluation of Dispersed Pollution Loads
from Urban Areas (28)
-------
Figure 5
A Frequency Distribution of Diurnal Temperature
Changes on a Clear cut Watershed
t-
ui
o
IT
8!
o
UJ
§
UJ
c
D
O
O
ico
80
60
40
20
100
80
60
40
20
0
After Logging
1967
n I
Before Logging
1965
10 20
DIURNAL TEMPERATURE CHANGE. DEGREES F
Source: Studies on Effects of Watershed Practices on Streams, EPA Water Pollution Control
Research Series No. 13010 EGA, 1971
-------
TABLE 9
LAND USE RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS
Area Classification Runoff Coefficients
Business, Industrial and Commercial 0. 80 to 0. 90
Apartment House Areas 0. 65 to 0. 75
Residential (lots 10,000 sq. ft.) 0.40 to 0.50
Residential (lots 12, 000 sq. ft. ) 0. 40 to 0. 45
Residential (lots 17,000 sq. ft.) 0.35 to 0.45
Residential (lots 1/2 acre or more) 0. 30 to 0. 40
Source: Virginia Department of Highways ^ Drainage Manual
b. Hydro logic Effects --It has long been recognized that urban develop-
ment in a watershed causes change in the streamflow regimen. The urbani-
zation process produces four effects on the hydrology of the area. They
are:
(1) Changes in the peak flow characteristics
(2) Changes in the total runoff and frequency of flooding
(3) Possible reduction of groundwater recharge
(4) Enlargement and degradation of the stream channel
The two chief characteristics affecting the overland flow are the percent
imperviousness of an area and the percent of the area served by storm
water sewers. The first effect exhibited is an increase in the discharge of
an area after urbanization. Leopold (95) has compared studies by various
I investigators and related the ratio of post to pre-urbanization discharges
of the mean annual flood for various combinations of imperviousness and
storm sewers (see Figure 6). Studies have shown that a stream strives
to reach a state of equilibrium in its channel size. The actual discharge of
the average annual flood and other flows in the basin may be calculated by
employing hydrologic principles. If this is deemed necessary at the initial
47
-------
Figure 6
Effect of Urbanization on Mean Annual
Flood for a 1-Square-Mile Drainage Area
20 40 60 80
PERCENTAGE OF AREA IMPERVIOUS
100
Values of ratio =
discharge after urbanization
: ' ^^ i . i ii^^^^^^^^j.
discharge before urbanization
Source: Hydrology for Urban Land Planning, USGS Circular 554,1968
-------
planning level, the practitioner is referred to the U. S. Geological Survey
Circular, "Hydrology for Urban Land Planning . . . " (95).
Natural recharge to the groundswater occurs when a portion of precipitation
percolates downward through the permeable layers of the soil. The
effects of urbanization with its covering of the natural surface with man
made materials severly impedes any local recharge except by lateral
flow. In addition, the composition of the soil structures by more intensive
use of the surface retards infiltration to the underlying aquifers.
In many instances groundwater actually recharges surface streams.
Hydro legists call the groundwater contribution to streams the base flow.
During periods of dry weather a reduction in base flow is mirrored in the
reduction of streamflow with the corresponding increase in the pollutional
consequences attributable to low flows. In shoreline areas the groundwater
table acts as a buffer against the intrusion of salt water. A reduction in
recharge lowers the groundwater table and allows the sea to advance further
into the aquifers. This condition can have severe repercussions on ground-
water drinking water supplies.
A-stream responds to increased hydrologic loadings imposed by urbaniza-
tion by attempting to reestablish equilibrium flow conditions. This results
in stream enlargement as described by Hammer (73.). The effects are
presented as ratios of post to pre-development for various land uses in
Table 10. These ratios can be weighted for a land use mix to arrive at a
channel enlargement ratio for a planning area. Adjustment factors to the
enlargement ratio for (1) changes in watershed size, and (2) distance of
flow from the planning area to the stream under study are available in the
literature (73, 130 ). These adjustments are applied to the composite
ratio to arrive at a final ratio.
49
-------
TABLE 10
CHANNEL ENLARGEMENT EFFECTS OF LAND USES
IN A ONE SQUARE MILE BASIN
Land Use Type Effect -
Land in Cultivation . 1.29
Wooded Land .75
Land in Golf Courses 2. 54
Areas of Houses p> 4 Years Old, Fronting on
Sewered Streets . 2.19
Area of Sewered Streets ^ 4 Years Old 5. 95
Other Impervious Area "^ 4 Years Old 6. 79
Non-impervious Developed Land, Plus
Impervious Area > 4 Years Old and
Unsewered Streets and Houses 1. 08
Open Land (Residual Category) . 90
Post development channel size 4- predevelopment size (in terms of
cross-sectional area).
Source: Hammer (73).
2. Agricultural Drainage
The greatest potential for nutrient enrichment of the water environment lies
in agricultural drainage, for both surface and groundwater resources. The
problem of estimating the magnitude of the loadings is very complex. An
appreciation of these complexities may be garnered by looking at the
linkages between fertilizer, crops and pollution.
The virgin soil covering the United States contained over 10 billion tons of
organic nitrogen. Cultivation induced nitrification and the nitrate rapidly
leaked away. Farmers, in effect, have been mining the rich soils of
America and replacing the depleted stocks with fertilizer.
50
-------
It is the misuse of fertilizers which poses the great pollutional threat.
Each crop has an optimum amount of fertilizer for maximum yield, and
a time schedule on which the fertilizer should be applied. These factors
affect the end amount that goes to crop production and the portion that
goes to pollution. The natural disposition of the residual nutrients is
still under active investigation. The proportion that adheres to the soil,
leaches to groundwater, runs off to streams or returns to the atmosphere
remains in question.
For these reasons the planner must rely on ranges of values for agricultural
runoff. Table 11 presents the ranges found by Sylvester ( 9 ) and Witzel (208)
in studies in Washington State and Wisconsin. Subsurface flow relates to
that portion of the precipitation which percolates through the soil, or is
caught in drains under the farmland and returned directly to the surface
flow.
TABLE 11
AGRICULTURAL POLLUTIONAL LOADS
TOTAL N TOTAL P
(Lbs/Acre/Year) (Lbs/Acre/Year
Surface 2.45-28.3 0.68-3.99
Subsurface 38 -166 2.5 -8.9
Source: (9 and 208)
A second major source of agricultural loading is feedlots and other types
of animal production. In certain regions, this is a problem of considerable
magnitude and cannot be ignored. In 1967, feedlot operations were
responsible for 16 percent of the fish killed in the United States (96).
51
-------
It is possible to estimate the magnitude of the raw sewage generated by
livestock. A study by the EPA (37) determined the average pollutional
characteristics of animal wastes in pounds per animal per day. By
employing these estimates and the production figures for the animal
population, the total raw animal waste generated per year can be calculated.
However, Loehr (96) states that, "The amount of animal waste that is
retained on the land or reaches ground and surface waters is not well
documented/ It is incorrect to use the amount of waste defecated by an
animal to indicate the actual surface and ground water pollution that may
result. " The planner or engineer, thus, is left with the problem of
estimating the percentage of animal waste which will reach the groundwater
or receiving water. This has been studied in some detail, but there is no
simple, numerical method of estimating the general case. Another EPA
report (123) concludes that, "The extent of water pollution caused by farm
animal production units is more dependent on production and waste manage-
ment practices than on the volume of wastes involved." The key to this
problem is in proper regulation, which can insure, through insistence of
waste treatment or spreading, that little or none of the waste reaches the
surface water system.
Sediment is also a major pollutant arising from agricultural activity.
Studies indicate that better than half of the sediment load carried by the
streams of the nation is derived from agricultural erosion. This waste of
soil resources presents both a severe environmental stress and a great
economic loss.
The Soil Conservation Service estimates allowable soil loss rates from
agricultural activity. These tolerable rates are those at which the topsoil
is replaced for specific crops and soil types. In a given locality the
52
-------
planner may employ the services of the local soil conservation district
in order to ascertain the exact magnitude of the agricultural erosion in
the area.
3. Construction Runoff
Erosion from construction sites has long been recognized as a serious
problem, and many control measures have been developed, mostly on a
very local basis. Many factors contribute to the erodibility of an area.
They include the inherent erodibility of the soil (texture, structure,
organic content, permeability), as well as rainfall distribution and
intensity, soil cover, slope and conservation practices. A method
receiving widespread use to estimate gross erosion is the universal soil
loss equation ( 1 ),
A=RLSKCP
This equation expresses gross soil loss within a basin on a tons per acre
per year basis as a product of factors for: rainfall (R), slope length (L),
slope steepness (S), soil erodibility (K), cropping management (C), and
conservation practices (P). From this it can be seen that the same soils
in different parts of the country may exhibit different gross erodibility
due to different rainfall factors. The Dow Report (18) catalogs some gross
erosion rates for several land uses in various parts of the country. These
are reproduced in Table 12.
Therefore, for any planning area, a study of the local characteristics of
soil erodibility is indicated. Once this is done, "the universal soil loss
equation or similar techniques may be employed with the C value adjusted
to show construction activity. The effect of construction practices at
several sites in the Potomac area was studied by Wolman (210) and is shown
in Figure 7.
53
-------
TABLE 12
EROSION RATES REPORTED FOR
VARIOUS SEDIMENT SOURCES
Sediment
Source
Erosion Rate
ton/sq. mi. /year
Geographic Location
C omment
Natural
Agricultural
Urban
Highway
Construction
15-20
32-192
200
320
13-83
25-100
115
12,800
13,900
1,030
10,000-70,000
200-500
320-3,840
50 50,000
1,000-100,000
1,000
500
146
280
690
2,300
36,000
50,000-150,000
Potomac River Basin
Pennsylvania and
Virginia
Mississippi River
Basin
Northern Mississippi
Northwest New Jersey
Missouri Valley
Northern Mississippi
Northern Mississippi
Eastern U. S. Piedmont
Kensington, Maryland
Washington, D.C. Area
Philadelphia Area
Washington, D.C. Area
Watersheds
Fairfax Co., VA
Georgia
Native Cover
Native Cover
Natural Drainage
Basin
Throughout
Geologic History
Forested Watershed
Forest and Under-
Developed Land
Soils Eroding at the
Rate They Form
Loess Region
Cultivated Land
Pasture Land
Continuous Row Crop,
Without Conserva-
tion Practices
Farmland
Established as
Tolerable Erosion
Undergoing Extensive
Construction
Small Urban Con-
struction Area
750 Square Mile Area
Average
As Urbanization
Increases
Construction on
179 Acres
Cut Slopes
Source: Dow Chemical Corporation ( 18)
54
-------
Figure 7
Relationship of Drainage Area, Sediment Yield
and Construction Activity: Suburban Maryland
105
DC
>-
r-T
H
O
UJ
>
H
UJ
5
Q
UJ
C/5
10
10"
0.01
Watersheds Undergoing
Construction
O "Natural" Watersheds
0.1
km.'
0.01
0.1 1 10
DRAINAGE AREA
100
1000
Source: Water Resources Research, vol. 3, No. 2, 1967 (224)
-------
4. Resource Extraction
The need for metal, oil, coal and other minerals that feed the demands
of American consumption continues to grow. Since these resources are
necessary, the extraction processes involved must take place. Therefore,
the most important aspect of assessing the probable impact of resource
extraction land use is to know the level of service of controls that exist,
or are technologically feasible in each resource industry.
As with industrial pollution, it is a meaningless exercise to attempt to
generalize pollution parameters over the entire range of extraction pro-
cesses. However, the broad categories of resource extraction activities
and their possible areas of water quality degradation are cataloged below.
a. Dredging Processes
(1) Increased suspended soil content (turbidity)
(2) Increased BOD from benthic deposits
(3) Curtailment of recreational use
(4) Changes in river flow characteristics
b. Drilling Processes
(1) Runoff or washoff of spilled chemicals or drilling mud
(2) Spillage during transport of product
(3) Disposition of well field brines ,
c. Mining Processes
(1) Increased erosion
(2) Effluent from tailing ponds
(3) Acid drainage from shafts and pits
(4) Leaching from slag piles and tailings
(5) Runoff from tailings
In each case, the possible pollutional consequences should be studied on
a case specific basis. Remedies, in many cases, are "after-the-fact, "
and consist of the enhancement of a ruined stream, when the original
56
-------
state, with its attendant benefits, could have been preserved with little
or no additional long-term cost.
C. EFFECTS OF LAND USE WITHIN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE
AREAS
In considering any region for development, particular attention should
be focused on the environmentally sensitive areas and the impact of
development on them. The thrust of the previous sections has been
towards the appreciation of the conventional pollutional loadings generated
by man. Employing land in sensitive areas for development not only
removes any natural protection they might have had from man-imposed
pollution, but may also destroy the area for present or potential uses which
may have a higher social or economic value. Several categories of
sensitive areas are described below.
1. Flood Plains and Shorelines
The use of flood plains and low lying shoreline areas for development has
caused many economic losses as well as losses of life over the years.
It is now generally accepted that such development may be unwise and
needs control. Less well understood is the fact that flood plains function
as natural safety values and recycle centers. The storms which cause
flooding wash great quantities of sediment and nutrients into the streams.
When a river overflows its banks, the velocity usually decreases and the
nutrient-rich sediment settles out. As the river recedes, it leaves behind
the sediment load. Thus the flood plain has acted as a temporary storage
area for large volumes of water from which suspended solids have settled
to enrich the soil. Man's use of flood plains, including flood control mea-
sures, which dike off flood plain areas, subverts this natural role of the
low plains. The sediment remains in the river to build sandbars, fill lakes
and bury wetlands. Agriculture, open space, recreation, harbors, and
marinas are all land uses which can be compatible with flood plains.
57
-------
Shorelines represent one of the greatest recreational resources. Many
shoreline areas are dependent upon maintaining sand dune structures
as a defense against erosion by the sea. The strength of the dunes, in
turn, depends on the vitality of the plant communities which live upon it.
These plant associations need fresh water. The potential depletion or pollution
of the fresh groundwater resources of shoreline areas makes these areas
quite unsuitable for development.
2. High Erosion Areas
The erosional potential of any soil type increases with the slope of the
land and any disturbance of the stabilizing cover on steep slopes presents
a danger for excessive erosion. Variations due to soil type cannot be
generalized; each region has special features and the local office of the
Soil Conservation Service provides local data. However, any slopes greater
than 12-15 percent are identified as sensitive areas for planning. Such
steep lands can be employed for forestry, recreational use and, in certain
cases, isolated low density residential development. The amount of
erosion which is suspended as sediment is a function of watershed size.
Small watersheds contribute a greater portion of their eroded soil to the
waters passing through them. These watersheds are best left for recreational
use, institutional open space, or low density residential development.
Construction should take place only under the most stringent erosion
controls.
3. High Siltation Areas
The ability of the watercourse to carry sediment is a direct function of
the velocity in the stream. This is readily apparent when one considers
the sediment build-up where free flowing streams enter impoundments or
58
-------
where a stream channel widens. The velocity drops and the suspended
soil particles settle out. This points to two areas that are sensitive to
development. The first is small, sluggish streams that may well cease
to exist under heavy erosional pressure. The other is areas of free
flowing streams above an impoundment. Since these areas can
be large, they can hold a variety of land uses. The critical feature in
these areas is that erosion during the construction phase must be
strictly controlled.
4. Upper Tributary Areas
The generation and preservation of high quality surface water is a legitimate
land use goal. The natural forestlands of America yield essentially pollution-
free runoff. Even the mildest degradation in quality at these beginnings
has severe repercussions along the entire length of the rivers. Many
municipalities maintain forested areas to draw their water supplies from.
The savings in treatment costs are far greater than any realizable develop-
ment gains. These upper tributary areas should receive less pressure
for development and perhaps be left as natural open space for recreational
enjoyment.
5. Aquifer Recharge Areas
These areas are to groundwater what upper tributary areas are to surface
water. They are the major source of clean, unpolluted water for the
groundwater systems of the region. Development in these regions not only
presents possible pollutional sources to the groundwater, but also reduces
the amount of recharge reaching the aquifer system. Again, the reper-
cussions can be extensive including the lowering of the groundwater table,
the reduction of base flow to the streams and rivers, and, in coastal areas.
59
-------
the intrusion of salt water into the aquifer system. Development should
be carefully considered and major topographic changes avoided in recharge
areas.
6. Estuaries and Wetlands
Estuaries are river mouths where tidal action brings about a mixing of
salt and fresh water. Associated with the estuarine environment are
salt and fresh water coastal marshes. The inland wetlands are the fresh
water marshes, swamps and bogs.' The dredging and filling of estuaries
should be done only under the most carefully controlled conditions.
The coastal marshes should be reserved for natural open space and wild-
life habitats and the adjoining lands restricted to low density residential
development. Much inland wetland acreage that is developed is drained
for agricultural use. These inland areas serve a needed natural function;
as such, they should be used only for non-disruptive agriculture and
isolated urban development.
60
-------
CHAPTER III
EFFECTS OF WATER QUALITY ON LAND USE
The availability of adequate quantities of useable water is a necessity for
a wide range of residential, commercial, industrial, recreation and agri-
cultural land uses. To have access to a large river that is too polluted to
use is virtually the same as being in a water scarcity situation. Thus,
the extent of deterioration of the quality of water will affect the amount
of clean water that is available for beneficial use, and in turn will limit
the productive use of the land. To a large extent, the pattern and quality
of land use depends upon the extent to which wastewater discharges are
treated prior to entering the receiving water, the control of non-point
sources, and the provision of sewer services. This chapter discusses the
nature and degree of water quality and water quality management impacts
upon land use.
A. THE ROLE OF WATER QUALITY IN URBAN GROWTH
The National Water Commission found there is a definite interdependence
between the development of water and other resources. However, insofar
as stimulating urban growth is concerned, the provision of water in
sufficient quantity and quality does not necessarily appear to have any
greater effect than the other fundamental economic and location factors
requisite to economic growth (132). It is unlikely, for example, that the
instant enhancement of poor water quality of any city pursuing expanded
growth would significantly influence the existing growth rate. But the
instant demand of 25, 000 new workers may influence growth immediately.
On the other hand, if water pollution was at a level where the
receiving waters could not tolerate any additional sewage effluent dis-
charges, none of these workers could settle in the town until adequate
sanitation facilities could be provided. In other words, while adequate
water quality may not stimulate growth, growth clearly cannot occur without
it.
61
-------
B. WATER QUALITY AS A LAND USE DETERMINANT
1. Water Quality Effects on Industry
Industries rely upon water in several important ways, particularly as a
transportation avenue for raw materials and finished products, as a
source of water supply for processing and cooling, and as a receiver of
waste by-products. The quality of navigable waters has little impact on
accessibility of channels, shorelines or harbors. An exception would be
the extreme pollution of a navigation channel such as the Cuyohoga River
in Cleveland where heavy deposits of oils, chemicals and debris cause an
extreme fire hazard and excessive corrosion to ship and barge hulls and
wharfing facilities. The Mayor of Cleveland recently noted publicly that
the Cuyohoga was, "the only river in the country that constituted a fire
hazard. " In .fact, however, there may be others.
The major water-using industries are those that withdraw or consume
large quantities of water, or that add substantial pollution to streams. In
1965 about half of the nation's water withdrawals was for industrial pur-
poses, including cooling for power generation (5). It is estimated that at
least 73 percent of these withdrawals occur within metropolitan areas (166).
About 80 percent of the industrial water is used by five major industry
sectors: manufacturing, mining, mineral processing, ordinance, and
construction. Within manufacturing, the major users of water are primary
metals, food products, chemicals, paper products, and petroleum products.
Major water-using industries play a significant role in the U. S. economy.
Their combined activities accounted for about 37 percent of the total
national income and 29 percent of the total civilian labor force in 1965.
However, the cost of water supply or the cost of attaining or maintaining
62
-------
certain standards of water supply or wastewater discharges holds a lesser
role with respect to other costs such as raw materials or labor. Conse-
quently, with few exceptions, deterioration of the quality of water supply,
or the required upgrading of wastewater return flow does not have significant
impact on the character of industrial processes or pattern of industrial
development. Two reasons for this are:
a. Low grades of water may be used in many processes.
b. Costs to meet higher quality standards for process and
codling water often can be recouped through savings accrued
from reduction of total water used, recirculating, reuse of
captured waste by-products, or by passing costs on to the
consumer.
This is not to state that industry does not display quality preferences.
Table 13 depicts the preferred limits in some industries' processes.
2. Water Quality Effect on Agriculture
The most immediate impact of water quality on agriculture concerns the
quality of irrigation water. In the past, irrigation was largely confined
to the western states. Modern agricultural practices involving special
crops and farming techniques find irrigation becoming more widespread
throughout the country. The water applied to cultivated lands in the form
of irrigation water or precipitation follows three basic pathways. A portion
flows off the land as surface runoff, a portion is lost to surface evaporation,
and the remainder infiltrates the soil. A part of the infiltrated water is
consumptively used, a part held by the soil, and the remaining surplus, if
any, moves downward or laterally through the soil. The water retained
in the soil is commonly referred to as the "soil solution." This retained
water tends to become more concentrated with dissolved constituents as
relatively pure water is utilized by plants or lost by upward capillary
63
-------
TABLE 13
PREFERRED LIMITS FOR SEVERAL CRITERIA OF WATER USE IN
INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
Turbidity,
Aluminum (hydrate wash)
Baking
Boiler feed
0 to 150 psi
150 to 250 psi
250 to 400 psi
400 to 1000 psi
> 1000 psi
Brewing
Carbonated beverages
Confectionery
Dairy
Electropolating/finishing, rinse
Fermentation
Food canning and freezing
Food processing, general
Ice manufacturing
Laundering
Malt preparation
Oil well flooding
Photographic process
Pulp and paper
Groundwpod paper
Soda and sulfate pulp
Kraft paper
Bleached
Unbleached
Fine paper
Sugar manufacture
Tanning operations
Textile manufacture
max.
. 10
80
40
5
2
10
2
Low
10
10
Low
50
25
40
100
10
20
0.3
25
Color,
max .
10
10
10
None
10
Low
30
5
25
100
5
100
0
70
Taste
and H Dissolved
odor p Solids, Oxveen.
max. min. max. mg/1 max. ml/1
Low
Low
8.0 3000 <2
8.4 1500 <0. 2
9.0 2500 0
9. 6 50 0
< 0. 5 <0. 05
Low 6.5 7.0 1500
Low
Low 7.0 100
None 500
Low
Low
Low 7.5 850
Low
170 to 1300
6.0 6.8
Low
7.0
500
250
300
500
200
Low
6.0 8.0
Source: ASTM, Water Quality Criteria, Pub. #416, 1966.
-------
action and evaporation. The soil solution can only be rendered less saline
by dilution with fresh irrigation water or rain, and by downward leaching
of excess water.
Absolute limits to the permissible concentrations of salts in irrigation
water cannot be fixed, for several reasons:
a. It is almost universally true that the soil solution is at least
three to eight times as concentrated as the water that
replenishes it, because of the evaporation of water from the
soil surface, transpiration of plants, and the selective
absorption of salts by the plants.
b. There is apparently no definite relationship between the
concentration and composition of the irrigation water and those
of the soil solution, which in some cases may be as much as
100 times more concentrated than the water.
c. Plants vary widely in their tolerance of salinity, as well as of
specific salt constituents.
d. Soil types, climatic conditions (such as temperature, rainfall
and humidity), and irrigation practices may all influence the
reactions of the crop to the salt constituents.
e. Interrelationships between and among constituents may be
highly significant; the effect on one ion may be modified by
the presence of another.
A comprehensive description of the relationships among irrigation water,
soil, and crops is given in Agriculture Handbook No. 60 of the U. S.
Department of Agriculture.
Good drainage of the soil may be a more important factor for crop growth
than the salts in the irrigation supply. Even when excellent waters are
used, poorly drained land may sometimes cease to be productive, while
saline waters, on the other hand, may sometimes be used on open well-
drained soils (106).
65
-------
The concentration of salts in natural irrigation waters is rarely so high
as to cause immediate injury to crops. If leaching of the root zone does
not take place, however, the concentration of the soil solution at this
depth will increase with successive irrigations until it reaches the limit
of solubility of each salt. The solubility of many salts (such as borates,
chlorides, and sulfates of sodium and magnesium) is beyond the tolerance
limit of many plants; consequently, these salts may build up to toxic
concentrations. The slow filling of the soil with salts (resulting in the
production of highly concentrated soil solutions) will eventually force the
abandonment of an irrigated area. This action was probably the cause of
failure of many ancient irrigation systems.
Because of all the variables involved, the classification of waters for
irrigation use must be somewhat arbitrary and the limits set cannot be too
rigid. As general guidelines, the quality classifications employed in the
California Water Quality Criteria publication are suggested. These
classifications are:
Class I - Excellent to good, or suitable for most plants under
most conditions
Class II - Good to injurious, harmful to some under certain
conditions of soil, climate, practices
Clase III - Injurious to unsatisfactory, unsuitable under most
conditions
These classifications are based on the characteristics of water, which
have been accepted thus far as sufficient to determine its suitability for
irrigation. Table 14 shows the classification of irrigation waters sug-
gested by the California study.
The tolerance of animals to salt and other pollutants in water depends
on many factors, such as species, age, physiological condition, content of the
66
-------
TABLE 14
SUMMARY OF CLASSIFICATIONS OF IRRIGATION WATERS
% Na
Na X 100
Na + Ca + Mg + K
as meg per liter
I Less than 30-60%
(Most recent work
favors a 60% limit)
II 30-75%
05 III More than 70-75%
*meg/liter = mg/1 equi'valer
Chlorides
Boron, in mg/1 in meg/i*
Boron recommendation for water of this Less than 2-5.5
class is generally accepted as less than
0.5 mg/1; however tolerant plants will
not be injured by 1-1.5 mg/1.
0.5-2.0 mg/1, although for tolerant . 2-16
plants water with boron up to 3.35 mg/1
may be satisfactory.
More than 2 mg/1, although water with More than 6-16
more than 1.0 may be highly unsuitable
for sensitive plants
mg/1 CT
it weight, for example, meg/1 of Cl 35' 5'
Salinity
(Soil Solution)
EC X 10° at 25° C.
Sul fates Specific conductivity
in meg/1* (Concentration of ions)
Less than 4-10 Earlier papers suggested
limit of about 500, but
more recently 1000 has
been accepted.
4-20 500-3000
More than 12-20 More than 2500-3000
Total sal
in mg/1
Up to about 7
350-2100
More than 175i
2100
Source: Water Quality Criteria, California State Water Control Board, 1963.
-------
feed, as well as the kinds and amounts of salts. Apparently, animals can
toletate more salt than can humans and vary in tolerance to different
substances. There is also evidence that they can, within limits, adjust
to saline waters.
3. Effect of Water Quality on Recreation Land Uses
Recreational use of water refers primarily to such activities as swimming,
wading, water skiing, skin diving, boating, marinas, shoreline activities,
aesthetic enjoyment and fishing. Of all beneficial uses of water, perhaps
the least progress in establishing water quality standards has been made
in recreational use. Water quality criteria for recreational uses have
been limited and either very general and qualitative in nature, or
quantitative, based on arbitrary assumptions. The plight of water
t
recreation was summed up concisely in a recent National Technical
Advisory Report (121), as follows: .
"Recreation uses of water in the United States have historically
occupied an inferior position in practice and law relative to other
uses.
Where maintenance of recreation quality water placed no signifi-
cant burden on other water users, recreation has customarily
been considered an appropriate use. If other uses degraded quality
below recreational quality, the recreation user has usually been
expected to seek alternative waters, a task constantly rendered
more difficult by rapidly expanding urbanization and
industrialization.
The reasons for these priorities in the uses of water are found in
the transition from an agrarian to an industrial and urban society.
Now the nation faces a new order of social problems, including,
for the first time in history, a serious concern for the creative
uses of the increasing amounts of leisure available to our people.
Today there is a growing realization that recreation is a full
partner in water use; one that, with associate services, represents
a multi-million dollar industry with substantial prospects for
future growth as well as an important source of psychic and
physical relaxation. "
68
-------
Due to a paucity of quantitative data on water quality criteria for the
protection of recreational use of water, the effects of potential pollutants
are assessed in a qualitative manner. It should be acknowledged,
however, that the setting of limits on parameters describing minimum
desirable water quality for recreational uses is difficult because of
variations in many of these parameters, due solely to natural causes.
The management of water for aesthetic purposes must be planned and
executed in the context of land use, shoreline, and the water surface.
Table 15 reflects some recent thinking with respect to water quality
criteria for the protection of various uses of recreational waters.
However, any localized analysis of water quality Impacts upon recreation
should be based on established water quality standards.
The recreational use of water for sport fishing can be severely retarded
by poor water quality. Studies of the effects of various pollutants on fish
and other aquatic life far exceed the references to those pertaining to
other beneficial uses of water. Criteria, first presented by Ellis in the
report, "Water Purity Standards for Fresh-Water Fishes," ( 48 ) propose
the following optimal limits:
Dissolved oxygen, not less than 5 mg/1.
pH, approximately 6.7 to 8.6, with an extreme range of
6.3 to 9.0.
Specific conductance at 25 C, 150 to 500 mho x 10 ,
with a maximum of 1000 to 2000 moh x 10"^ permissible for
streams in western alkaline areas.
Free carbon dioxide, not over 3 cc per liter.
Ammonia, not over 1.5 mg/1.
Suspended solids such that the millionth intensity level for
light penetration will not be less than 5 meters.
In the absence of toxic substances or pollutants, the water described
above is favorable, and not merely sub-lethal, for a mixed warm-water
69
-------
TABLE 15
TENTATIVE GUIDES FOR EVALUATING RECREATIONAL WATERS
Water-Contact
Boating and Aesthetic
-o
o
Determination
Conforms, MPN/100 ml
Visible solids of sewage origin
ABS (detergent), mg/1
Suspended solids, mg/1
Floatable oil and grease, mg/1
Emulsified oil and grease, mg/1
Turbidity, silica scale units
Color, std. cobalt scale units
Threshold odor number
Range of pH
Temperature, maximum C
Transparency, Secchi Disk, ft
Noticeable
Threshold
1000^'
none
11
J
4 1
20!/
,4 /
ioi/
- 1
ioi/
' 10T/
is!
32i/
6.5-9.0
39
Limiting
Threshold
2
none
_ i
£/
100
5
20
50
100
256
6. 0-10.0
50
Noticeable
Threshold
-
none
*?
20l/
oi;
2°T
201
15!
32l/
6. 5-9. 0
30
20
Limiting
Threshold
-
none
5
100
10
50
3
100
256
6. 0-10. 0
5°3/
O 1
Value not to be exceeded in more than 20 percent of 20 consecutive samples, nor in any three
consecutive samples.
2/
No limiting concentration can be specified on basis of epidemiological evidence, provided no fecal
pollution is evident.
3 /
No concentration likely to be found in surface waters would impede use.
Note: Noticeable threshold represents level at which people begin to notice and perhaps to complain.
Limiting threshold is level at which concentrations prohibit or seriously impair use of water for
recreation.
Source: McGauhey, P.H., Engineering Management of Water Quality, McGraw-Hill, 1968.
-------
fish population and its food organisms. It must not, however, be
assumed that fish are not found or cannot survive in waters with concen-
trations beyond these limits. In addition to the above criteria, water
temperature must also be considered. Table 7 in Chapter II describes
provisional maximum recommended temperatures for various species.
Some researchers in this area have concluded that the public health
basis upon which water quality standards and criteria are largely based
is not adequate for protecting recreation and aesthetic values of water
(46). Insofar as the value of water for recreational use and aesthetic
enjoyment are functions of human motivation and attitudes, more research
is needed to develop a set of psychological standards for water quality (50).
The economic consequences of the loss of recreational land due to
polluted water were highlighted by a study of the Lake Erie Basin by the
U. S. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation which concluded that control of
pollution in presently affected areas would increase swimming by six
million activity days annually (177). Table 16 shows the dollar values
associated with opening beach areas closed by poor water quality. This
report states:
"If the water quality of the lake (Lake Erie) and its tributaries
were improved, public agencies would be more prone to consider
additional beach development. As an example, the City of Toledo
with more than 300, 000 people is adjacent to the shores of Lake
Erie and has no public swimming facilities along the shore. There
is little inclination to provide swimming facilities under present
water quality conditions. Under suitable water quality conditions,
public pressure could very well cause such facilities to be provided.
The Cleveland Regional Planning Commission estimates the four
county areas of Cuyohoga, Lorain> Lake, and Geauga will need 81
additional acres of beach by 1970. Emphasis could be placed on
acquisition along the Lake Erie shore if water quality were improved
to permit swimming in areas acquired. "
71
-------
TABLE 16
ESTIMATED INFLUENCE OF WATER QUALITY ON
SWIMMING ACTIVITY AT PUBLIC BEACHES
LAKE ERIE BASIN
(STATED IN DOLLAR VALUES)
Estimated swimming activity at public
beaches (1963) $16,455,000
Estimated swimming activity at public beaches which
frequently exhibit poor water quality and should
be closed (1963) $ 780,000
Estimated swimming activities without water quality
improvement- $15,675,000
Increase in swimming activity with improved
water quality .
Reopening of closed beaches $ 1, 325, 000
Increased participation by present patrons $ 2, 640, 000
Increased attendance participation $ 2, 625, 000
Total increase $ 6,590,000
Estimated swimming activity with improved water
quality . $23, 045, OOP
Annual loss without improved conditions and
with enforcement $ 7,370,000
Source: U. S. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Water Oriented Outdoor
Recreation -- Lake Erie Basin, Ann Arbor, Michigan, August 1966,
p. 9-9.
72
-------
4. Effect of Water Quality on Land Values
The quality of water can affect land values in a variety of ways. Enhance-
ment of river or lake waters enhances the value of adjacent land. While
the provision of sewer services generally enhances land value, the stigma
of a nearby sewage treatment plant may degrade property value. It is
clearly evident from observing the pattern and character of urban develop-
ment that a corresponding relationship exists between high water quality
and healthy urban environments from an economic, social and ecologic
viewpoint. Similarly, poor water quality is typically associated with
deteriorated or even blighted waterfronts. Human activity generally tends
to avoid contact or proximity to water of poor quality.
For the most part, however, little attention has been given to measuring
or studying these relationships except for the public health aspects upon
which the early attempts at setting water quality standards were based.
In the case of the economic impact of water quality on land values, only a
few relatively isolated case studies are available which have inquired into
this relationship.
Poor water quality particularly affects land values for residential and
recreational land uses. Concerned citizens, particularly homeowners
adjacent to polluted rivers and lakes, are increasingly organizing political
pressure to initiate water clean-up efforts. Pressures are being brought
to bear on both the local polluters and enforcement agencies.
A study by Beyer (12) states that homeowners along a clean section of the
Rockaway River in New Jersey generally considered the presence of the
river to add value to their homes, while the majority of homeowners
along a polluted river section considered the river's presence detrimental.
-------
Realtors interviewed during this study all agreed that polluted water tends
to affect the value of neighboring real estate. One realtor speculated that,
if the river were cleaned up, property values could immediately rise by
10-20 percent. A study of Lake Onandega, New York, estimates a land
value appreciation rate of approximately 200 percent if the water quality
level of a nearby lake were equalled (Benefits of Water Quality Enhance-
ment, EPA Project #16110DAJ: Dec. , 1970).
An estimate made by a Corps of Engineers study suggests that improved
water quality could drive the price of waterfront property upward by as
much as 13 percent. In the Nashua River Basin of New Hampshire, it is
estimated that improved water quality would thus enhance the real estate
value by nearly $7 million (71).
Coughlin and Hammer (32) have pointed out that there are a host of inter-
acting variables which must be considered in determining land value along
a given body of water, including several factors pertaining to water
pollution control. Results from their analysis suggest that houses near
streams with good water quality are perceived as being worth between "a
little more" and "much more" because of their closeness to a stream.
The probability of believing that one's house is worth more because of the
closeness of the stream, they conclude, is 0. 2 for the cleanest streams
and 0. 025 for the dirtiest. The relationship is clear: high water quality is
perceived as having a positive effect on land and housing value.
C. EFFECT OF WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT ON LAND USE
The preceding section explored some of the significant impacts water
quality may have on particular land uses. This section explores the
impacts of specific water quality management measures, such as inter-
ceptor sewer extensions and the location of treatment plants. The pro-
vision of wastewater services may impact the land uses they are designed
to serve. They may also encourage the proliferation of sprawl
74
-------
and accelerate growth rates. It is, therefore, important that the predictable
nature of these impacts be anticipated in comprehensive metropolitan area
planning as well as in the formulation of criteria and standards by which
these services and management measures are planned arid administered.
The following impacts are considered herein:
Impacts of interceptor sewers.
Impacts of treatment plants.
Impacts of sewer connection policies.
Second cycle pollution.
While there is not a great amount of data available to accurately assess
the magnitude of these impacts, it is clear that the provision of sewer
services and the initiation of certain water quality management strategies
raises land use issues which must be given close consideration. Such
issues range in significance from small scale site impacts to large scale
regional influences. Where applicable, the following discussion will cite
impact examples and cases where land use policy and sewer service
policy have been interrelated.
1. The Impact of Interceptor Sewers on Land Use
The pattern, density and timing of urban development is closely related
to the placement of interceptor sewers. Other factors are obviously
critical to urban expansion (i. e. , water, schools, land prices, access,
etc. ) but major sewer lines do play a lead role in making urban develop-
ment possible where it could not occur before. Furthermore, services
other than sewers tend to be more easily extended in response to economic
pressures because they are less limited by topography and are of lower
capital cost.
75
-------
Due in great part to the historic absence of coordination between sewer
authorities and comprehensive planning agencies, interceptors have often
been constructed in locations where induced land development was out of
scale with other existing or planned services. The typical situation has
been a suburban area which requires public sewer services due to
increasing land development pressures and the inadequacy of on-site or
package plant disposal systems. In the tradition of a public utility (i. e. ,
"services must be supplied wherever there is a demand"), an interceptor
system is extended. For efficiency reasons, the interceptor is designed
with enough capacity to serve the maximum service-area population,
which is more likely to be based upon trend-extension forecasts than
upon land use plans. Several negative impacts may then result. The
land use impacts fall into two basic categories: growth inducement, and
degradation of impacted natural environments.
a. Growth Inducement -- As with freeway construction, major sewer
lines have a tendency to become self-fulfilling prophecies. That is, an
interceptor tends to induce the amount of development which was its
original premise for construction. Not only does capacity get met and
often surpassed (i. e. , due to density-increasing zoning changes), but
the rate of development is escalated. A 20-year design capacity is often
consumed in half that time. With the trend toward regional sewer
systems, this growth inducement impact could become even more severe.
(1) In some cases, the construction of large interceptors threatens
to impose growth on jurisdictions which are ill-equipped to
provide services and to control land development. For example,
there is a firm plan to run an interceptor from Detroit straight
north to the town of Romeo. An existing water quality manage-
ment plan specifies long-term facility construction, but there
is some concern that land use planning will not precede con-
struction. In that event, a development boom could hit the
undeveloped, unprepared areas between Romeo and the growth
fringe of the Detroit Metropolitan Area.
-------
(2) An impact which has received little previous attention is the
runoff pollution which can be the result of extending new inter-
ceptor lines. In erosion-prone areas, water quality planners
may be trading off sanitary sewage problems for large amounts
of construction-related sedimentation and stream bank erosion.
In Atlanta it is estimated that construction of a proposed contro-
versial interceptor sewer (42 to 72 inches) would induce sub-
stantial new development in a large, relatively undeveloped
service area. While the new interceptor would help solve the
existing pollution problems caused by inefficient package plants,
it is argued that the new induced development will generate
large amounts of runoff pollution.
In view of the growth inducement potentials of many current grant applica-
tions, consideration is being given by federal agencies to the adoption of
policies which would discourage the giant-step design approach which has
characterized interceptor sewer planning. Such policies would encourage
incremental construction and discourage sewer lines from traversing large
expanses of open land.
b. Degradation of Impacted Natural Environments -- The construction
of a large interceptor can also affect the land resources near the facility
sites such as stream bank cover, vegetal and wooded growth along right-of-
way, recreation areas and unique natural areas. These impacts upon the
natural environment's protective systems are generally both direct and
secondary.
Directly, facility construction can generate stream-smothering erosion
and can result in the denuding of stream banks. The destruction of foliage,
results in a reduction of the flood plain's ability to filter but impurities
and to reduce runoff velocity.
Interceptors which are placed in close proximity to parks and natural
areas can have severe secondary impacts in terms of the induced urban
development.
77
-------
(1) The previously mentioned interceptor in Atlanta threatens
a proposed park area in this manner. The encirclement of
this park with development would not only diminish the
feasibility of preservation but also cause imbalance in the
park's ecologic processes due to drainage modifications,
runoff pollution, construction damages and overusage.
(2) A similar situation exists in Flint, Michigan, where an inter-
ceptor along the Flint River was planned through a heavily
forested park. In that case, however, public pressure caused
the sewer to be rerouted in order to preserve the ecological
uniqueness of the park.
Interceptors, since they normally follow low areas such as stream valleys,
can also place increased development pressure on the flood plains. With-
out some type of limitation on sewer connections for flood plain properties,
stream buffers can be partially or completely eliminated.
It is of some significance to note that stringent environmental impact assess-
ment procedures are now required for highway routes passing through or
near public parks, and nature preserves (Section 4 (f) of the Department of
Transportation Act, as amended). The essence of this policy is that no
highway route affecting a 4 (f) property will be approved so long as there
are alternative routes which avoid such lands. In spite of the fact that
parks and open space are equally favored for sewer rights-of-way (due '
in part to topography and desire to avoid social disruption) and that inter-
ceptor sewers are comparable growth stimulators, no such similar policy,
other than NEPA requirements, has been formulated to reduce the park
impacts of sewers.
c. Efforts Toward Coordination --If the extension of major sewer trunks
into new service areas serve as such a dominant influence upon the timing,
shape and density of growth it would seem logical that better formulated
sewer policies could be used as a powerful tool in implementing land use
plans. This subject has received a great deal of attention in recent years,
mostly at the theoretical level of discussion.
78
-------
Canadian examples are often cited where growth is controlled through the
provision of water and sewer facilities. The Province of Ontario imposed
controls governing land use and population density on its 900-odd com-
munities through giving or withholding permission to localities for water
and sewage systems. Metropolitan Toronto is committed to the develop-
ment of major interceptors as a first step in providing services to areas
planned for growth. The Toronto experience, however, is an exception to
the way growth generally occurs in the United States. For instance, the
limit of Toronto area growth is set by the province, as opposed to the local
autonomy prevalent in the United States.
In the United States, few states seem to be prepared to take such com-
paratively drastic measures (98). Until recently, there was skepticism
held by many that local government could effectively exercise any controls
beyond traditional zoning powers. Walker and Wengert concluded from a
study of Detroit that "water supply policy is a very weak weapon in the
struggle for more rational land use" . . . and "it is futile to expect to do
indirectly what cannot be done directly. " (21 i) Moreover, in the United
States there have been relatively few "major" interceptors constructed in
wastewater management systems at a time or scale adequate to affect growth.
Interceptors have usually been constructed after substantial growth has
occurred. They are constructed to collect or link the web of smaller sewer
systems that have crept out into the expanding suburbs on an incremental
fashion.
Today, however, with greater interest in water quality and in reducing the
amount of development dependent upon private package plants and septic
systems, there is a growing list of regional scale sewage systems and inter-
ceptors. The availability of increased federal cost sharing, of course, has
also given impetus to the expanded scale of planning and construction.
79
-------
While some metropolitan areas are in the process of evolving coordinated
sewer and land use policies, two particularly interesting examples are
the Lexington, Kentucky, and Washington, D.C. metropolitan areas. The
following discussion elaborates on these two case examples.
(1) Several years ago, Lexington, Kentucky, established an
urban/rural service area plan. Under the urban service
area concept, practically all new urban-type development
is located inside the urban service area. The urban service
area forms a ring around the built-up area of Lexington,
presently encompassing an area of 73 square miles. The
remaining 210 square mile portion of Fayette County --
within which Lexington is located -- is designated as a rural
service area, and is to remain undeveloped or agricultural
in character.
The major intent of the urban service area is to concentrate
urban development within a controlled space so as to prevent
sprawled or scattered development and attendant higher costs
for services. For instance, installation of water lines large
enough for fire hydrants (6-inch or 8-inch) cost roughly
$33, 000 per mile in the area. Obviously, per capita costs
would be extremely high if this service were provided on a
scattered basis.
The urban service area has undergone only three major changes
since its establishment in 1958. Expansions of the urban
service area are based upon careful analysis of topography,
soil conditions, and generally follow drainage basin areas in
order to maintain continuity of water and sewer services.
Since 1958, only seventeen requests have been made to zone
land within the rural service area for urban activities. Four
of these were for special travel support facilities, and were
approved. Of the other 13 requests, eight were disapproved,
one was withdrawn, and only four were approved.
In administering zoning and subdivision regulations within
the urban service area, the supply of utilities is the basic
determinant of the areas to be opened to development. If
the provision of services is too difficult, out of phase, or
otherwise too costly, approval may be postponed or denied
until services can be effectively and efficiently extended.
80
-------
(2) Prince George's County, encompassing the southeastern
portion of the Washington, D. C. metropolitan area, uses the
provision of sewer and water facilities as one of the primary
implementation measures for the County's proposed "staging
policy. " The staging policy is formulated by the County, in
close cooperation with the Maryland National Capital Park
and Planning Commission and the Washington Suburban Sanitary
Commission.
The staging policy indicates the areas and sequence of growth
over the next ten years and where public utility and service
agencies should concentrate their expenditures. It is formulated
to phase new growth in conjunction with existing sewer and
water service capacities and rational extensions of these
services in conformance with the comprehensive general plan.
Maryland state law requires Prince George's County to submit
annually to the State Department of Health comprehensive
master plans for the construction of basic water and sewerage
facilities. The state law requires the counties to define their
"goals, purposes, and concepts for future development" as a
basis for preparing the Ten-Year Water and Sewerage Plan.
The Sanitary Commission prepares for the county a Ten-Year
Water and Sewer Plan which is subsequently submitted to
the State Department of Health in compliance with the law.
The Ten-Year Water and Sewer Plan is designed to serve the
new areas to be developed as delineated in the staging policy.
In the water and sewer plan, precise system area maps
delineate the sequence whereby water and sewer facilities
would be provided over the next ten years. Thus, the pro-
vision of water and sewer services becomes a major controlling
factor for enabling new areas to be opened up for development.
The premises for this staging policy are as follows:
(a) Public services and facilities can be provided most
efficiently and economically if development occurs in
a compact manner and a logical sequence.
(b) Through effective coordination of zoning actions,
subdivision actions, and the extension of sewer lines,
development can be shaped as contemplated in the
general plan; namely, into a radial pattern of urbanized
corridors defined by controlled open space wedges.
81
-------
While the staging policy has not yet been officially adopted
at this writing, its principles have been reflected in the
current Ten-Year Water and Sewer Plan and recent county
development decisions. It is believed that the policy will
be officially adopted in early 1973 with slight amendments
to the draft as shown.
2. The Impact of Treatment Plants on Land Use
In terms of areawide impact, new or expanded sewage treatment plants
can have the same secondary land use effects as interceptor sewers.
Increased sewage treatment capacity can reinforce or support undesirable
growth patterns by extending service to areas which have inadequate
services and facilities for full urban development, are environmentally
sensitive to increased development, or are ill-equipped for land use
control.
Of course, where land use and sewer service policies are well coordinated,
the reverse impacts can be expected. In such cases, the treatment plant
capacity and capacity staging can encourage growth where desired and dis-
courage it where negative impacts could be expected.
The remainder of this section is devoted to a discussion of the direct land
use impacts caused by the location, siting, design, construction, and
operation of sewage treatment plants. In both urban and rural settings,
the location of a new treatment plant or an expanded treatment plant tends
to be an intrusion into the existing environment. The facility may obstruct
natural views, interrupt the continuity of the landscape by its structure
and form, disturb the natural terrain, reduce water-based recreation
opportunities, impact land values, or create scars due to construction
and excavation during the site preparation process. Most of the negative
impacts which have been experienced around sewage treatment plants have
82
-------
been the result of either narrowly formulated location studies or inadequate
anticipation of future expansion needs.
a. Impacts Upon Downstream Land Uses -- One of the common problems
with existing sewage treatment plants is the location of their discharge
points vis-a-vis other land uses which depend upon use of the same
receiving water body. The placement of treatment plants within or up-
stream from public parks has been one of the most notorious examples of
incompatibility. Not only have sewage treatment plants degraded the
stream quality within parks and caused noxious odors, but they also have
introduced visual barriers and blockages of physical access along stream
corridors.
To a lesser extent, other water-using land uses such as water supply
treatment plants and industries have also been impacted by the locations of
sewage treatment plants.
b. Aesthetic Impacts -- In the planning of sewage treatment plants,
adequate attention has often not been given to the compatibility of the
plant with the land uses which are adjacent to it. Little attention has been
given to landscaping improvements and architectural design as a means of
reducing some of the aesthetic and/or psychological impacts caused by
the presence of a plant. In residential areas, new or expanded treatment
plants have often adversely affected the stability of surrounding property
values. Real estate sales representatives commonly report, for instance,
the lots in housing tracts with overlooks to a conventionally constructed
sewage treatment plant are difficult, and often the last, to sell. While the
costs of such lots may be only shaved a small amount from similar lots
with unobstructed views, buyers clearly demonstrate resistance to buying
such lots. Technologically, aesthetically, and functionally it is possible
83
-------
to plan and design treatment plants that are compatible. The costs and
expertise involved in achieving such compatibility have often blocked
progress in this area.
c. Odor Impacts -- One of the most common problems encountered in
local reaction against treatment plants involves the stigma created by
odors emanating from the plants. The public has come to generally
distrust sewage treatment plants. Poorly operating treatment plants,
giving off bad odors, are remembered much more vividly than large
plants that run well.
Treatment plant odors under normal operating practices are minor and
can be controlled within the confines of the treatment plant. However,
odors do get out of control when treatment plant operation is inefficient,
plant capacity has been exceeded, or toxic industrial wastes are dis-
charged into the system.
d. Construction Impacts -- Surrounding land uses are also impacted during
the treatment, plant construction or enlargement process. These impacts
include the displacement of previous land uses, the destruction of natural
ground cover, the generation of sheet erosion, noise, and general dis-
ruption to street transportation and community activity during construction.
Overall, the record of compatibility for sewage treatment plants has
not been good. They can be done better through improved pre-planning
and project evaluation procedures. Treatment plants can be made un-
obstrusive to the natural landscape and the urban environment with proper
site design, architectural treatment, and landscaping. Unfortunately,
where this has been done effectively, it is an exception rather than the
rule. Only by providing more successful examples will the stigma of
sewage treatment plants be minimized within the public's perception.
84
-------
3. The Impact of Sewer Connection Policies on Land Use
The effectiveness of sewer connection bans, moratoria, and limitations
are being explored in several communities as a means of throttling sewer
system overloads. For example, bans and limitations have been issued
in Fairfax, Montgomery, Prince George's and Prince William Counties
in the Washington metropolitan area, and in the entire state of Florida
where adequate treatment is not available to handle generated wastewater.
Such bans can slow down development either immediately or over a period
of time.
An association of home builders in Montgomery and Prince George's
Counties prepared a report (20). on the impact which the sewer moratorium
will have. The report predicts the following possible impacts of the
moratorium in the suburban Maryland portion of the Washington, D. C.
metropolitan area due to decrease in construction activity:
Reduction of Area Economic Output. Based on an interindustry
model of the State of Maryland, the reduction of new construction
investment would have a negative multiplier effect of 2. 21 in
total economic output. This effect would be somewhat mitigated
because of the localized nature of the moratorium. The report
notes that service business to the construction industry would
be the hardest hit.
Loss of Income. Loss of income would amount to eight percent
of the Gross Local Product of the two counties.
Elimination of Smaller Construction Firms. Smaller sized
construction firms operating primarily in the areas subject
to sewer moratorium will likely go out of business because of
lack of adequate financial resources to move to other areas.
Even larger firms that have committed to large complexes
may face such problems if alternative sites cannot be found
elsewhere.
Restriction of New Industrial Growth. New industrial growth
will be curtailed because of lack of capacity to dispose of
industrial wastes and to handle residences stimulated by new
employment.
85
-------
Population Decrease. The squeeze of employment loss and
increased housing costs will force middle and low income
people from the area.
Hardship on Middle and Low Income Families. The rising
value of existing housing will limit the supply of low and
middle income housing, forcing the counties into a "rigid
demographic profile. "
Decline in Tax Revenues. The increase in assessed valuation
for existing land and improvements will probably not produce
enough revenue to offset the decline from assessments which
would have come from new development. (The Tax Appeals
Courts in Montgomery and Prince George's Counties are
granting a 25 percent reduction of the assessed value of
unimproved land when a letter from the sanitary commission
substantiates that the property is precluded from development
because of the sewer moratorium. In some cases, the Tax
Appeals Courts have granted up to 75 percent reduction in
assessed value of a piece of property. The number of appeals
for reassessment because of the moratorium has not been
great because the general public is not yet fully aware of the
ruling. It is anticipated, however, that the total reduction of
assessed value of all affected unimproved land will be about
25 percent, meaning about a 2 percent reduction in total county
tax revenues.)
It does seem clear that the construction industry in these counties may suffer
until the sewer and treatment plant deficiencies can be corrected. However,
the net economic and land use impact on the area should be measured in
terms of the saving gained through moving toward more efficient services
as deficiencies are met and capacity for new construction is developed.
For example, projections in the aforementioned homebuilder's report
were based on the probability of construction stopping completely --
which is not the case. Moreover, no mention was made of the problems
of perpetuating higher sewer costs due to sprawled or scatterd develop-
ment, as has been prevelant throughout most of the area. Conspicuous
inadequacies such as these make it quite difficult to assess the validity
of conclusions drawn.
86
-------
Overall, it appears that limiting permits for sewer connection may con-
tribute to at least temporary relief from system overload conditions.
However, the method of ordering such limitations as well as the potential
side effects requires close attention.
While the issuance of moratoria is usually based on an immediate water
quality problem/ the slow-down in development and new hookups is often
delayed by attempts to be fair to the builders already having approved
permits and authorizations. This problem can only be overcome by either
revoking permits where they have been issued but not yet utilized, or by
issuing sewer bans several months prior to system overload.
Because sewer moratoria alter the supply component of the housing market,
housing shortages and inflated housing prices can result within high growth
areas, as depicted in the following diagram:
Over-Taxed'Sewage Treatment System
Water Pollution
Imposition of Building Ban
I
Decrease in Housing Construction
1
Housing Demand Unmet by Supply
I
Higher Housing Prices
87
-------
It is also important to recognize that the issuance of such orders slows
down construction of both bad and good development. Planned unit
developments, innovative low and moderate income housing programs and
new towns will be discouraged as much, or more, by an interrupted
building cycle as traditional housing projects. The potential effect of
Fairfax County's sewer tap allocation formula (i. e. , "first-come, first-
served") on the new town of Reston, Virginia, is a case in point.
Finally, the issuance of selective construction moratoria, if not coordinated
on an area'wide scale, can shift the burden of growth to jurisdictions which
are, or will be, equally strained to meet growth requirements. The net
result may only be a shift of pollution problems to other treatment plants.
4. Second Cycle Pollution
Successful clean-up of polluted waters may also induce uncontrollable
growth as well as adverse land uses along river corridors and on lake
shore lands that defeat the purpose of the initial clean-up effort. Com-
munities which have succeeded in cleaning up their waters often experience
an onslaught of sudden and unplanned development. Accompanying this
new growth is a recurrence of pollution and ecological damage which
equals or surpasses that prior to clean-up. This new phenomenon has
been termed "second cycle" pollution. The occurrence of second cycle
pollution seems somewhat inevitable as long as development is permitted
to proceed haphazardly following a clean-up effort.
Increasingly, water quality management specialists are noting the dangers
and complexities of this second cycle phenomenon in both metropolitan and
rural areas.
88
-------
a. The Metropolitan Second Cycle -- The land development inducements
generated by improved sewage treatment plants and the expansion of sewer
interceptor sewers have been discussed earlier. Without proper planning
and controls, such quantum changes in service capacity can lead to develop-
ment conditions which cycle back to overloaded wastewater facilities. The
"giant step" expansion of sewer service districts can result in more of the
same problem namely, rapid growth of point waste loads -- and can also
produce new problems in the form of non-point loads. A prime case in
point is Illinois1 modern Hanover sewage treatment plant which in 1970 was
considered one of the most advanced in the country. Explosive growth in
the plant's service area has saturated its capacity, caused it to become an
environmental nuisance and forced a sewer connection moratorium (40).
In anticipation of potential growth inducement and second cycle pollution,
Fairfax County, Virginia, recently decided not to apply for federal and
state aid for sewer program improvements in the 1975-1976 fiscal year.
Improvements were opposed on the grounds that the increased capacity
would open the County to a "flood of 330, 000 new residents. " (The Reston
Times, "Sewer Applications Vetoed," September 27, 1972.)
b. The Rural Second Cycle -- Undeveloped rivers within rural areas repre-
sent a unique potential problem. The attractive natural state of many of
our nation's remaining rivers has remained undisturbed so far only because
gross pollution has kept the post-war building boom from their shores.
Pollution rather than ordinances has checked construction on their flood
plains.
As these rivers undergo clean-up programs to meet the recreational standards
set for them, they will become attractive for unplanned resort sprawl,
motels, second home communities and commercial development. Such
89
-------
development will block public access and impair the aesthetic quality of
the shores and the setting. The induced development may itself, in turn,
create more water pollution through direct discharges, poorly sited
septic tanks, siltation, dumps, debris and oil.
The Androscoggin River in Maine and New Hampshire provides a good
example of the potential this form of second cycle pollution has:
"Paper wastes choke the river with a strong hydrogen
sulfide smell, telltale, white form at riffles, floating
sludge mats, and sludgecoated banks blocking landing.
Yet, pollution aside, the Andoscoggin ranks high among
the scenic and magnificent rivers of the East: the
Presidential Range rises abruptly in the mountain reach
from Gorham to Bethel, open farmland and little villages
line the valley as the river widens north of Bethel. Per-
haps largely because of the pollution, this scenic river,
navigable to recreation watercraft and close to heavily
travelled U. S. Route 2, remains unspoiled with banks
uncluttered by ticky-tack cottages and motels. Yet, once
the pollution from paper wastes is stopped, the communities
and states have no planning or zoning tools to check helter-
skelter development of a river so tempting and so accessible
to vacationers. Dr. Donaldson Koons, Chairman of the
Main Environmental Improvement Commission, estimates
that property values would rise $50 to $100 per foot if the
river were cleaned up." (71)
These examples illustrate the complicated and often unpredictable conse-
quences of second cycle pollution problems. It is clear that second cycle
impacts and even those of subsequent generations of pollution problems
should be included in comprehensive water quality management planning.
90
-------
CHAPTER IV
GUIDELINES
The purpose of this chapter is to suggest guidelines for interrelating
land use and water quality considerations within the water quality
management planning process. The chapter is divided into four sections
as follows:
Overview of Land Use Strategies and Techniques
Planning Methodology Guidelines
Guidelines for Formulating Land Use Strategies
Guidelines for Planning Water Quality Management Practices
The first section briefly describes the array of land use strategies and
potential implementation tools which should be used in reducing water
quality degradation resulting from land use. These strategies are
generally assessed in terms of their short and long-range payoffs.
The first guideline set describes the possible approaches to structuring
the plan formulation process with attention to data requirements,
analytical procedures, plan development procedures and program imple-
mentation factors. The second guideline set deals with the formulation
and application of land use strategies in wat quality management planning
and in the operation of land use and water quality management programs.
The third guideline set suggests procedures and criteria for evaluating
and minimizing the impacts of water quality management practices upon
land use. Such guidelines would be of use in both the formulation of the
water quality management plans and the review of grant applications,
environmental impact statements and policy proposals.
91
-------
These guidelines are proposed as a supplement to EPA guidelines which
cover the water quality management planning process. It is assumed
that the reader is familiar with those guidelines.
A. OVERVIEW OF LAND USE STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUES
In developing land use strategies for water quality management programs,
there are several goals toward which such efforts should be aimed:
Reduce and balance point discharges with the water quality
standards and established wasteload allocations for receiving
waters. The planner should seek to distribute waste-
generating development in a manner which does not overburden
the receiving water body at points of waste discharge.
Reduce and balance harmful non-point discharges. The planner
should set forth plans and programs which minimize both the
production of non-point pollution and the entry of such wastes
into water bodies.
Conserve the natural features and natural systems which
protect water quality and quantity. The planner should plan
and control land use in ways which allow the natural terrain
and ground cover to perform its runoff control, groundwater
recharge and waste absorption functions.
Planning strategies oriented toward these general goals fall within three
general categories which range in scope from areawide to site specific:
Regional Strategies -- On the regional, metropolitan and
river basin level, water quality management planners have
responsibility for considering a wide range of options in
meeting water quality standards and effluent limits. The
achievement of this objective requires the sensitive con-
sideration of growth objectives, alternative arrangements
of the area's physical structures, composition of settlement
areas and the location and character of open space and rural
land uses. Four land use strategies which have potential for
improving water quality at the regional level are:
a. Modify growth rates.
b. Modify growth distribution.
92
-------
c. Conserve environmentally sensitive areas and open
space.
d. Control the siting of critical uses.
Land Management Strategies - - Not all land use /water
quality problems can be dealt with at the planning or planning-
administration levels. Many water quality problems stem
from poor land management in both rural and urban areas.
The management of land is of great significance to the control
of non-point pollution. The strategies which relate to land
management include:
a. Control construction-related erosion.
b. Utilize agriculture and silvaculture conservation
practices.
c. Manage flood plain and shoreline uses.
d. Control resource extraction activities.
Site Development Strategies -- Careful attention to the water
quality impacts of individual projects can have .important
results, if not individually, at least cumulatively. At the
site planning level, three strategies may prove fruitful,
depending upon local conditions and institutional factors:
a. Modify site location practices.
b. Modify project size and/or mix.
c. Improve site planning and development.
Techniques for implementing these strategies are diverse. In addition
to traditional, well tested regulatory procedures, innovative policy
makers and planners are devising an increasing array of controls in an
attempt to weld environmental considerations to land planning and
development endeavors. These implementation techniques include:
Regulations
Incentives and disincentives
Acquisition programs
Public facility development and service delivery
Grant programs
93
-------
Intergovernmental arrangements and reviews
Voluntary agreements and advisory services.
These goals, strategies, and implementation techniques are depicted
graphically in Figure 8.
The land use strategies outlined here are not brand new, visionary
ideas. They are being considered and frequently implemented in various
places throughout the country. The mechanisms to implement these
strategies are even more familiar. It is more universal acceptance
and adoption of these strategies that is now needed. Localities pursuing
strategies to modify growth distribution, control location of critical
uses, minimize erosion and sedimentation, and all the other strategies
will reap benefits of improved water quality and, collaterally,
preservation of other natural and human values.
In the matrix shown in Figure 9, the strategies for land use are evaluated
as to long and short-range potential for reducing water pollution and as
to ease of implementation. Each cell was rated from 1 to 5, with the
number assigned by professional assessment of the strategy in terms
of (a) potential effectiveness under ideal conditions, and (b) realistic
feasibility for implementation, given existing and anticipated political
and economic constraints. The short-term payoffs of the strategies,
it will be noted, have lower scores than the long-term payoffs. Lead
time involved in implementing strategies, both legally and fiscally,
generally means that full scale implementation seldom comes about in
the short range. More importantly, since land use strategies seldom
begin with a pure water base, impact of existing point and non-point
sources will be felt for years to 'come, as tomorrow's treatment labors
to catch up with yesterday's mistake. However, adoption of appropriate
94
-------
Figure 8
The Role of Land Use Planning and Control
in Water Quality Management
BALANCE AND
REDUCE POINT
DISCHARGES
GOALS
REDUCE AND
BALANCE
NON-POINT
DISCHARGES
CONSERVE
NATURAL
FEATURES
REGIONAL
STRATEGIES
MODIFY
GROWTH RATES
MODIFY GROWTH
DISTRIBUTION
CONSERVE EN-
VIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE AREAS
& OPEN SPACE
CONTROL SITING
OF "CRITICAL
USES"
STRATEGIES
SITE DEVELOP-
MENT STRATEGIES
MODIFY SITE
LOCATION
PRACTICES
MODIFY
PROJECT
SIZE & MIX
IMPROVE SITE
PLANNING 81
DEVELOPMENT
LAND MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES
CONTROL CON-
STRUCTION RE-
LATED EROSION
UTILIZE
AGRICULTURE &
SILVACULTURE
CONSERVATION
PRACTICES
MANAGE FLOOD
PLAIN &
SHORELINE USES
CONTROL
RESOURCE
EXTRACTION
ACTIVITIES
.
REGULATIONS
ZONING
SUBDIVISION
REGS.
BUILDING
CODES
SPECIAL
ORDINANCES
STATE LAND
USE REGS.
STATE DIS-
CHARGE PERMITS
HEALTH CODES
TECHNIQUES
INCENTIVES &
DISINCENTIVES
TIMBER
CONSERVATION
INCENTIVES
DEVELOPMENT
BONUSES &
PENALTIES
RELOCATION
SUBSIDIES
DEVELOPMENT
DISINCENTIVES
TAX DEFERMENT
ACQUISITION
PROGRAMS
? OPEN SPACE
ACQUISITION
SCENIC &
CONSERVATION
EASEMENTS
PARK
DEDICATION
LAND
BANKING
URBAN
' RENEWAL
GRANT
PROGRAMS
CONDITIONAL '
REQUIREMENTS
FACILITY
DEVELOPMENT
LAND ACQUI-
SITION
PLANNING
NEW TOWNS
INTER-GOV'T
ARRANGEMENTS
& REVIEWS
ZONING &
SUBDIVISION
REFERRAL
NEWGOVT
FORMS
A-95 REVIEW
E.I.S.
VOLUNTARY
AGREEMENTS
& SERVICES
LENDING
POLICIES
INNOVATIVE
ENTREPRE-
NEURSHIP
TRADE ASSOC.
GUIDANCE
PUBLIC
FACILITY
DEVELOPMENT
& SERVICE
DELIVERY
URBAN SERV-
ICE POLICY
SEWER TAP
POLICY
CAPITAL
IMPROV. POLICY
MORATORIA
& BANS
-------
Figure 9
Assessment of Payoffs and Implementation Requirements
IMPLEMENTATION TECHNIQUES
PLANNING STRATEGY
Modify Growth Rates
Modify Growth Distribution
Preserve Environmentally Sensitive
Areas and Open Space
Control Siting of Critical Uses
Control Construction-Related Erosion
Utilize Agriculture & Silvaculture
Conservation Practices
Manage Flood Plain and Shoreline Use
Control Resource Extraction Activities
Improve Site Planning & Development
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
1
3
5
5
4
4
3
4
4
2
4
1
2
2
3
3
1
2
2
3
2
4
4
5
4
3
. 4
3
5
2
6
6
9
9
2
6
2
9
10
20
16
20
12
12
16
6
20
a cs
D ' a
a a a
a a
a D a
a ' D
a a a G a
a a D a
a aaa a
Notes: 1. Values are based upon authors' judgement and experience
2. Values range from 1 to 5 indicating minimal to maximal degree of effectiveness or feasibility
3. Implementation tools are identified as follows:
Primary Implementation Techniques
o Secondary Implementation Techniques
-------
land use strategies will not only minimize water quality degradation
from new development, but water quality could be expected to improve as
poor land use patterns and practices are phased out.
In the short term, it is concluded that the greatest likelihood of water
quality improvement would be obtained by pursuing control of critical
use siting, erosion control and improved site planning and development.
In the more distant future, additional benefits will be possible through
more sophisticated planning for growth distribution and through pro-
tection of environmentally sensitive areas (including flood plains and
shorelines).
The payoff index also indicates that the most effective strategies are
those which can be implemented most easily. For example, modifying
the growth rate has a low hypothetical payoff, not because the strategy
is not valid, but because widespread public acceptance and implementation
are difficult to achieve. The matrix also summarizes tools for imple-
menting the land use strategies. The tools were also evaluated as to
political and economic feasibility as well as technical efficacy. Public
controls such as zoning requirements, permits, and other regulations
can generally be enacted with little strain on the local budget or little
widespread objection. Review and advisory services are not as effective
simply because compliance cannot be enforced. The matrix also
illustrates that all tools cannot be used for every strategy, but that
there are several means available to implement each land use strategy
to improve water quality.
97
-------
B. PLANNING METHODOLOGY GUIDELINES
While it is necessary that land use strategies be considered in water
quality management planning, there are a variety of approaches which
can be used to formulate such plans. The approach selected for a
particular area will depend upon the type and severity of water quality
problems. Other factors which may affect the approach include the
available planning staff, budget, and time. For a fast growing, urban-
industrial complex, the planning approach may have to deal very carefully
with the issues of growth rate, growth distribution, and critical use
location. On the other hand, a small urban area with moderate growth
may be more dependent upon waste treatment solutions than on land use
modifications.
1. General Planning Approaches
Traditionally, land use has been considered only as an input to the formu-
lation of sewer plans and water quality management plans. Land use
forecasts and plans have been converted to waste generation loads which
then set the demand framework for design of wastewater collection and
treatment systems. In most cases, this "supply and demand" type of
planning is no longer appropriate. Based on EPA's desire to have land
use considered as a management tool rather than simply as a demand
parameter, three alternative planning approaches are discussed below.
Each offers particular advantages and is applicable in different types of
planning situations. In fact, however, a fair amount of combination can
occur between these approaches.
Approach a." In this approach, land use strategies are considered only
in response to particular water quality problems which cannot be solved
by structural methods (i.e., waste treatment, flow regulation, inter-basin
98
-------
transfer, etc. ). The land use plan, upon which the projected waste loads
are based, is accepted as given. The emphasis is upon land use control
proposals which flow out at the end of the planning process in a sort of
"add-on" fashion. Examples of land use controls which might be incor-
porated include flood plain regulations, erosion control ordinances and
agricultural regulations. The methodology for this approach is simple in
that there is no feedback to the baseline land use plan and the effect of
land use plans and controls on water quality conditions is not quantified.
This approach affords only minimal attention to the development of regional
land use strategies. Approaches b and c described below are preferable
in most situations. Use of Approach a should be limited to:
(1) Areas where growth is slight to moderate
(2) Areas where water quality management plans have already
been completed
(3) Areas where available financial resources do not permit more
specific methodologies with the exception of land use elements
Approach b. --In the tradition of environmental impact assessment,
this approach allows the planner to estimate the impact of one or more
land use plans upon water quality conditions. It can be diagrammed as
shown in Figure 10.
The water quality management plan is prepared in a fairly traditional
manner (using land use plans as the base for determining waste load
projections) but is extended to include:
(1) A measurement of the effect of the land use plan on water
quality
(2) A feedback process for modifying the land use plan if
plan evaluation criteria are not met
99
-------
Figure 10
Water Quality Management Planning Process: Approach b
FICATION
FEEDBACK FOR LAND USE PLAN MODI
z
0
<
o
LL
FEEDBACK FOP. MODI
PRACTICES
r i
OF SEWER PLANS & MGMT
^
IDENTIFICATION OF
PROBLEM AREAS
X
GOALS, OBJECTIVES,
ASSUMPTIONS, CONSTRAINTS,
PROJECTIONS
i
r
LAND USE PLAN
T
r
PROJECTED WASTE LOADS
POINT
SEWER PLAN |
^
NON-POINT
CURRENT
LOADS
PROJECTED
WASTE WATER
DISCHARGES
1
PROPOSED WATER
QUALITY MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES INCLUDING
LAND USE CONTROLS
J
.
WATER QUALITY RESPONSE
CURRENT
WATER QUALITY
CONDITIONS&
STANDARDS
S"^ DOES ^^
PLAN MEET: ^NW
FEASIBILITY CRITERIA
STANDARDS & GOALS
COST-EFFECTIVENESS
CRITERIA
IMPLEMENTATION
PROG RAM FOR
FACILITY AND LAND
USE STRATEGIES
-------
The feedback can be used either for land use plan revision or comparison.
In the latter case, several alternative land use plans could be tested for
their relative impact. This approach can result in the consideration of
the kinds of land use water quality issues endemic to larger urban-
industrial centers and high growth areas.
Approach c. -- Even more sensitive consideration can be given to land
use/water quality relationships by reversing the order of the traditional
planning process. Instead of using the land use plan as a determinant
of waste load projections, the waste load limits of waterways are used
to shape the land use plan. This approach uses the carrying capacity
of water resources as a primary constraint upon the preparation of a
land use plan. On the basis of water quality standards and acceptable
waste load allocations for receiving waters, desired discharge locations
and volumes are determined. Once the discharge limitations are known,
it is then possible to convert to the amount of population growth and land
development which can be accommodated within each planning district.
This water resource carrying capacity is then considered, along with
other plan preparation criteria (i.e., public services, transportation
accessibility, other environmental constraints, etc. ), to prepare a land
use plan and controls. At the same time, technological water quality
management practices are, being analyzed. By preparing technological
and land use proposals simultaneously, the water quality management
planner is able to view the process more comprehensively and is able
to more easily assess the most cost-effective balance between structural
and non-structural strategies.
This process is diagrammed in Figure 11, and the analysis components
are graphically portrayed in Figure 12.
101
-------
Figure 11
Water Quality Management Planning Process: Approach c
+
WAT6 R USE
CONSTRAINTS
+
LAND
DEVELOPMENT
CONSTRAINTS
FEEDBACK FOR MODIFICATION
OP 'LANS
-------
Figure 12
Analysis Components of an Environmental Carrying Capacity Approach
to Land Use/Water Quality Planning
++ -TV «^
PREMISE: Start by defining acceptable waste load allocation for
receiving waters & work back toward identification of appro-
priate technological & land use strategies
A A A A
Stream Section
LEGEND
Ij 1 Not Suitable for Additional Development
Suitable for High Density Development
Suitable for Medium Density Development
Suitable for Low Density Development
It t ! t 11 Conditional Use Area
H- + + + +1
Outfall Locations
Stream
Section
AB
^
Watershed
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Acceptable
Waste Load
(BOD) only
50 tons/day
+10 tons/day
- 2 tons/day
+ 5 tons/day
- 6 tons/day
+ 5 tons/day
^J
Special Problems
High Bacterial
Counts, Low D.O.
Proposed
SCS Dam
Urban Runoff
Problems
Ground water
Recharge area
Low flow &
D.O.
Thermal
Discharges
^
Treatment
Modification
Chlorination,
Tertiary Treat.
Expand
Capacity
Separation
of Sanitary
& Storm
Discharges
Expand
Capacity
Phase Out
Package
Plant
Mod. of
Industrial
Process
MK- _^^
Land Use
Modifications
Impose Non-
Point Controls
Development
Freeze
Purchase of
Parkland
Reduce Ind.
Zoning ~
' ^
Additional Popu-
lation Holding
Capacity
45,000
25,000
None
None
5.000
15,000
| ,^^
-------
These general planning approaches have been discussed in order of
increasing sophistication. In practice, a viable plan may result from
any one of them depending on the complexity of the study area. The first
approach is most limited in potential for improving land use/water
quality relationships. The second or third approaches, or a combination,
would result in the most sensitive consideration of land use impacts and
would be most appropriate within growing urban-industrial areas. The
common premise of all three approaches is that land use strategies
(i. e., regional, site and land management) must be given careful
consideration in the formulation of water quality management plans.
2. Procedures and Plan Content
Regardless of the planning approach selected for the study area, there
are certain general procedures which should be common to the formu-
lation of land use strategies within the water quality management planning
process. The following guidelines suggest methods for arriving at a plan1
which will satisfy the intent of the second and third planning approaches.
a. Points of Consideration -- Land use should be considered throughout
the water quality management planning process but particularly at five
basic points:
(1) Current land use patterns and controls should be examined
to determine their causal relationship to water quality
conditions.
(2) Land use plans should be used as a base from which point
and non-point loads are estimated.
(3) Land use strategies should be evaluated and recommended to
reduce the burden upon costly wastewater facilities and upon
the purification capability of the natural environment.
(4) Controls and implementation techniques should be selected
to insure the success of chosen land use strategies.
104
-------
(5) Water quality management facilities, including interceptors,
should be located, designed, and operated with sensitivity to
their potential effect upon qualitative and quantitative aspects
of land use.
b. Waste Loads -- The calculation of waste load data must be based
upon either a single land use plan or several realistic alternatives. Land
use forecasts will not suffice unless they have been adopted as part of the
area's land use plan. Furthermore, the data must describe the non-point
loads by the smallest possible drainage areas and must be of such detail
that the impacts of alternative land use patterns can be discerned.
Appendix A presents a simple example of waste load calculation and
assessment for an actual watershed. This exercise relies upon the tables,
methods and techniques described in Chapter II.
c. Water Quality Response -- In projecting waste loads and in deter-
mining water quality response to land use configurations, rigorous,
mathematical analysis must be used. Many tools and techniques are
available for analysis. In the case example shown in Appendix A, simple
manual calculations suffice. In other cases, larger and more diverse
in nature, it may be necessary to take advantage of the numerous computer-
ized water quality models which exist.
d. Effect of Land Use Strategies -- The water quality response to site
development and land management strategies can be estimated in a more
qualitative manner. In the case of these types of strategies, it will be
sufficient to provide an estimate of relative improvement. For example,
the protection of flood plain buffers could reduce sedimentation by
X percent; or, the imposition of construction runoff regulations could
reduce the site-related erosion by X percent.
105
-------
e. Selection Criteria -- Land use plans and land use control measures
should be evaluated for their:
(1) Institutional feasibility
(2) Contribution to meeting or exceeding standards
(3) Cost-effectiveness
f. Implementation Program
(1) A program for implementing water quality-related land use
plans and land use control measures must be prepared as
part of the water quality management plan. A schedule for
implementation as well as an assignment of organizational
responsibilities should be included. Furthermore, the staging
of land use plans and controls and wastewater collection and
treatment systems should be integrated in a compatible manner.
(2) Where current legislative authority is not sufficient to permit
the desired level of land use control, the water quality
management plan must set forth a program to overcome these
constraints. Such a program should describe legislative
proposals, inter-governmental cooperation efforts and
educational activities.
g. Plan Implementation Monitoring and Update -- Procedures for
monitoring and updating plans are required as a component of any water
quality management plan and are particularly important with regard to land
use. Since land use control has historically been a decentralized and fluid
public function, it is important that provision be made for:
(1) A mechanism for monitoring conformance of development
with the plan's land use premises.
(2) An impact evaluation system for giving rational consideration
to land development proposals which represent a potential
deviation from the recommended land use and wastewater
facility plans.
(3) A water quality monitoring program which provides sufficiently
detailed data for evaluating the effectiveness of land use
strategies and the techniques used to implement them. (This
should be done in conjunction with states in their programs to
comply with Section 106 of the 1972 Water Pollution Control
Amendments. )
106
-------
C. GUIDELINES FOR FORMULATING LAND USE STRATEGIES
The following guidelines are proposed to assist in the formulation of
water quality management plans which are based in part upon improved
land use planning and control. Given the diversity of natural, man-made
and institutional conditions between planning regions, latitude and flexi-
bility is built into the guideline statements. The selection of a particular
mix of land use strategies and implementation techniques would basically
be the decision of responsible local and state agencies. Guidelines are
provided for the following subject areas:
Urban Growth Rates
Urban Growth Distribution
Environmentally Sensitive Areas and Open Space
Critical Use Siting
Site Planning and Development
Agriculture and Silvaculture
Resource Extraction
Following each statement of guidelines is a discussion of the premise for
consideration and techniques which may be used in implementing the
suggested guideline. Examples are briefly described for reference
purposes.
Guideline #1: Urban Growth Rates
a. Guidelines
(1) The area's growth rate should be examined with regard
to:
(a) Carrying capacity of water resource base.
(b) Financial and technological capacity for meeting
sewage collection and treatment demands.
107
-------
(c) Legal and organizational resources required to
guide growth in consonance with natural environment.
(d) Other growth-related public services which must
share financial resources with water quality
management.
(2) The effect of modifying the area's growth rate should
be assessed in terms of potential reduction of point and
non-point pollution loads.
(3) The feasibility of growth rate modification policies
should be analyzed with particular attention to available
legal tools and orgarnV.ational resources and political
acceptability.
b. Premise. Stopping, slowing down or selectively modifying
population growth and land development will reduce the threat
to water quality posed by point and non-point discharges
which are inextricably related to urban development.
Growth has three major water quality impacts:
Increased point discharges may reach the volume where,
regardless of treatment technology, the assimilative
capacity of receiving waters is exceeded.
Increased urban runoff and subsequent non-point loadings
are bound to occur as land is exposed and impervious
surface area increases.
Stream enlargement, both an erosion and an aesthetic
problem, and increased peak flow levels, will naturally
occur proportionate to urbanization.
It is doubtful that even the most stringent runoff control and
treatment practices can avoid all the damages induced by
growth, particularly in regions haying a sensitive land-water
balance (i.e., estuaries, stratified lakes, coastal and wetlands
areas, headwater regions). There can thus be little question
that stopping, slowing down, or selectively modifying population
growth and land development will reduce the potential threat
108
-------
urbanization poses to water quality. Given the high costs of
meeting current water quality standards and treatment require-
ments, the cost savings could also be substantial.
Legality of Growth Regulation. Regulation of population
densities and distribution can be a legally feasible companion
to a water quality management project, but only if taken
within a proper context. Growth of a population in a given
area may be controlled indirectly by a variety of government
actions such as deliberate failure to make public services
available, requirements of large acreages of open space, or
zoning which discourages high density uses, or more direct
prescriptions of population maximums and distributions. Any
statute, ordinance, or administrative regulation having the
farce of law which is a direct population limitation unsupported
by some legitimate and clearly articulated objective is legally
unsound and is, furthermore, constitutionally offensive to the
protected' freedom of movement within the United States (41).
Moreover, such restrictions are also vulnerable to attack in
or around urban areas on the ground of promoting racial
segregation or discriminating unreasonably against an
identifiable socio-economic class. Regulation of population
density could encounter similar objections.
Protection of water quality would seem to be a permissible
objective of growth regulation, especially if care is taken to
establish a causal connection between population size and
densities and stream and groundwater quality. It can be
demonstrated that protection and improvement of water
quality is required by the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act and state laws. Further, it can be shown that these laws
apply both to point and non-point sources.
109
-------
In practice, water quality protection may become one purpose
for regulating population totals and concentration. However,
a particular regulation may have several other legally valid
justifications. It is necessary to examine each of these other
justifications to make sure that, if used, they are sustainable.
For example, regulations designed to influence or even
dictate growth patterns may be supported by the need to
prevent overburdening of a range of public facilities and
services such as schools, fire protection, water supply, and
transportation (including streets). But in each instance, it
is necessary to balance the requirement that communities
provide reasonable levels of public services on a nondiscrim-
inatory basis against the reasonableness or necessity for the
regulation or the feasibility of limiting public services and
facilities to a degree that would make the restrictive regulation
unnecessary. It is this balancing which determines the
propriety of any growth control (212).
It should be mentioned that growth control policies, if adopted
on something less than a metropolitan scale, could have
disastrous repercussions upon neighboring jurisdictions.
Metropolitan growth, in a situation of this type, is likely to
be merely shifted toward those jurisdictions in the area which
have not set growth policies.
d. Examples.
(1) Some states are studying the undesirable impacts of
growth. Hawaii's Commission on Population has a study
on growth and distribution underway. The Governor's
Advisory Council on Environmental Quality in Michigan
has urged that the state adopt a goal of zero population
growth for its citizens, and the Environmental Commission
of Colorado has recommended stabilization of that state's
population (35).
110
-------
(2) Lake Tahoe, in Nevada and California, is one area where
growth rate policies are being implemented. In the Lake
Tahoe area, the bi-state Lake Tahoe Regional Planning
Agency recently adopted a master plan setting a maximum
population of 280, 000, the limit beyond which it was felt
that non-point waste discharges would destroy the delicate
ecological balance of Lake Tahoe. If the area were
developed under the previous zoning plan, the Agency
projected a population of 700, 000 (154).
(3) In Fairfax County, Virginia, one of the fastest growing
counties in the United States, consideration is now being
given to various growth-limit ing policies designed to
stage growth in accord with public service and environ-
mental capacities. While no official action has been taken
as yet, it is reasonable to predict that some type of growth
control policy may be evolved (184).
(4) In Boca Raton, Florida, residents approved a 1972
referendum to amend the City's charter establishing a
maximum limitation of 40, 000 dwelling units for the city.
Existing zoning in the City would have allowed 65, 000
dwelling units. Subsequent to the charter amendment,
the city council imposed an emergency 45-day ban on
building permits for residential uses for more than two
families, with the period used for adopting a new com-
prehensive plan reflecting the growth ceiling and for
initiating implementation of the plan.(57).
(5) Even more directly related to the issue of water quality
is Florida's imposition of a sewer tap moratorium
wherever communities have failed to meet the 90 percent
waste treatment standard. Across the United States
it has become common to impose sewer or building
permit bans for certain development areas until additional
sewage treatment capacity becomes available.
Guideline #2: Urban Growth Distribution
a. Guidelines
(1) The amount and density of growth assigned to sub-areas
within a development region should be based, in part,
upon:
111
-------
(a) The water quality standards set for those water
bodies.
(b) The state established waste load allocations for
streams, stream sections, and lakes (and coastal
waters and estuaries in ocean-front regions)
within the sub-areas.
(c) The existing and planned capacity of sanitary
sewage collection and treatment systems.
(d) The non-point waste load potentials of each sub-area.
(2) Priority attention should be given to guiding acceptable
levels of growth into sub-areas possessing adequate
sewer and other urban services and adequate allowable
waste load allocations. Conversely, development within
inadequately serviced sub-areas should be restricted
and staged with the development of services.
(3) Public services and facilities (i.e., sewer and water
facilities, transportation facilities, schools, parks,
etc. ) should be planned and programmed to guide growth
toward those sub-areas which are most capable of
accommodating waste loads.
(4) Development should be encouraged to occur in larger
sized increments (i. e., new towns and PUD's) so that
economies of scale and more thorough predevelopment
planning can be stimulated, particularly with regard to
water quality management.
(5) Density controls should be considered as a means of
preventing water quality degradation. However, it
should be recognized that low density can be obtained
via cluster development as well as via large lots.
Furthermore, higher densities may be an appropriate
development form in certain situations, particularly in
view of lower land consumption rates, service and
treatment efficiency, and the indirect benefit of diverting
growth from more sensitive areas. In addition, density
must be related to many other considerations such as
housing opportunity, air pollution and transportation
facilities.
b. Premise. Planning, zoning, and other regulatory mechanisms
can be used to direct growth into concentrations and locations
which will minimize deleterious impacts on water quality.
112
-------
With or without growth rate policies, it is of critical
importance that new growth and development be allocated to
those sub-areas of the region having the greatest capacity to
collect, treat and assimilate wastes and the least susceptability
to urban runoff pollution. Location of land uses, assignment of
density levels and the time-phasing of development are three
basic facets of the urban planning process which, if carefully
coordinated with other water-related professionals, can
result in substantial water quality improvement.
c. Planning Techniques. Analysis of natural features has been
a common planning practice in the allocation of population and
land uses to a region's sub-areas. The technique has usually
been to delineate graphically on transparent maps each land
type which is considered worthy of protection (i.e. , marshes,
recharge areas, forests, etc. ) or is viewed as having develop-
ment limitation (i. e. , shallow depth to bedrock, steep slopes,
flood plains, etc. ). By overlaying these map transparencies
any coincidence of areas meriting protection is revealed
through the intensity of graphic patterns.
Ian McHarg, Phillip Lewis and others have used and refined
this approach in increasingly well accepted studies. Figure 13
displays some of the map overlays used in such a planning
process. Examples of this approach include the Baltimore
. County Plan for the Valleys (105), the Skippack Watershed
Plan (67), the Fox River Watershed Plan (139), and the
Plan and Program for the Brandywine (169).
There are some limitations to this planning approach, however,
particularly as applied to water quality management planning.
113
-------
Figure 13
Technique Overlaying Selected Natural Features
on Composite Map
SOIL DRAINAGE
Surface Water Marshes & Swamps
High Water Table
Good Drainage
SLOPE
Greater than 10%
Between 2'/i% to 10%
| | Less than
BEDROCK FOUNDATIONS
Marsh Lands
| [ Cretaceous Sediments
Crystalline Rocks
SOI L FOUNDATIONS
Silts & Clays
[ ~| Sandy Loams
| | Gravelly Silt Loams
to Strong Sandy Loams
SUSCEPTIBILITY TO EROSION
High Susceptibility
[ j Moderate Susceptibility
| ] Low Susceptibility
COMPOSITE
High Cost
Medium Cost
Low Cost
Source: Ian L. McHarg,Oes/ff/J With Nature. Doubleday & Company. N.Y. 1969, pp 33-39.
-------
First, the graphic overlay approach can be misleading if it
assigns the same conservation or development value to each
data item. For instance, should bedrock classification be
equal to slope in determining where development can occur?
More importantly, however, relating land use to water quality
requires some quantitative analyses (i.e., development-
runoff ratios, development-stream enlargement ratios,
allowable load limits for point and non-point discharges, etc.)
which go beyond the mapping approach. The planner must be
able to assign land uses with as much knowledge as possible
concerning the water quality response to that assignment.
The process must dynamically depict the interactions between
land use, land features, and water resources.
d. Implementation Techniques and Example^
(1) Urban Service Districts. Establishment of official or
unofficial boundaries for the provision of urban services
can be an important tool in implementing plans for the
location, density and timing of development. An
increasing number of communities have opted for this
growth management approach, either in the form of
restriction on all services or in the form of sewer
extension policies.
(a) In Salem, Oregon, setting urban growth boundaries
has been proposed which would geographically limit
the city's future urban development. The area
beyond the urban growth boundary would be main-
tained as a green belt around the city having very
low density living areas, open space, public parks,
permanently zoned agricultural land and other com-
patible uses. A major consideration in delineating
the proposed urban growth boundaries was the
natural limits of the city's gravity flow sewer system.
(b) Lexington, Kentucky, has established an urban/
rural service area plan. Under the urban service
area concept, practically all new urban-type
development is located inside the urban service
115
-------
area. The urban service area forms a ring around
the built-up area of Lexington, presently encompas-
sing an area of 73 square miles. The remaining
210 square mile portion of Fayette County -- within
which Lexington is located --is designated as a
rural service area and is to remain undeveloped
or agricultural in character.
(c) Prince George's County, which comprises the
southeastern portion of the Washington, D.C.
metropolitan area, uses the provision of sewer
and water services as one of the primary imple-
mentation measures for the county's proposed
"staging policy. " This proposed policy was formu-
lated to phase new growth in conjunction with
existing sewer and water service capabilities and
rational extension of these services in conformance
with the county's comprehensive general plan. The
county's ten-year water and sewer plans, required
by state law, would reflect the development timing
delineated in the staging policy.
(2) Land Use Regulations. Zoning has been, and will
continue to be, used as the primary control over location
density and timing of growth. With little or no modifi-
cation, most zoning ordinances can be used to implement
water quality-related land use plans. However, the
following examples are cited as efforts to expand the
effectiveness of zoning as an environmental control.
(a) The State of Hawaii has, since 1961, operated
under a four district state zoning system which
delineates those areas which, from the state
perspective, should be used for urban, agricultural,
conservation and rural purposes.
(b) Several states, including Maine, Vermont and
Florida, have initiated land use permit systems
for development over a minimum size. Environ-
mental criteria are heavily considered .in evaluation
of proposed projects. In Vermont the permit
system is related closely to a statewide land use
plan.
(c) The Tahoe Regional Planning Commission has
adopted several land use regulations which are
directly tied to implementing the environmentally-
based land use plan.
116
-------
(d) Ramapo, New York, has developed an ordinance
which relates the location and timing of growth to
the provision of public services.
(e) San Jose, California, has been divided into three
districts: urban, urban transition, and urban
reserve. Growth is to be drastically limited in
the latter two categories.
(3) New Towns. The national trend in new town development
offers an opportunity to redirect growth into a pattern
which is more amenable to environmental balance. The
size of such developments and the required level of
planning create potentials for more adequately dealing
with both point and non-point pollution loads. New town
developers are generally receptive to the clustering of
residences, the preservation of natural terrain and
large amounts of open space as well as the control of
runoff through stormwater retention lakes and other
techniques. Thus, the accommodation of growth in
larger, more innovative developments (including large
planned unit developments) can be an effective approach
for a water quality management plan.
Such developments can be encouraged by local action
such as the adoption of more flexible land use controls,
land banking, service extensions, and access improve-
ments. Several states also have adopted legislation to
encourage and assist new community development. Some
offer property tax relief to new town developers during
the period of land assembly as an incentive. In Texas
and Arizona, special district bonds can be issued for new
town development. California, Ohio, and Kentucky are
among the states which also recently enacted legislation
favorable to new community development.
Guideline #3: Environmentally Sensitive Areas and Open Space
a. Guidelines
(1) Land use plans should be prepared with special attention
to the protection and preservation of environmentally
sensitive areas and open space systems. Such areas
should be assessed in terms of the importance of the
area to:
117
-------
(a) Reduction of stormwater runoff volumes and velocity.
(b) Natural absorption and filtering of runoff waste loads.
(c) Protection of surface water quality.
(d) Groundwater recharge.
(e) Sediment detention.
(2) The water quality management plan should specifically
describe the proposed land use plans program and controls
for at least the following types of environmentally
sensitive areas:
(a) Flood plains and stream buffers.
(b) Lake shorelines.
(c) Coastal zones.
(d) Wetlands.
(e) Aquifer recharge areas.
(f) Steep hillsides.
(g) Other erosion-prone areas.
(3) A description should be provided assessing prospects
for protection of the identified environmentally sensitive
areas and open space systems.
(4) Protection of open space and environmentally sensitive
areas should be encouraged at the regional, community
and site development levels.
b. Premise. There are certain natural areas which, if significantly
altered, will have especially damaging impacts upon the quality
and quantity of water. These areas are designated as
"environmentally sensitive. " The major types of environ-
mentally sensitive areas are shown in Figure 14.
Effects of significant alteration are as follows:
(1) Construction in flood plain and shoreline areas:
reduction in the ability of such areas to absorb and
filter sediment and nutrients from stormwater runoff;
increased water temperature due to reduction of shade
118
-------
Figure 14
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
TYPE
Shorelines
Wetlands
Flood plains
Steep slopes
Forests and
woodlands
Headwater
regions
Aquifer
recharge
areas
DESCRIPTION
Land bordering bodies of
surface water lakes, ocean.
For planning purposes, strip
extending 1000' from
water edge.
Water and flood water storage
areas (marshes, swamps, and
bogs I
Land bordering watercourses.
For planning purposes gen-
erally defined as land with a
flooding probability of from
50 years upward, or land
within 300' of a navigable
stream, whichever is greater.
Slopes of over 12%. Depend-
ing upon circumstances, a
higher percentage, may be
chosen.
Natural vegetative cover with
tree canopy
Upland tributaries where
stream flows are low and.
seasonally incapable of
assimilating increased waste
loads
Points of interchange between
' aquifers and surface waters.
MAXIMUM USE
DESIRABLE
Only uses inseparable from
water fronts: ports, harbors,
recreation, water and sewage
treatment plants
Non-disruptive agriculture;
isolated urban development
Natural vegetative cover; uses
which will not be damaged
by flooding (recreation areas,
parks), or are inseparable
from flood plain use
Forest'ry (with conservation
measures to prevent erosion):
recreation; low density
residential.
Recreation; timber produc-
tion; low density development
Low density development
with export of domestic
discharges
No polluting uses; minimal
impervious surface
MEANS OF CONTROL
Zoning
Acquisition
Special use permits
Tax incentives
Tree protection laws
Setback and bulkhead regulation
Zoning
Acquisition
Special use permits
Tax incentives '
Zoning
* Acquisition
* Subdivision regulations
* Building codes
Special use permits
Tree protection laws
Setback and bulkhead regulation
Zoning
Erosion control regulations
Subdivisipn regulations
Tree protection ordinances
Zoning
Acquisition
Tax abatement
Zoning
Acquisition
Erosion control regulations
Zoning
Impoundment of clean
streams transecting aquifers
Acquisition
-------
and increased loads of warmer runoff water; stream
enlargement and bank erosion due to increased runoff;
and reduction in land absorption of nutrients during
flood overbank periods.
(2) Filling of wetlands (freshwater or saltwater): reduction
in propagation of marine life thus affecting commercial
and sport fisheries and shellfish harvesting; alteration
of wildlife species diversity; reduction of surface water
retention and storage .
(3) Development over groundwater recharge areas:
reduction in groundwater supplies; potential pollution
of groundwater due to infiltration of nutrients and
contaminants; saltwater intrusion; increased storm-
water runoff flows.
(4) Development of steep slopes and other erosion prone
areas: increased erosion and sediment; increased
stormwater flows resulting in stream bank scouring;
thermal pollution loads.
(5) Destruction of forests and woodlands: decreased storm-
water retention; reduction of nutrient absorption and
filtration; increased erosion.
(6) Development in headwater regions: point and non-point
discharges where surface water has little capacity to
assimilate; stream enlargement and bank erosion.
Necessary identification, mapping, and planning for environ-
mentally sensitive areas should be handled at the regional level
because of the extensive functional and geographic inter-
dependencies of ecological systems. Realistically, not all
environmentally sensitive areas can be preserved in their
natural state as open space, but strategies should be planned
at regional levels.to limit development to those forms which
reduce potential damage to the sensitive areas. Regional and
local policies to preserve these areas can prevail against
urbanization's "traditional" demands to occupy streamsides,
wetlands, steep slopes, and coastal zones.
120
-------
Frequently, environmentally sensitive areas are aesthetically
pleasing and preservation of them as open space can satisfy
much of the urban dweller's physical and social desire for
open spaces. Therefore, there is a commonality of interest
which should be explored between park planners, compre-
hensive planners and water quality planners, both at the
regional and local level. For instance, protecting stream
banks from development, erosion and sedimentation can
reduce non-point waste loads markedly (32). A buffer strip
can be acquired (300 feet on either side has been suggested in
several instances as the width needed. ) Such publicly owned
streamsides in an urban area can be devoted to park and
nature preserves (169).
Regarding wetlands, the planner should refer to a recently
released EPA "Policy to Protect the Nation's Wetlands, "
(Administrator's Decision Statement No. 4: March, 1973).
c. Techniques and Examples. As noted in the following paragraphs,
environmentally sensitive areas can be preserved by a variety
of federal, state, regional or local actions and many various
techniques are available.
(1) State Legislation. States have taken the lead in pro-
tection of environmentally sensitive areas, especially
in cases where these areas are clearly an economic
resource to the state such as Florida's wetlands, or
Wisconsin's lake shorelines, or Delaware's coastline.
States may regulate land use directly through permits,
statewide zoning, or selective controls, or they may
achieve control indirectly by mandating land use
regulation at the regional or local level.
121
-------
(2) Special District Protection. Special legal and organi-
zational arrangements have been developed to protect
environmentally sensitive zones in several instances.
For instance, in 1965 the San Francisco Bay Conservation
and Development Commission was established to control
the land development around the Bay. In New York, the
Adirondack Park Agency has been set up as the legal body
to plan and guide development in 2, 275,000 acres of
public land and 3, 500, 000 acres of private land in this
park. Similar arrangements have been made for the
Pines area in Burlington and Ocean Counties, New Jersey.
The Pinelands Environmental Council was set up to
review all land use plans within the 373, 000 acre area and
to minimize damages to the environment of the Pinelands
and its underground water supply.
(3) Low Density Zoning. The traditional method of protecting
such areas as woodlands, wetlands and credible slopes
has been to place them in low density zoning districts.
Agricultural and large lot residential districts have
most often been used for this purpose. The validity of
large lot residential zoning is increasingly being challenged
in suburban areas on the grounds of social exclusion. Thus,
the use of low density zoning for environmental protection
will have to be carefully conceived and will have to be
applied selectively rather than for large portions of local
jurisdictions.
(4) Flood Plain Zoning. Flood plain zoning is one of the
more familiar uses of zoning which protects environ-
mentally sensitive areas. However, flood plain zoning
has not hitherto generally been justified as a water
quality control measure. The principal legal justification
for governmental action restricting development of flood
plains is the danger to which a property owner subjects
himself and others by his unwise development in a flood
plain. Flood plains may be protected by zoning which
encourages retention of their natural state and which
permits only those uses which would not be harmed by
flooding or which would not contribute toxic substances
to flood water. Where the state or local will to regulate
is present, this justification is legally sufficient.
Flood plain and shoreline regulation, as a technique for
water quality protection, should entail:
122
-------
Limiting uses permitted to those which do not
disturb the natural vegetation and topography,
which will not be harmed by flooding; or which
are inseparable from waterfront activity.
Prohibiting the removal of vegetation within lands
adjacent to water bodies; and, if necessary,
initiating replanting programs to foster the rein-
statement of lands which have been defoliated.
Prohibiting the storage of potential pollutant
materials within flood plain areas (i. e., petro-
chemicals, toxic materials, junk, etc. ).
Strict regulation of sewage treatment facilities to
minimize the potential for flood damages and
overflow situations (i.e., setback controls, flood-
proofing standards, etc.).
Regulating and limiting structural development.
Limiting excavation, dredging and land fill activity.
Despite increased awareness of flooding problems, flood
plain zoning is not widespread and is generally enacted
on a local basis where it does exist. Of the 84 planning
commissions surveyed in Ohio recently, for instance,
only seven cities and three townships reported having
zoning or other types of regulations pertinent to flood
plain control (10).
Several model flood plain zoning ordinances have been
drafted. The State of Wisconsin has a model county
flood plain zoning ordinance, and the American Society
of Planning Officials has published a guide for preparing
Regulations for Flood Plains (Planning Advisory Service
Report #277; February 1972).
(a) "Conservancy district" is the name given to one of
the zoning categories in Belgium, Wisconsin.
Principal uses in the conservancy district include
floodway and flood overflows, soil and water con-
servation, streambank and lakeshore protection,
along with other ecologically oriented uses. The
list of conditional uses is confined to those which
would not disturb the "natural fauna, flora, water-
courses, water regimen or topography" (205).
123
-------
(b) Walworth County, Wisconsin, produces an example
of the management techniques made possible by a
flood plain and shoreland zoning ordinance. The
zoning ordinance there layers land management
regulations onto any other applicable uses for all
lands lying within 1000 feet of the high water
elevation of 36 lakes in the county and all lands
within 300 feet of the flood plain of all navigable
streams. Within these areas the following are
permitted only after submission and approval of
an appropriate conservation plan:
Tree cutting and shrubbery clearing.
Earth movements.
Tillage, grazing and livestock watering.
Surface water withdrawal, diversion, or
discharge for irrigation, processing, or
cooling purposes.
(5) Acquisition. The lowest risk approach to protection of
environmentally sensitive areas and open space would
be public acquisition. In spite of the costliness of such
an approach, there are several instances in which the
value of such lands demands acquisition. Furthermore,
land purchased for conservation purposes can be used
to serve other public purposes such as recreation,
environmental education and research, flood damage
reduction and water supply.
(a) Acquisition of metropolitan parkland is one method
of acquiring lands which, if used otherwise, would
degrade water quality. The Bureau of Outdoor
Recreation Land and Water Conservation Fund is an
important source, along with the Department of Housing
and Urban Development's Legacy of Parks Program, of
financial aid for preserving open space and natural areas.
(b) Several states, including Florida, New Jersey,
New York and Illinois, have passed bond issues
to acquire environmentally sensitive areas.
(c) Boulder, Colorado, has been involved for several.
years in a program to protect the foothills around
the edge of the city and to eventually form a
greenbelt.
124
-------
(d) Scenic or development easements are being used
in several areas to minimize development of
scenic and environmentally sensitive areas. In
Yellow Springs, Ohio, a Country Common
Association has been formed as a non-profit
organization to obtain easements for 3600 acres
in the headwaters of the Little Miami River. The
river has recently been declared a National and
State Scenic River, and a combination of fee simple
and easement acquisition is currently being imple-
mented along a river corridor of approximately
80 miles.
(6) Financial Incentives. Reduction of taxes as an incentive
for maintaining land as open space is being increasingly
employed. For instance, Virginia's Land Use Law of
1971 empowers counties in the state to reduce tax
rates on land use for agricultural, horticultural, open
space, or forest purposes. So far, three counties have
utilized the provision: Loudoun, Fauquier, and Prince
William. Property tax relief systems for owners of
open space are in effect in several other states including
Florida, California, and Connecticut. The Nixon
administration has also proposed federal tax incentives
and disincentives to encourage protection of environ-
mentally sensitive land.
(7) Other Techniques. Other techniques for preserving
sensitive areas include:
(a) Fill and Dredge Statutes such as those in Maryland,
Connecticut, Rhode Island, North Carolina, and
Georgia.
(b) Tree protection ordinances such as those used in
Atlanta, Sacramento, and numerous other cities.
(c) Mandatory dedication laws such as that used by
Edina, Minnesota, to require dedication of flood
plain areas within proposed subdivisions.
125
-------
Guideline #4: Critical Use Siting
a. Guidelines
(1) Special attention should be given in water quality
management planning to the location, construction and
management of such critical land uses as:
(a) Power generating plants.
(b) Sewage treatment plants (see also Section D of
this chapter).
(c) Solid waste disposal sites.
(d) Agricultural feedlots.
(e) Industries which have independent discharges.
(f) Water-withdrawing activities (i. e., industries,
domestic water treatment plants, etc.).
(g) Highways.
(h) Airports.
(i) Recreation areas.
(2) Recommendations should be prepared for guiding the
location of new critical land uses. Recommendations
should be embodied both in the land use plan and in a
set of criteria and procedures for evaluating project-
level impacts upon water quality.
b. Premise. In formulating both comprehensive plans and water
quality management plans, the planner should attempt to locate
facilities and major land use activities where their effects
upon water quality will be minimized and where incompatibility
between various uses of water will be avoided. Certain sources
of wastewater discharge which have potentially major impact
on.water quality in an area are called "critical uses. " Examples
of critical uses include power plants (thermal pollution), sewage
treatment plants (BOD, bacteria and nutrients), solid waste
sites (groundwater pollution), agricultural feed lots (nutrients),
water treatment plants (major water user), various forms of
industry (miscellaneous types of pollutants), and recreation areas
(human wastes, siltation, aquatic disturbance).
126
-------
Critical use locations are often difficult to anticipate within
the land use plan and are usually handled on a case-by-case
basis. It does not follow, however, that proposals for such
uses should receive less formal analysis. In fact, since
they tend to have large potential impacts, they should receive
more attention. This requires the preparation of criteria
defining critical uses to be specially assessed and procedures
for actually conducting such assessments.
Procedures and Techniques. Generalizations concerning
criteria for critical use siting are virtually impossible since
both the nature of discharges and the conditions at proposed
sites are so diverse. Figure 15 briefly describes some of
the differences in characteristics between different types of
critical uses.
To comply with the guidelines proposed here, two initial
steps must be taken:
(1) Define the land uses which will be submitted to the
water quality review requirements for critical uses.
Normally, critical uses will be evaluated for a wide
range of environmental impacts rather than just water
quality impacts. Under the Florida Environmental
Land and Water Management Act, "developments of
regional impact" require special state review. This
is being defined as any development which, because of
its character, magnitude or location, would have a
substantial effect upon the health, safety or welfare of
citizens of more than one country. As described in
Initial Rules (58), this definition would include:
/a) Airport development projects.
(b) Attractions and recreation facilities with more
than 1000 parking spaces or 4000 permanent
spectator seats.
127
-------
Figure 15
Planning Considerations for Major Critical Uses
CRITICAL USE
Sewage treatment
plants
Sanitary landfill
Industrial plants
with indepen-
dent discharges
Water processing
plants
Power generating
plants .
Highways
Intensive cattle
feedlot
POTENTIAL
HAZARDS TO
WATER QUALITY
Nutrients
Bacteria
BOD
Leaching of minerals
or other pollutants into
ground or surface water
Erosion
Toxic substances
Heat
Organic wastes
Decrease in surface
water flow
Heat
Residual wastes
Sedimentation
Stream channel
modification
Animal waste washoff
Groundwater contam-
ination
Sedimentation
STRATEGY TO
CONTROL IMPACT ON
WATER QUALITY
Separate from
incompatible
development
Utilize high level
treatment
Separate from bene-
ficial downstream uses
Separate from ground
and surface water
Regulate management
practices
Make location com-
patible with waste load
limitations
In-plant treatment
Permit issuance
Fines for violations
Balance with compet-
ing, uses
Prohibit in environ-
mentally sensitive areas
Dispersion of sites
On-site cooling
techniques
Avoidance of water-
course crossings, hill-
side locations, & chan-
nel modification
Control construction-
related erosion
Stream vegetation
buffers
Regulation of manage-
ment practices
Sediment basins
Prohibit in environ-
mentally sensitive areas
PARAMOUNT
LOCATIONAL
CONSIDERATIONS
Surrounding development
Projected need for
expansion
Water quality at point of
discharge
Downstream uses
Location of ground water
table and surface water
Existing and projected devel-
o'pment in area
Final reuse of site
Existing water quality and
water quality standards
Projected kind and amount
of effluent
Treatment plant capacity
Water quality at intake point
Projected development in
water shed
Location of competing water
uses
Location of competing or
compatible uses
Tolerance of existing biotic
communities
Locations of water channels
Soil characteristics
Engineering design
Construction practices
Level terrain
Soil & geologic characteristics
Water quality conditions
-------
(c) Electrical generating facilities (above 100 mega-
watts) and transmission lines of over 230 kilovolt
capacity.
(d) Hospitals of more than 600 beds or servicing
more than one county.
(e) Industrial plants and industrial parks providing
parking for 1500 or more vehicles or occupying
a site greater than one square mile.
(f) Mining operations of more than 100 acres or more
than 3,000,000 gallons per day water consumption.
(g) Office parks over 30 acres or 300, 000 square feet
of gross floor area.
(h) Petroleum storage facilities within 1000 feet of
navigable water for storage of over 30, 000 barrels
plus all such facilities with over 200,000 barrel
capacity.
(i) Port facilities construction, except those used for
sport or pleasure with less than 100 slips for
moorings.
(j) Residential developments on a sliding scale of
dwelling units, depending upon county population.
(k) Schools with a design capacity of more than 3000
full time students.
(1) Shopping centers with over 40 acres of land,
400, 000 square feet of gross floor area, or 2500
parking spaces.
(2) Prepare a general list of factors to be used in assessing
the water quality impacts for proposed critical uses.
Following is a partial list of factors which might be
utilized:
(a) Will the proposed land use discharge wastewater
directly to a watercourse or into a public sewer
system? If the former, will the discharge meet
water quality standards and waste load allocations ?
If the latter, is the public system capable of
accommodating the estimated volume and com-
position of wastewater?
129
-------
(b) Would approval of this proposed land use pre-
empt wastewater allocation, water use, or sewer
capacities previously planned for other land uses?
Should the land use plan be amended accordingly?
(c) Do plans for the proposed land use recognize all
reasonable point and non-point sources, hydrologic
conditions and conditions particular to the area?
(d) Have adequate plans been made for control of
non-point waste loads during site preparation and
construction?
(e) Have adequate plans been made for permanent
stormwater runoff retention and control of run-
off pollution?
(f) Would the land use result in unreasonable damage
to vegetative cover and environmentally sensitive
areas, particularly flood plains, shorelines,
wetlands and steep slopes?
(g) What impact would the proposed land use have
upon groundwater quantity and quality? Would
recharge potentials be diminished? Would ground-
water withdrawl rates result in depletion, intrusion,
or diminution of surface water flows?
(h) Have water conservation and reuse practices been
considered? What effects would these practices
have on meeting both water quality and quantity
needs ?
(i) Have alternatives been considered, including
alternative site locations, development procedures,
treatment processes, and operational practices?
(j) Summarize the primary and secondary water
quality impacts, both beneficial and adverse,
anticipated from the action. Both short-term
and long-term impacts shall be included.
Critical use evaluations require a systematic, interdisciplinary
approach involving land use planners, water quality engineers,
environmental scientists and others. Available skills should
be called upon to collaborate in the review of significant
proposals. The objective should be to guide proposed critical
130
-------
uses to areas demonstrated to be most compatible in terms
of land and water use, water quality standards and waste load
allocations. Consideration should be given to dispersing uses
so that receiving waters will not be degraded by overconcen-
tration of discharges.
Progress toward controlling location of critical uses is being
made in many parts of the country. The Environmental
Impact Statement requirement of the 1969 National Environ-
mental Protection Act, as well as the Office of Budget and
Management's Circular A-95, insure that many activities
involving federal assistance will be assessed for compatibility
with area plans and environmental goals, including water '
quality considerations. In addition, some states have enacted
review requirements for state and locally funded projects
(i. e., California) and for privately initiated developments
(i.e., Florida, Maine, Vermont and California). It would be
advisable to formulate the critical use review procedures
called for under these guidelines in a form compatible with
those review systems already operational.
Implementation of recommendations resulting from such
critical use review can be difficult to insure due to the
general lack of teeth in current review requirements.
Reviews conducted under both NEPA and A-95 are only
advisory to the funding agencies. However, the zoning
ordinance provides a valuable tool in "red-flagging" critical
uses for review, in controlling site-location, and in
ameliorating adverse effects. Lists of conditional uses or
special exceptions, requiring special approval by the local
board of zoning adjustment, should be amended to include
those land uses considered important to water quality.
131
-------
Guideline #5: Site Planning and Development
a. Guidelines
(1) The design review and regulatory procedures (i. e. ,
zoning,subdivision and building regulations) currently
being followed by land use control agencies shall be
examined for consistency with water quality goals.
Of concern is the effect which such procedures have
upon the generation of point and non-point pollution
problems. New or modified procedures, guidelines,
and regulations should be suggested, where appropriate,
to minimize water quality degradation. Enforcement
provisions should also be described.
(2) Recommended site development strategies shall at
least:
(a) Introduce consideration of water quality impacts
as a criteria in reviewing site development and
rezoning proposals.
(b) Impose the burden of proof upon the developer for
showing that his proposal will not negatively
impact the achievement of water quality goals
and standards.
(c) Encourage site design flexibility to the point that
disturbance of natural land form and vegetation
can be lessened. '
(d) Expand the practice of controlling erosion and
sedimentation during site development and
construction.
b. Premise. The details of where and how urban land uses are
planned and developed are of substantial importance to water
quality. While the area-wide land use plan may indicate that
sanitary waste loads can be adequately treated for Area X
under medium density residential, the quality of site planning
and .development within Area X essentially determines the
amount of non-point pollution. Thus what happens on each
and every land parcel must be controlled with particular
132
-------
regard to reducing stormwater runoff and erosion. Cumu-
latively, these small individual actions constitute a major
impact on an area's water quality conditions.
c. Site Planning and Development Strategies. Strategies
include improved site selection procedures, compatible
scaling of project size and mix, sound site planning, water
conservation practices, and erosion control practices.
(1) Encourage Proper Site Selection. Evolve procedures
to guide developers to sites which are physically
appropriate to the intended use and will thus exert less
impact upon the natural environment. Builders and
developers can minimize erosion, sedimentation,
sanitary sewage disposal and other environmental
problems by selecting the best site for the intended
use. Since tracts of land vary in suitability for different
uses, knowing the kind of soil, the topography, the sub-
surface conditions, the drainage patterns and the avail-
ability of sewer services will-help in identifying and
evaluating potential problems. In practice, however,
other site evaluation factors, such as market area,
traffic access, land cost and public services, have
tended to predominate in this entrepreneurial decision-
making process. Environmental considerations have
generally been dealt with once the site is selected, if
at all.
(2) Modify Project Size and Mix. Encourage development
mix and intensity compatible with the natural features
of the site, with assimilative capacity of receiving
waters and with other off-site conditions. It is
generally known that maximum zoning limits become
minimum development targets. It is usually possible,
however, to negotiate officially or unofficially if a zoning
change or site plan review is required. If, for instance,
a proposed development would generate degrading storm
water runoff or it should impose sanitary sewage treat-
ment difficulties, it may be possible to scale down the
amount of on-site activity to a more reasonable level.
Furthermore, it may be possible for the public body
to require a land use mix which is more compatible with
local water quality conditions (i. e., reducing the pro-
jected population of the development, substituting service-
related industry for product-oriented industry, etc. ).
133
-------
In such an evaluation, consideration should be given to
such factors as:
(a) Matching land use intensity to natural features
(topography, soil erodability, vegetation, etc.).
(b) Matching use intensity against current and fore-
casted quality of receiving waters.
(c) Matching land use intensity to off-site conditions
(land runoff, committed allocations of sewer line
capacity, etc.).
(d) Planning a use mix which permits utilization of
the same parking areas by various uses at various
times, thus reducing overall magnitude of
impermeable parking lots.
(3) Apply Sound Site Planning Principles. Utilize advice,
regulation, and review to insure that the site plan is
compatible with the land form and the water quality
conditions. Frequently, care exerted in site planning
may be as important a consideration as obtaining an
optimal location. It is important that site planning for
a project be conducted in a manner which minimizes
runoff pollution and maximizes groundwater recharge.
Detaining storm water runoff reduces the amount of
sedimentation and other runoff impurities reaching a
surface water body, while recharging the groundwater
aquifer decreases the likelihood that the aquifer will
diminish the base flow of the surface water body. The
following discussion is devoted to ways of fitting the
project to the site so as to accomplish these two goals.
Erosion and sedimentation as well as the other impurities
carried by runoff, can be controlled effectively, and at
reasonable cost, if certain principles are followed in
the use and treatment of land. These principles include:
Minimizing the amount of impermeable surface.
Reducing the velocity and controlling the flow
of runoff.
Detaining runoff on the site to trap sediment.
These principles may be incorporated within site plans
in the following ways:
134
-------
(a) Cluster or concentrate the proposed land develop-
ment within a smaller portion of the site, thereby
allowing the development to attain its agreed-upon
use intensity factor or floor area ratio while at
the same time reducing the total site coverage.
This may require the relaxing of lot size minimums
and height limits as they might be imposed in
traditional zoning ordinances.
(b) Use for open space those sections of the site
which are not well suited for urban development.
Land falling into this category may include steep
slope areas, flood plains, wetlands, soils with
severe limitations for development, and soils with
a high susceptibility to erosion.
(c) Develop large tracts of land in small increments
or phases so that construction can be completed
rapidly, and so the large land areas are not left
bare for long periods of time.
(d) Where large amounts of parking are required
(i.e., large shopping centers, office parks, and
industrial developments), the provision of multi-
level parking structures can be required so as to
reduce total parking lot acreage. Where surface
level parking is necessary, the use of semi-
pervious paving material should be given strong
consideration.
(e) Interrupt large expanses of impervious area with
natural or landscaped surfaces to aid the dispersion
of runoff.
(4) Water Conservation Practices. In the interest of con-
serving water supply and reducing surface and ground
water withdrawl rates, proposed land uses should be
required to incorporate recycling procedures and water
conservation plumbing devices. Table 17 provides a
comparative analysis of some plumbing devices
designed to meet this objective.
(5) Erosion Control Practices. If a program for erosion
is worked out during the planning and design stages,
before plans become fixed and construction begins, the
problems brought on by soil erosion, runoff, and sedi-
mentation can usually be avoided or lessened. Necessary
information on soil, topography, and geologic and hydro-
logic conditions should be obtained during site studies.
135
-------
TABLE 17
WATER CONSERVATION
PLUMBING DEVICES RANKED BY WATER SAVING COST EFFECTIVENESS *
WATER
.SAVINGS
HARDWARE DEVICE GPCD (1)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Aerator for
Lavatory and
Kitchen Sink 0.5
Dual Cycle
Water Closet 17.5
Limiting Flow
Valves for
Shower 6
Batch-type Flush
Valves (2) for
Water Closet 15.5
Vacuum Flush
Toilet (for
100 homes) 22.5
Recycle Toilets 24.7
Batch-type Flush
Valve (1) for
Water Closet 7.5
Shallow Trap
Water Closet 7.5
Urinal with Batch-
Type Flush Valve 7
Washing Machine
with Level Control
Control 1.2
Vacuum Flush
Toilet (for
Single Homes) 22.5
Limiting Flow
Valves for
Lavatory 0.5
ESTIMATED INSTALLATION
COSTS
MATL. LABOR
$ $
2 0
100 30
35 15
120 38
.
300 25
75 30
80 30
150 25
35 0
!*
45 23
TOTAL
$
2
130
50
158
295
325
105
110
175
35
1520
68
WATER-SAVINGS
COST-EFFECTIVENESS
TOTAL
$/GPCDU;
4
7.4
8.3
10.2
13.1
13.2
14
14.7
25
29.2
67
136
GPCD, gallons per capita per day
* Source: Wenk (196)
136
-------
Particular attention should be given to on and off-site
measures that may be needed to prevent damage to
downstream land and property, either by erosion or
sediment. The basic objectives during the construction
process should be:
(a) Leaving the soil exposed for a minimal amount
of time.
(b) Providing for the collection of sediment and
debris to prevent entry into the receiving water
body.
(c) Releasing the runoff water and its contained
impurities safely.
The satisfication of these objectives should be of concern
within public projects such as highway construction and
sewer and water line installation, as much as it should
be a concern within private land development projects.
There are two basic categories of erosion and sediment
control measures -- mechanical and vegetative. To a
lesser extent, chemical measures are also used. The
most widely used of these measures are presented in
Figure 17. Detailed information and standards and
. specifications developed for local conditions can be
obtained from the local office of the Soil Conservation
Service in some local soil and water conservation
districts. The Environmental Protection Agency has
recently issued a comprehensive manual outlining
techniques for erosion and sediment control (53).
Figure 17 shows a sample plan for controlling erosion
during construction.
d. Techniques and Examples
(1) Zoning and Subdivision Regulations. Planned unit
development regulations and subdivision regulations
can control site development mix, size and design. In
order to accomplish the kind of clustering described
above, it would be necessary to have a flexible set of
developmental regulations which do not tie the developer
down to a rigid method of placing buildings over the
site. Subdivision regulations can be further improved
by incorporating a requirement that all site plans sub-
mitted to the local governmental unit include the
location of on-site vegetation as well as soil conditions.
The intent would be to point out clearly those areas of
vegetation which the plan would displace as well as a more
clear indication of the kind of runoff and drainage problems
which the site may have to deal with.
137
-------
Figure 16
Erosion and Sediment Control Measures
for Construction Sites
MECHANICAL MEASURES
VEGETATIVE MEASURES
1. LAND GRADING: Grade only those areas necessary
for immediate construction. Minimize cut and fill;
avoid heavy grading.
2. BENCH TERRACES: Constructed across the slope of
the land to break long slopes and slow the flow of
runoff.
3. SUBSURFACE DRAINS: Sometimes required at
base of fill slopes to remove excess ground water.
4. DIVERSIONS: Ridges and channels used to divert
runoff away from erodable slopes; particularly useful
along highway embankments.
5. BERMS: Useful around large parking lots to collect
runoff for gradual release through grassed outlets or
subsurface drains.
6. SEDIMENT BASINS: A permanent or temporary dam
to detain runoff and trap sediment.
1. VEGETATIVE PROTECTION: Conserve maximum
amount of ground cover particularly along stream
corridors.
2. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEEDING:
Seeding will add stability to soils which are not needed
either permanently or temporarily for construction.
Grasses, legumes, trees, shrubs, vines and ground
covers can be used.
3. MULCH: Straw mulch can be used to protect con-
structed slopes and other areas regraded at an
unfavorable time for seeding.
4. STREAM CHANNEL STABILIZATION: Eroding or
erosion-prone channels and stream banks can be
stabilized by use of vegetation, rip-rap and mechanical
measures.
-------
Figure 17
Sample Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
UNDISTURBED
TEMPORARY BLOCK
SILT TRAP
'EARTH DIVERSION BERM
STRAW BALE
STRAW BALE DIVERSION
EARTH DIVERSION BERM
EARTH DIVERSION BERM
-390 -
EMERGENCY
SPILLWAY
UNDISTURBED
-386--/
TEMP. EASEMEN
Source: Erosion-Siltation Control Handbook (Draft). Fairfax County,Virginia.
-------
Recent innovative new land use controls include:
(a) The University of Delaware's Water Resources
Center is currently conducting a study of the
Christina River Basin which is geared toward
developing an across-the-board set of project
development regulations (163). Such regulations
would be designed to force the developer/builder
to consider the real costs of protective devices
and design improvements necessary to minimize
the project-related water quality impacts of
development of the selected site.
To implement such an approach, a community
would define desired levels of environmental
quality and outline the acceptable control measures.
It would then be up to the developer/builder to
assess the cost impact upon his cash flow and the
site's profitability. Undoubtedly, this imposition
of real environmental costs would eventually begin
to influence the site selection process and would,
in general, reduce development-related damage
to the environment. For example, Tourbier (163)
cites the case of planning 1-95 through Tinicum
Marsh near Philadelphia when the alignment was
relocated to higher ground when the costs of
culverts (necessary to maintain fresh water flow
into the marsh) were calculated. This occurred,
not because an engineering solution was not
possible, but because construction costs were
prohibitively high.
(b) In Ramapo, New York, (population: 77, 000), the
zoning ordinance was amended to create a
"special permit" requirement for all residential
development. The permit is granted only if
standards are met for minimum facilities and
services available to the new development. The
net effect is improved control over both the
location and timing of development.
(c) Petaluma, California, (population: 29, 500), has
put into operation a control ordinance which
establishes an annual residential land development
quota and awards allotments for development on
the basis of those projects receiving the most
evaluation points. Points are assigned on the
basis of availability of public facilities and
services and quality of design. In addition, all
proposals must conform with the general plan
and environmental design plan.
140
-------
(2) Statewide or Regional Review. In Vermont, a permit
structure has been developed, and each application for
development must be reviewed by a district commission
and may be appealed to the state's environmental board.
Approval is based upon a set of rigid criteria including
the following selected water quality criteria (13):
(a) The project will not result in undue water pollution.
In making this determination, it shall at least
consider the elevation of land above sea level and
in relation to the flood plains, the nature of the
soils and subsoils and their ability to adequately
support waste disposal; the slope of the land and
its effect on effluent, availability of streams for
disposal of effluent; and the applicable health and
water resources department regulation.
(b) The project will not cause unreasonable soil
erosion or reduction of capacity of the land to
hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy
condition may result.
(c) The project will not have an undue adverse effect
on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics,
historical sites, or rare and irreplaceable natural
areas-
The clearinghouse function performed by designated
state and area-wide organizations under the Office of
Management and Budget's Memorandum A-95 may also
be of benefit in ecnouraging public projects, as well as
private housing projects financed under FHA mortgage
insurance, to comply with environmentally sound site .
planning and development procedures.
(3) Implementation Through Financial Mechanisms^
Project mortgages on new developments, whether con-
veniently or federally insured, could have stringent
requirements regarding permanent means of erosion
and storm water runoff control. For instance, site
planners could be required to provide attractive means
of storm water detention on site to reduce the volume
of runoff from the development. The Maine Bankers'
Association adopted a pollution code which requires
member banks to consider environmental aspects of
each project before approving requested loans or
mortgages.
141
-------
(4) Implementation Through Dedication. Localities can
insure that site planning respect the integrity of environ-
mentally sensitive areas by requiring the dedication of
park land as a technique to insure preservation of
environmentally sensitive sections of tracts undergoing
development. Flood plains, and stream buffers
are notable areas where localities are increasingly
demanding conservation by dedication to the local govern-
ment or other organization which can guarantee its
maintenance and preservation.
(5) Implementation Through Other Mechanisms. Other
tools which have been evolved in this country to imple-
ment improved site planning vary from state laws
assessing the impact of massive new developments to
tree preservation ordinances. For instance:
(a) Saratoga, California, now requires subdivision
developers to attain a certain number of trees per
lot; Summit, New York, bars the cutting of a tree
thicker than three inches in diameter, unless it
endangers the public; and Atlanta requires a permit
if more than 25 percent of the trees on a lot are to
be felled.
(b) The California Environmental Quality Act provides
yet another tool for insuring site development
which is compatible with water quality goals.
Under a recent court interpretation, this law,
passed in 1970, has been extended to cover not
just public projects, but all private land develop-
ment projects as well. Under the recent Friends
of Mammoth Decision, the court has instructed
all private developments which began after the
adoption of this act to file, retroactively if
necessary, statements describing the environ-
mental impacts to be generated by each development.
(c) Regulations such as those which may apply to
locatidnally appropriate use of septic tanks or
other on-site disposal systems would also be of
assistance. The use of on-site disposal systems
to serve low density development may be a viable
alternative to sewer extension in some cases;
such a decision is dependent upon soil conditions,
topography, the hydrology of the area, and the
profosed density. Drainage fields should, in all
cases, be well removed from wells, stream sides,
and other watercourses.
142
-------
(d) Building codes can be modified to require
installation of water saving plumbing devices.
(6) Erosion Control Regulations. Ordinances and program
requirements are major methods of insuring that proper
attention is given to erosion control during construction.
Mandatory control may be imposed either by the state
or by local governmental entities. Any erosion controls
adopted by any of these entities to be legally valid must
satisfy two requirements: first, that any statute,
ordinance or regulation to be legally valid must be
designed to promote the health, safety or general
welfare of the enacting jurisdiction's inhabitants; and
second, that the measure adopted must be a rational
and sensible method of achieving one of these three
permissible objectives. At the state level these are the
only limitations involved when enacting erosion legis-
lation. Cities, counties, and special districts (such
as soil and water conservation districts), however,
aside from being similarly limited, must, in addition,
be delegated power by the states to enact ordinances
which are environmentally beneficial. Local regulations
may be separate ordinances or may be contained in
subdivision regulations, zoning ordinances and building
codes. Examples of such control at the state and local
level follow:
(a) Maryland was the first state which enacted a law
requiring that all counties and municipalities
adopt erosion and sediment control ordinances,
with its Department of Natural Resources estab-
lishing criteria and procedures to be used by
counties and soil conservation districts in pre-
paring and implementing the control program
(House Bill No. 115, Maryland - 1970).
(b) Fairfax County, Virginia, is experiencing very
high levels of construction activity and has
recognized that erosion control is a major environ-
mental concern. The county code and subdivision
and site development requirements have been
amended to require sedimentation and erosion
control measures. Additionally, the county has
prepared an excellent Erosion-Siltation Control
Handbook discussing erosion control planning
costs and enforcement measures as well as data
on the soils of the county (185). In Fairfax
County, all requests for clearing and grading
143
-------
permits, building permits, or other activities
which involve clearing, filling, grading, and con-
struction, are analyzed by the county's Design
Review Division to determine erosion and siltation
requirements. If controls are required, the
developer is required to sign an erosion and
siltation agreement and deposit an amount in
escrow equal to the cost of providing the control
before the plans can be approved or grading permits
issued.
(c) A Model State Act for Soil Erosion and Sediment
Control is suggested by the Council of State
Governments. The act bases the legislation on
amendment to enabling legislation for soil con-
servation districts (which exist in all 50 states).
The Model Act relates erosion and sediment control
to water quality, encompasses erosion caused by
both wind and water, and applies to virtually all
land disturbing activity.
(d) Soil conservation districts in 27 states and
Puerto Rico have been authorized by the state
government to issue land use regulations to control
erosion. The process for issuing such regulations
is laborious, generally requiring public hearing
and referendum before passage (13).
(e) The State of Iowa recently (1972) enacted a law
envisioning financial assistance to land owners
in implementing sediment control practices.
Under the law, the soil conservation districts
can require implementation of such measures if
federal or other public funds covering 75 percent
of the cost are made available to the owner (35).
(if) Otsego County, Michigan, adopted an ordinance
in 1971 requiring approval of erosion and sediment
control measures in accordance with standards
of the local soil conservation district prior to
approval of site plan or plat. An occupancy
permit cannot be issued for the completed
structure unless the control measures have been
implemented. Furthermore, property owners
must maintain permanent erosion control
measures (H3).
144
-------
Guideline #6: Agriculture and Silvaculture
a. Guidelines
(1) Where agricultural land uses represent significant
sources of water pollution, attention should be given
to the development of improved waste management and
land management measures, including:
(a) Soil conservation practices.
(b) Animal waste disposal practices.
(c) Pesticide application practices.
(d) Fertilizing practices.
(e) Irrigation.
(2) Advisory organizations serving agricultural and silva-
culture interests should be encouraged to upgrade
educational and assistance programs and assist, where
appropriate, in the preparation, implementation and
administration of conservation regulations.
(3) An implementation program and schedule should be
prepared showing target dates, organization responsi-
bilities, and financial resource needs for putting
improved agriculture and silva culture conservation
practices into effect.
b. Premise. Improved agriculture and silvaculture conserva-
tion practices and increased pressure for operators to
develop and follow acceptable conservation plans can reduce
non-point discharges. Agriculture and silvaculture sources
of pollution are largely non-point and are perhaps the most
difficult to control. Water flow over cropland and feed lots
transports soil particles, manure, salts, nutrients, and
pesticides from the land into the surface water; chemicals and
nutrients in solution may percolate through the soil into
groundwater. Runoff from logging areas carries increased
nutrient loads, sediment and thermal loads.
145
-------
The above problems become increasingly acute in areas of
intensive agriculture or silvaculture use where waste loads
are concentrated and the waste assimilation capacities of
receiving water are inadequate. Widespread use of known
conservation techniques can significantly reduce the negative
impacts which agriculture and logging may have on water
quality. Planners should be aware of potential escalation of
deleterious effects of agriculture on water quality and the
relationship should be a consideration of regional land use
planning, especially around urbanizing areas. Evolution
of better measures for control should be given high priority
since the problem can be expected to increase in future
years (116).
(1) Soil Conservation. Despite erosion control efforts to
date, it has been estimated that between 50 and 75
percent of the sediment washed into the nation's waters
each year comes from crop and pasture lands (36).
Sediment from cropland entering surface waters in the
U. S. in 1967 was estimated at 2. 6 billion tons by USDA.
Sound soil conservation practices would benefit not
just water quality conditions but also the farmer, allowing
him to retain rich topsoil now lost to waters. The Soil
Conservation Service has a continuing program of
advising farmers on the use of contour plowing, strip
cropping, crop rotation, terracing, and improved
drainage control.
For timber harvesting operations, the strategy should
be to encourage use of practices which minimize exposure
of bare soil and increases in erosion. Such practices
include patch cutting, reforestation, and sediment
retention devices. Broader application of such soil
conservation practices plus the protection of natural
buffer strips along stream corridors and waterways
are needed in both agricultural and logging areas.
(2) Animal Waste Disposal. Traditional land and water
disposal techniques used in the elimination of animal
wastes have, in many areas, become undesirable.
146
-------
Particular problems exist with large cattle feed farms
and hog raising operations. For instance, a feed lot
of ten thousand cattle produces nearly 750, 000 pounds
of waste per day (36). Such modern agricultural
practices as animal waste composting operations could
have a substantial impact if they were applied on a
broader basis.
(3) Pesticide Control. Pesticide runoff within agricultural
areas also poses a difficult challenge. Although this
issue is greatly dependent upon further research in the
area of perfecting new insect control techniques,
curtailment in the use of hard pesticides as well as
more careful application could reduce one of the'
significant surface water contaminants generated within
agricultural areas.
(4) Irrigation Management. In agricultural regions where
irrigation is a major use of water, efforts should be
made to manage that use of water in a way which does
not substantially diminish the quantity and the quality
of the withdrawal source. The accomplishment of this
strategy, of course, is extremely difficult due to the
fact that water laws in the arid regions where irrigation
is a major water use present many obstacles to planning
and regulation of the amount of irrigation water use.
c. Techniques and Examples. Although advisory assistance to
control agriculturally engendered pollution is widespread,
regulatory controls are not. Most erosion and sediment
control ordinances enacted to date exempt agricultural uses
from their provisions, although several encourage utilization
of approved agricultural practices. The states have the
primary responsibility for regulating agricultural sources,
either directly through water pollution statutes or indirectly
through laws regulating land use and agricultural methods.
A state or locality, for example, may ban the sale or use of
a pesticide found to be unduly dangerous (218). They may
require that wastewater be discharged from agricultural
areas at environmentally proper times (232), and they may,
147
-------
through zoning ordinances, exclude agricultural activities
from environmentally sensitive lands or gathfer such activities
together in an area particularly suited for water quality
control (229).
New regulations should be explored which would require
better management of agriculture and silvaculture, including
provisions to: time the application of pesticides and fertilizer;
require planting of vulnerable banks of watercourses in
permanent crops; and require mandatory planting of temporary
cover crops to protect topsoil from excessive erosion. It
should be added that such requirements can sometimes place
an insupportable financial burden on individual farmers, so
study of devices for financial relief should coincide with
evolution of agricultural regulation. Obstacles in the path
of strategies to improve water quality by regulating agri-
cultural operations would appear to be more political or
economic than legal. The concept of protection of the
nation's water and land by requiring sound management practices
is, however, gaining currency:
(1) The Model State Act for Soil Erosion and Sediment
Control developed by the Council of State Governments
enables local soil conservation districts to require
that agriculture and forestry practices be carried out
in conformance with conservation standards established
pursuant to the Act.
(2) Pennsylvania's Environmental Quality Board has
adopted regulations requiring erosion control measures
to prevent stream and lake pollution. Under these
regulations erosion and sedimentation control plans
will be required for agricultural activities (plowing and
tilling only) by July 1, 1977 (173).
(3) The 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act directly
includes agriculture and silvaculture by dealing with
all sources of water contamination. Further, there
148
-------
is specific mention of agricultural and silvaculture
sources in the provisions of the Act dealing with
planning (Section 208). Discharges or runoff from both
point and non-point sources constitute violations of
federal law. Whether and to what extent means will be
developed for subjecting them to the federal or state
permit systems is a question, but it is a fact that
agricultural and silvaculture practices and operations
can lead to violations.
Guideline #7: Resource Extraction
a. Guidelines
(1) Where resource extraction land uses are a source of
water quality degradation, the sources shall be identified
and procedures and methods shall be developed for
control of site location and planning, management of
waste-producing operational practices, and land recla-
mation. If existing regulations and enforcement pro-
visions for control of extraction activities are inadequate,
a program should be prepared for eliminating the legal
and administrative deficiencies.
(2) Particular attention shall be paid to reclamation of
abandoned extraction sites which may remain as
sources of water degradation until reclamation
practices are implemented.
b. Premise. Resource extraction operations must be regulated
in a manner which insures minimal disruption to the locale
and prevention of erosion, sedimentation or toxic discharges
from the sites. The quality of land management practices
applied in the quarrying of sand and gravel and in the mining
of coal; sulfur and other minerals has not been satisfactory
from the water quality standpoint.
Resource extraction may be either a surface or subsurface
operation. Some type of surface extraction of resources
149
-------
occurs in each of the 50 states, and only slightly more than
one-third of these mined areas has been reclaimed as of
1965 according to Soil Conservation Service figures. Although
surface extraction is generally the most efficient method of
mining, the process must be managed carefully to preclude
awesome damage to the environment. "Spoil, " the piles of
earth, vegetation, and rock scooped from above the deposit,
is prey to erosion and sedimentation, as well as acid drainage.
The mounds of waste generated by processing the ore may
cause similar problems.
Specific pollutants vary with the type of extraction. However,
erosion and sedimentation are possible at any site where
proper site planning, construction techniques, and planting
are not carried out. Other major threats to water quality
can come from the salt water which is a by-product of oil
extraction or acid mine drainage from coal mines and their
spoils and from erosion and sedimentation. Unlike most other
activities, negative side effects of mining can continue long
after the mining operation has been discontinued unless proper
reclamation measures are taken. Technology and practices
exist by which all of these undesirable side effects can be
controlled, and most states, as well as the extraction industries,
actively pursue some form of pollution abatement and control.
c. Techniques and Examples. Careful preplanning and super-
vision of new mine development can militate against potential
pollution during and after the extraction activity. Legislation
requiring permit approval has been enacted in several states
and localities, including Pennsylvania, West Virginia,
Maryland, and Ohio. Criteria and regulations to protect
150
-------
water quality should be an integral component of the evaluation
process and may be incorporated in requirements concerning
design, management, and reclmation measures. West
Virginia's regulations, for example, require submission of
plans for both natural and man made drainage, for erosion
and sediment control, treatment of mine drainage, and
revegetation. Regulations in Pennsylvania and Illinois
require posting of a performance bond to insure compliance
with water quality plans. Several states also regulate in-
stream extraction of sand, gravel and other mineral deposits,
as well as those extraction activities which are located in
close proximity to water bodies.
D. GUIDELINES FOR PLANNING WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
Wastewater collection and treatment facilities and major producers of
water-borne wastes should be planned and constructed in consonance
with the existing land use patterns, water quality standards, and com-
prehensive plans for the region. The guidelines which follow outline the
process by which planning for wastewater treatment should be related to
land use. General relationships between wastewater treatment facilities
and land use are discussed, as are treatment plant location, sewer
trunk and interceptor design, water conservation practices, discharge
permit systems, and sewer moratoria.
Guideline #1: General Considerations
a. Interagency review, on an inter-governmental scale, should
be pursued in an effort to insure that:
151
-------
(1) Wastes will be compatible with established and
projected downstream uses.
i.
(2) Possible economies of scale or joint usage of site or
facilities are exploited.
(3) Facilities will be locationally compatible with the
stability of already developed areas and plans for
future development.
(4) The type of facility, site size, and design will blend
with topography and surrounding development.
(5) Disruption of the site, the area, and of water quality
during the construction period will be within acceptable
bounds.
b. Alternatives should be evolved and analyzed so that partici-
pants in the planning and decision-making processes under-
stand options open to them and the ramifications of each.
Alternative solutions should be considered with regard to:
(1) Sites. Alternative sites should be located and the
merits and constraints of each evaluated to determine
relative feasibility.
(2) Timing and Routes of Collector System. Implications
of options should be assessed in terms of conformance
with comprehensive land use and development plans,
population projections, availability of other public
services, and real estate values.
(3) Means of Disposal. Decision makers should understand
available alternatives basic to treatment plant siting,
such as one large plant versus smaller, dispersed
plants, or long distance piping of wastes rather than
siting the plant in a developed area.
c. Potential sites for wastewater treatment facilities and
corridors for future interceptor sewers should be included
in long-range comprehensive land use plans so that potentially
incompatible developments can be precluded near sites which
will be utilized for treatment facilities in the future. Also,
new development sited near future lines should be designed
so as to minimize disruption when the lines are built.
152
-------
Guideline #2: Treatment Plant Location and Design
a. Location decisions for treatment plants require detailed
>
study of land forms, regional land uses, future growth of the
service area, engineering criteria and operations data.
(1) Alternative sites should be selected and analyzed
with regard to existing ecological and hydrological
conditions, clear statement of existing and planned
land uses, and socio-economic implications of
alternative sites.
(2) An interdisciplinary team representing the skills of the
engineering architecture, urban planning, landscape
architecture, and ecology professions should conduct
the site selection study.
(3) - Sites should meet the following desirable conditions:
(a) Natural features which can accommodate the
treatment facility with little or no disturbance.
(b) No excessive problems of drainage, runoff,
slope, soil conditions or geologic subsurface
disturbances.
(c) Opportunity for accommodating compatible uses
at site.
(d) Proximity to a water body of the size and quality
sufficient to handle, in all seasons, treated
effluent without quality degradation.
(e) Least negative impact on surrounding environ-
ment and property values.
(f) Availability of space for expansion if necessary
in the future.
(g) Avoidance of visually prominent sites in favor of
less, obtrusive alternatives.
(h) Minimal dislocation of homes or other forms of
development.
(i) Avoidance of destruction of unique geologic or
archeological areas or historic landmarks.
(j) Avoidance of side effects associated with disposal
of the solid waste residue to be generated by the
plant.
153
-------
b. Treatment plant sites should be designed and developed
according to the following principles:
(1) The structure should be set back from the stream and
protective flood-proofing methods used to minimize
possibility of damage to the facility or release of
pollutants to downstream areas during flood conditions.
The resulting space between the receiving water and
plant may be used for recreational areas or other
forms of open space compatible with streamside buffers.
(2) The site plan and structure design should meet the
following criteria:
(a) Area for future expansion should be included in
initial concept design.
(b) The layout of the facility should respect existing
topography and character of the site.
(c) The long axis of plant structures should be
oriented perpendicular to natural water bodies
or other scenic areas to avoid blocking views
and access.
(d) Prominent locations for unsightly structures
should be avoided.
(e) Landscaping should be compatible with natural
vegetation in the area.
(f) The construction process should minimize dis-
ruption of vegetation and implement full erosion
and sediment control program.
(g) The construction process should be planned so
as to minimize possible nuisance or disruption
to surrounding development.
(h) The plant design should complement any other
structures being planned at the same time and
should not detract from existing waterfront
development.
Guideline #3; Sewer Trunk and Interceptor Planning
The relationship between growth and sewer trunk and interceptor design
and construction is a delicate one. In most instances the goal is to
154
-------
serve normal projected growth without overburdening the existing treat-
ment plants, overextending the public purse, or overstimulating growth
and development.
a. Locational Criteria
(1) Sewer districts generally are based on natural drainage
basins and decisions to install new trunk lines and
interceptors within the basins must be made with
regard to:
(a) Existing land use patterns.
(b) Area plans and goals for new development.
(c) Economic feasibility of the line with regard to unique
or difficult engineering or construction needs
which may elevate costs.
(d) Natural topography, hydrology, and ecological
conditions which could be disturbed or destroyed
either by construction of the lines or development
induced by the lines.
(2) Proposed trunklines should be examined for conferm-
ance of projected impact with comprehensive land use
plans. Considerations include whether the lines will
support desirable growth patterns and densities.
(3) Locational decisions should include consideration of
possible overall degradation of water quality due to
increased sedimentation and runoff from development
made possible by the new sewer service capacity.
(4) Extension decisions which might permit "leapfrogging"
of urban development into more rural areas should be
examined carefully with regard both to area plans to
manage sprawl and the desirability of committing
public funds to stretches of unutilized sewer to reach
the proposed development.
b. Timing Criteria
(1) Decisions to construct lines and timing of the construc-
tion must be made in coordination with other public
agency plans for providing services, such as highway
departments and school and health systems, to insure
that social dislocation will not result from premature,
unsupported development.
155
-------
(2) Population projections, market studies, and compre-
hensive plans should indicate immediate or short range
demand of sufficient size to support the amortization
plan devised by the responsible jurisdiction.
(3) In areas undergoing rapid growth where treatment
facilities are being expanded and lines being extended,
timing of these capital programs should be coordinated
so that neither is completed far in advance of the other.
(4) Long range planning and construction commitments
should be sufficiently flexible that future shifts in
growth patterns or advances in wastewater treatment
system design can be accommodated without resulting
in substantial waste or underutilization of collection
systems.
(5) Temporary on-site disposal systems and package
plants, where deemed appropriate, should be clearly
related to long range plans for public service.
c. Capacity Criteria
(1) Trunk line capacity should generally be based on pro-
jected short and mid-range growth, rather than be of
a size as to over stimulate development.
(2) Allocation mechanisms to control tap-ins to interceptors
are necessary to insure that capacity designed to serve
future desired development is not utilized by unplanned
development.
d. Installation Criteria
(1) Construction should be planned and supervised to
insure minimal disruption to the natural environment
and to traffic patterns and nearby development.
(2) Erosion and sedimentation control measures should be
implemented during construction.
(3) Removal of natural vegetative cover should be minimized
and replanting should immediately follow completion of
short segments.
(4) Plans for locating and screening of construction
machinery and stockpiles should be required.
156
-------
e. Financing Factors
(1) Decisions to "open up" large areas by installing new
lines should be made with full realization that additional
expenditures for a wide range of public services and
utilities will be required for perhaps extended periods
in the future until the development begins to pay its own
way.
(2) If financing sewer construction is done through a
special assessment district which generally requires
building up a core population temporarily utilizing on-
site disposal methods, the later shift to a public sewer
system should be pre-planned so that homeowner costs
are more easily financed. Consideration should be
given to such techniques as:
(a) Installing collector system at time of construction
so that hook-up to a public system can occur as
soon as an interceptor is extended.
(b) Assessing a pre-construction fee for developing
a capital construction fund.
Guideline #4: Water Conservation Practices
a. Water conservation should be considered as a means for
reducing the necessary capacity of facilities needed to
collect, convey, and treat both domestic and industrial
waste, as well as for reducing per capita usage of water.
b. Water quality managers and planners should encourage the
domestic use of various devices available to curtail water
use. Ootions to reduce water consumption include: faucet
aerators, flow control shower heads, automatic flush valve
toilets, shallow trap water closets, and the English dual
cycle water closet. Table 17 lists water saving devices
ranked by cost-effectiveness.
157
-------
c. Industrial, commercial, and agricultural reuse of water
should be encouraged. For instance, in-plant recirculation
of water should be pursued not only to reduce total water
requirements but also to decrease waste discharges.
d. Planners of wastewater systems should be cognizant of
possibilities for reuse of effluent, generally after some type
of treatment, and alert both local governments and water
users to such possibilities. Treated sewage effluent, for
instance, can be utilized for irrigation purposes. However,
special attention should be paid to land use impacts by such
reuse practices (i.e., heavy metal residues in food, reduction
in soil permeability, etc.).
e. Water conservation practices should be encouraged by incor-
porating them within building codes and other state and local
regulations.
Guideline #5: Discharge Permit System
a. An effective mechanism should be established for review of
significant discharge and waste disposal applications by
agencies responsible for land use planning and control,
including the local planning commission or agency and the
areawide planning agency.
b. Point source uses which should be subjected to such review
include:
(1) Industries.
(2) Power plants.
158
-------
(3) Residential, commercial, or recreational package plants.
(4) On-site disposal systems serving developments of all
commercial and recreational enterprises and sub-
divisions of more than 10 dwelling units.
(5) Cattle feedlots.
c. In review of applications for discharge permits, whether
required at the federal, state or local level, consideration
should be given to potential land use impacts -- aesthetic
incompatibility, premature development, adverse effects on
public services, depreciation of property values, damage to
recreational areas, degradation of land resources, and other
impacts which might be caused either by new or continued
point discharges.
d. Alternative locations and relocation of point sources should
be considered where waste treatment technology is incapable
of resolving water quality problems and/or land use impacts.
e. Permits for septic tanks, where they are allowed by state
and local law, should be closely analyzed and monitored.
(1) Septic tanks should be permitted only after thorough
investigation of soil suitability and topography, impact
upon land use plans, and public service capabilities.
(2) Consideration should be given to devising a system of
registering and inspecting septic systems to insure
that proper maintenance procedures are followed.
f. To avoid proliferation of sewer systems and service districts,
all domestic waste treatment facilities should be publicly
provided and maintained as a step toward reaching that goal.
Private treatment and collection facilities should not be per-
mitted within a reasonable distance from an existing collection
line which could be utilized in the immediate or more distant
future.
159
-------
Guideline #6; Sewer Moratoria and Permit Allocation Policies
While governmentally imposed moratoria or limitations on sewer taps
can serve as useful temporary or permanent tools in stabilizing growth
within overburdened sewer service districts, policy makers should give
consideration to the following:
a. Policies which significantly alter the availability of sewer
tap-in permits should be coordinated on an area-wide basis
to preclude the possibility of shifting excessive growth
burdens to unprepared neighboring jurisdictions.
b. Since there is a significant time lag (up to two years) between
imposition of sewer moratoria and actual reduction of con-
struction activity, such action should either be taken well
in advance of overload conditions or be made retroactively
applicable to all projects which are still in the construction
stages.
c. The development of sewer tap allocation formulas should
consider service and qualitative factors as well as equity
principles. (For instance, issuance of limited sewer tap
permits on a first-come, first-served basis may result in
less desirable development than a policy which allocates
permits to areas where development is more easily serviced
or where socially, aesthetically or economically significant
development would be encouraged.)
d. Special attention should be given to the impact of sewer and/
or construction moratoria upon housing market costs and the
supply of housing, particularly for low and moderate income
households.
160
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was prepared by the following staff members: Mr. Stephen C.
Nelson (AMV Project Manager), Mrs. Suzan K. Cheek (AMV Urban Planner),
Miss Janice Birara(AMV Urban Planner), Mr. Alex Bigler (AMV Advisor),
Mr. Robert P. Shubinski (WRE Project Coordinator), Mr. Gerald F. Tierney
(WRE Water Quality Engineer), and Mr. Mitchell Wendell (Attorney and
President of Environments for Tomorrow).
Special appreciation is extended to the numerous federal, state, regional,
and local agencies who provided information and advice to the study team.
161
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Agricultural Research Service, A Universal Equation for Predicting
Rainfall--Erosion Losses: An Aid to Conservation Farming in Humid
Regions. ARS Report 22-66, USDA, Washington, D.C. 1961.
2. Akerlindh, G., "The Quality of Storm Water Flows. " Nordish Hygienish
Tidskrift (Stockholm) Vol. 31, No. 1, January 1950.
3. American Public Works Association, Water Pollution Aspects of Urban
Runoff. Chicago, Illinois, 1969.
4. . Proceedings, National Conference on Solid Waste Research.
Chicago, Illinois, December 1963.
5. American Society of Civil Engineers, Urban Water Resources-Research.
PN 184-318, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia,
1968.
6. AVCO Economic Systems Corporation, Storm Water Pollution from Urban
Land Activity. Washington, B.C., 1970.
7. Ayres, Robert U. and Kneese, Allen V., "Environmental Pollution. "
Federal Programs for the Development of Human Resources. Vol. 2, 1968.
8. Bailey, G.W. and White, J.L., "Factors Influencing the Absorption,
Desorption, and Movement of Pesticides in Soil." Residue Reviews,
Vol. 32, 1970. .
9. Bartsch, Alfred F., Algae and Metropolitan Wastes, Transactions of the
1960 Seminar. U.S. Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 1961.
10. Battelle-Columbus Laboratories, Flood Plain Management, An Approach
for Ohio. Report for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources,
Columbus, Ohio, 1971.
11. Benedict, Judith and Wasserman, Cheryl, The Brandywine Plan: Five
Years Later. University of Pennsylvania, Institute for Environmental
Studies, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, February 1972.
12. Beyer, Jacquelyne, Water Quality and Value of Home sites on the Rockway
River. Rutgers - The State University, New Brunswick, New Jersey,
December 1969.
162
-------
13. Bossellman, Fred and Callies, David, The Quiet Revolution in Land Use
Control. Prepared for the Council on Environmental Quality, Washington,
D.C., 1971.
14. Bossellman, Fred L., "Summary of Florida's Environmental Land and
Water Management Act of 1972. " Address Given at the National
Conference of the American Society of Planning Officials in Detroit,
Michigan, April 17, 1972.
15. Boughton, Walter C.,"How Land Utilization Affects Water Resources. "
Irrigation and Water Supply Commission, Queensland, Austria.
16. . Effects of Land Management on Quantity and Quality of
Available Water, A Review. Report No. 120, Water Research Laboratory
The University of New South Wales, Manly Vale, N.S .W. Australia,
May 1970.
17. Bower, Blair T., et_al.. Waste Management. Prepared for the New
York Regional Plan Association, March 1968.
18. Brandt, G.H., An Economic Analysis of Erosion and Sediment Control
Methods for Watersheds Undergoing Urbanization. The Dow Chemical
Company, Midland, Michigan, February 1972.
19. Brater, E.F., "Steps Toward a Better Understanding of Urban Runoff
Processes." J. Water Resources Research, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 1968.
20. Brown, Jeremy E., The Role of the New Construction Industry and the
Effects of the Sewer Moratorium. Suburban Maryland Homebuilders
Association, August, 1972.
21. Bryan, Edward H., Quality of Stormwater Drainage from Urban Land
Areas in North Carolina. Report Presented to Water Resources Research
Institute, University of North Carolina, June 1970.
22. Butchbaker, A.F., et al., Evaluation of Beef Cattle Feedlot Waste
Management Alternatives. Report Prepared for the Environmental
Protection Agency, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., November 1971.
23. Carey, George W., et al., Urbanization, Water Pollution and Public
Policy. New Brunswick, New Jersey, Center for Urban Policy Research,
Rutgers - The State University, 1972.
24. Clark, John W. and Viessman, Warren, Jr., Water Supply and Pollution
Control. International Textbook Company, Scran ton, Pennsylvania, 1965.
163
-------
25. Clawson, Marion, America's Land and Its Uses. Resources for the
Future, The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1972.
26. . "The State Role Vis-a-Vis the Federal in Resources, Policy
and Development." Presented at Governors' Conference on National
Land Resource Policies, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, June 29, 1972.
27. Cleveland, Jerry G., _et_al., Evaluation of Dispersed Pollutional Loads
from Urban Areas. The Bureau of Water Resources Research,
University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, April 1970.
28 Cleveland, Jerry G., Reid, George W., and Walters, Paul R.,
"Storm Water Pollution from Urban Land Activity. " Presented
at Governors' Conference on National Land Resource Policies,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, June 29. 1972.
29. Colorado, Senate Bill No. 35 (1972) Amending Colorado Revised
Statutes (1963).
30. Copeland, B.J., Odum, Howard T., and Cooper, David C., "Water
Quantity for Preservation of Estuarine Ecology. "
31. Cornell University, Department of Agronomy,. College of Agricultural
and Life Sciences, Management of Nutrients on Agricultural Land for
Improved Water Quality. Ithaca, New York, August 1971.
32. Coughlin, Robert E. and Hammer, Thomas R., Stream Quality
Preservation Through Planned Urban Development: An Evaluation
of Effects. Regional Science Research Institute, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, December 1971.
33. Coughlin, Robert E., Sheldon, Sallie and Hammer, Thomas R., "The
Intensity of Development Along Small and Medium Sized Streams in
Suburban Philadelphia." RSRI Discussion Paper Series: No. 50,
Regional Science Research Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
September 1971.
34. Council on Environmental Quality, The President's 1971 Environmental
Program: Emerging Problems. Washington, D.C., 1971.
35. ' . Environmental Quality, First Second, Third Annual Reports.
Washington, D.C., August, 1970, 1971, 1972.
36. Croke, E. J., et al., "The Relationship Between Land Use and
Environmental Protection. " Argonne National Laboratory, Briefing
Paper Prepared for the Joint Meeting of the President's Water
Pollution Control Board and Air Quality Advisory Board, March 1972.
164
-------
37. Cywin, Allen and Ward, David, Agricultural Pollution of the Great
Lakes Basin. Report to the Environmental Protection Agency,
July 1971.
38. Dale, R.H., Land Use and Its Effects on the Basal Water Supply Pearl
Harbor Area, Oahu. Hawaii, 1931-1965. Hawaii State Department of
Land and Natural Resources, Division of Water and Land Development,
U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C., 1967.
39. Davis, George, et al., Wastewater Management Project Muskegon
County, Michigan. Chicago University, Chicago, Illinois, November
1971.
40. Dawdy, David R., "Knowledge of Sedimentation in Urban Environments. "
J. Hyd. Div., ASCE. Vol. 93, No. HY6, November 1967.
41. Dearinger, J.A., Evaluating Recreational Potential of Small Streams.
ASCE Urban Planning and Development Division.
42. . Delaware, Code. Chapter 70, Title VII (1971)
43. Delogu, Orlomdo, Legal and Governmental Structures for Water
Management in Metropolitan Areas. University of Maine, Portland,
Maine, July 1971.
44. Dinius, S.H., "Social Accounting System for Evaluating Water Resources. "
J. Water Resources Research, Vol. 8, No. 5, October 1972.
45. Dion, N.P., "Some Effects of Land-Use Changes on the Shallow Ground-
Water System in the Boise-Nampa Area, Idaho." Water Information
Bulletin No. 26, prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey in Cooperation
with Idaho Department of Water Administration, June 1972.
46. Ditton, R.B. and Storey, E.H., The Identification and Critical Analysis
of Selected Literature Dealing with Recreational Aspects of Water
Resource Use, Planning and Development. WRC Research Report No.
23, Water Resources Center, University of Illinois, July 1969.
47. Edison Water Quality Laboratory, Environmental Impact of Highway
Deicing, for Water Quality Office, EPA, 11040 GKK (06/71)
48. Ellis, M. M., "Water Purity Standards for Fresh Water Fishes, "
Special Scientific Report #2, Department of Interior, 1944.
165
-------
49. Environmental Protection Agency, Hydrology of Solid Waste Disposal
Sites in Northeastern Illinois. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, B.C., 1971.
50. , Office of Water Programs, "Water Quality Planning
Environmental Material, " Prepared for the EIS Workshop, San
Francisco, California, July 10-11, 1972; New York, New York,
July 17, 1972.
51. . The Control and Prevention of Saline Seeps on
Fallowed Land. Progress Report of Workshop, Great Falls, Montana,
March 1971.
52. . Bibliography of Water Quality Research Reports,
June 1970 - June 1972. Washington, D. C.
53. . Office of Research and Monitoring, Guidelines for
Erosion and Sediment Control; Planning and Implementation.
Washington, D. C., 1972.
54. . Water Quality Office, Guidelines, Water Quality
Management Planning. Washington, D.G., January 1971.
55. . "Health Hazards of Lead. " 1972.
56. Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. Conference Report
No. 92-1465, September 28, 1972.
57. Florida, Boca Raton, Emergency Ordinance No. 1756, "The Charter
Amendment Partial Building Permit Moratorium Ordinance. "
November 8, 1972.
58. Florida Division of State Planning, Development of Regional Impacts
(DRI): Guidelines and Standards; Initial Rules Adopted by the
Administration Commission, March 7, 1962.
59. Forrest, Clyde W. (ed.), et al.. Change; The Recurring Zoning Issue.
University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, May 1970.
60. Fox, Irving K. , Water Resources Policy in Wisconsin, A Summary
Assessment, Volume 1. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin,
1971.
166
-------
61. Franklin Institute Research Laboratories, The, Selected Urban Storm
Water Runoff Abstracts. First, Second, Third Quarterly Issues,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
62. Fruh, E. Gus, "The Overall Picture of Eutrophication. " Presented
at the Texas Water and Sewage Works Association's Eutrophication Seminar,
College Station, Texas, March 1966.
63. Fulton, Jerome and Say, E. Wayne, Inland Lakes; Analysis and Action.
Huron River Watershed Council.
64. Gavis, Jerome, Wastewater Reuse. Prepared for National Water
Commission, Arlington, Virginia, July 1971.
65. Gburek, William I. and Heald, Walter R., "Effects of Direct Runoff
from Agricultural Land on the Water Quality of Small Streams. "
Northeast Watershed Research Center, University Park, Pennsylvania.
66. Glymph, Louis M. Holtan, Heggie N., and England, Charles B.,
"Hydrologic Response of Watersheds to Land Use Management. "
J. Irrigation and Drainage Division, ASCE. Vol. 97, No. IR2,
June 1971.
67. Goldman, Charles R., Environmental Quality and Water Development,
Volumes I and II. University of California, Davis, California, 1971.
68. Grava, Sigmund, Urban Planning Aspects of Water Pollution Control.
Columbia University Press, New York, New York, 1969.
69. Gruen, Gruen, and Associates and Sedway/Cooke, Approaches Toward
a Land Use Allocation System for California Coastal Zone. Report
for Department of Navigation and Development, Calfornia Resources
Agency, October 1971.
70. Grundy, Richard D., "Strategies for Control of Man-Made Eutrophication. "
Environmental Science and Technology, December 1971, pp. 1184-1190.
71. Hague, Bart, Coordination of Land Use and Open Space Programs with
Water Pollution Control Programs. Environmental Protection Agency,
New England Region.
72. Hall, James D. and Lantz, Richard, Effects of Logging on the Habitat
of the Coho Salmon and Cutthroat Trout in Coastal Streams. Oregon
State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
167
-------
73. Hammer, Thomas R., "Stream Channel Enlargement Due to Urbanization. "
RSRI Discussion Paper Series: No. 55, Regional Science Research
Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, May 1972.
74. Hammer, Philip, Land Use Control Techniques Available to States.
Address Presented at National Conference on Land Policy, Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania, June 29, 1972.
75. Hansen, Roger P., et al., Public Land Policy and the Environment
Volumes 1 through 4. Rocky Mountain Center on Environment, Denver,
Colorado, December 1970.
76. Harvard University, Environmental System Program. Cambridge,
Massachusetts, March 1972.
77. Hawaii, Revised Statutes . Chapter 205 (1968), As Amended (Supp. 1969).
78. Heady, Madsen, et. al., Agricultural Demands. Iowa State University,
Ames, Iowa, November 1971.
79. Hines, N. Willima, Public Regulation of Water Quality in the United
States. National Water Commission, Arlington, Virginia, December 1971.
80. Holt, Robert F., "Surface Water Quality As Influenced by Agricultural
Practices. " Presented at 1971 Winter Meeting of American Society of
Agricultural Engineers.
81. Hudson River Valley Commission, Siting and Design of Municipal Treatment
Plants. March 1970. :
82. Hufschmidt, Maynard M., et al., Water Resource Planning in the Urban-
Metropolitan Context. National Water Commission, Arlington, Virginia.
83. Ibach, D. B. and Adams, J. R., Fertilizer Use in the United States. By
Crops and Areas--1964 Estimates. U. S. Department of Agriculture
Statistical Bulletin No. 408, Washington, D. C., August 1967.
84. "Impact Zoning. " House and Home, August 1972, pp. 60-69.
85. Indiana Department of Commerce, Let's Consider Our Environment. 1970
Conference Proceedings, Indianapolis, Indiana, September 1970.
86. Ingram, Helen, The New England River Basin Commission; A Case Study
Looking Into the Possibilities and Disabilities of a River Basin Commission.
Established Under Title II of the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965,
National Water Commission, Arlington, Virginia, November 1971.
1(58
-------
87. Ingram, William M. and Mackenthun, Kenneth M., Biological Field
Data for Water Pollution Surveys. U. S. Department of the Interior,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Washington, D.'C.,
July 1966.
88. Jansen, David L.. A Model Relating Water Quality Vegetation Structure
and Urbanization in the San Jacinto River Basin. Project Completion
Report, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, December 1970.
89. Kibler, David F. and Busby, C. E., A Guide to the Development of an
Air Force Erosion Control Manual. Water Resources Engineers, Inc.
to Air Force Weapons Laboratory, Air Force Systems Command,
Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, November 1970.
90. Kneese, Allen V. and Bower, Blair, T. Managing Water Quality:
Economics, Technology, Institutions. Resources for the Future, The
Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1968.
91. Kneese, Allen V., et al., Economics and the Environment, A Material
Balance Approach. The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland,
1970.
92. Kolega, J. J., et al., "Land Disposal of Septage (Septic Tank Pumpings). "
Presented at First International Meeting of the Society of Engineering
Science, June 12, 1972.
93. Law, James P., et al., Water Quality Management Problems in Arid
Regions. Published by Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D. C., October 1970.
94. Leopold, Luna B., "Landscape Esthetics. " Natural History, October 1969.
95. . "Hydrology for Urban Land Planning - A Guidebook on the
Hydrologic Effects of Urban Land Use. " U. S. Geological Survey Circular
554, 1968.
96. Loehr, Raymond, Pollution Implication of Animal Wastes--A Forward
Oriented Review. Kansas University, Lawrence, Kansas, July 1968.
97. Mach, Leslie, Ground Water Management in Development of a National
Policy on Water. National Water Commission, Arlington, Virginia,
January 1971.
98. Machkenthun, Kenneth M., Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Water, An Annotated
. Selected Bibliography of Their Biological Effects. U. S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Washington, D. C.,
1965.
169
-------
99. . The Practice of Water Pollution Biology. U.S. Department
of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
Washington, D. C., 1969.
100. Males, Richard M. and Gates, William E., Decision Processes in
Water Quality Management. Engineering-Science, Inc., Oakland,
California, April 1971.
101. Maryland, Montgomery County, "Excavation, Stripping, Grading and
Fills." 1971.
102. Maryland, House Bill No. 115, 1970..
103. McCarty, P. L., "Sources of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Water Supplies. "
J. AWWA, October 1966.
104. McGauhey, P. H., "Engineering Management of Water Quality. "
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 1968.
105. McHarg, Ian L., Design With Nature. The Natural History Press,
Garden City, New York, 1969.
106. McKee and Wolf, Water Quality Criteria. 2nd Edition. California State
Water Resources Control Board, 1963.
107. McPherson, M. B., "Hydrologic Effects of Urbanization in the United
States. " ASCE Urban Water Resources Research Program, Technical
Memorandum No. 17, June 1972.
108. . Prospects for Metropolitan Water Management. American
Society of Civil Engineers, 1970.
109. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., University of Florida, and Water Resources
Engineers, Inc., Storm Water Management Model, Volume I - Final
Report. Prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency, July 1971.
110. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Engineers, A Comprehensive Pollution Abatement
Program for the Occoquan Watershed. Interim Report to Commonwealth
of Virginia State Water Control Board, March 1970.
111. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Wastewater Engineering; Collection, Treatment,
Disposal. McGraw-Hill. 1972.
112. . 1969 Occoquan Reservoir Study. A Report to the Commonwealth
of Virginia State Water Control Board, April 1970.
113. Michigan, Otsego County. Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance
and Regulations (1971).
170
-------
114. Milgram, Grace, The City Expands. Institute for Environmental
Studies, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
March 1967.
115. Mitchell, Ralph, Water Pollution Microbiology. Wiley-Interscience,
New York, New York, 1972.
116. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Waste
Management and Control. Washington, D. C., 1966.
117. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Waste
Management and Control. Washington, D. C., 1967.
118. National Association of Conservation Districts, Suggested Guidelines
and Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Programs. League
City, Texas.
119. National Industrial Pollution Control Countil, Fertilizers and Agricultural
Chemicals. Sub-Council Report, Washington, D. C., October 1971.
120. Nemerow, Theory and Practice of Industrial Waste Treatment, Addison-
Wesley. 1963.
121. National Technical Advisory Committee, FWPCA, Water Quality
Criteria. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1968.
122. North Carolina> Guilford County, Zoning Regulations.
123. North Carolina State University, Department of Biological and Agricultural
Engineering, School of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Role of Animal
Wastes in Agricultural Land Runoff. Raleigh, North Carolina, Report to the
Environmental Protection Agency, August 1971.
124. Northern Maine Regional Planning Commission, The Northern Maine
Regional Treatment System, River Basin Planning Phase. Presque Isle,
Maine, April 1972.
125. Odum, Eugene P. and Howard T., Fundamentals of Ecology, 2nd Edition.
W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1959.
126. Oregon State University, Schools of Forestry and Engineering, Studies
on Effects of Watershed Practices on Streams. Corvallis, Oregon, Report
to the Environmental Protection Agency, February 1971.
127. Battelle Memorial Institute, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Research
Report on Shoreline Management Guidelines. Prepared for Grays Harbor
Regional Planning Commission, 1971.
171
-------
128. "Poverty, Pollution, and Sewers. " Trans-Action, September 1968, p. 5.
129. Powell, Mel D., Winter, William C., and Bodwitch, William P.,
Community Action Guidebook for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control.
National Association of Counties Research Foundation, Washington,
D. C., March 1970.
130. Regional Science Research Institute, "Perception and Use of Streams
in Suburban Areas: Effects of Water Quality and Distance from Residence
to Stream. " Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March 1972.
131. Rikert, David A. and Speiker, Andrew M., Real-Estate Lakes. U.S.
Geological Survey Circular 601-G, Washington, D. C., 1971.
132. Rivkin/Carson, Inc., Population Growth in Communities in Relation to
Water Resources Policy. Prepared for National Water Commission,
October 1971.
133. Ruth, Herman D. and Associates, Regional and Local Land Use Planning,
Volumes I-III. Berkeley, California, February 1970.
134. Scalf, Marion R., et al.. Fate of DDT and Nitrate in Ground Water.
U. S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Department of Agriculture,
April 1968.
135. Sevenson, H. A. and Baldwin, H. L., A Primer on Water Quality. U.S.
Geological Survey, Washington, D. C.
136. Shigorin, G. G., "The Problem of City Surface Run-Off Water. "
Vodosnabzhenie i Sanitarnayu Tekhnika, No. 2.
137. Smith, George E., "Fertilizer Nutrients as Contaminants in Water
Supplies. " Publication 85, American Assoc. Adv. of Science, Washington,
D. C., 1967.
138. . "Are Fertilizers Creating Pollution Problems?" Presented
at Twenty-Second Annual Meeting, Soil Conservation Society of America,
Des Moines, Iowa, August 13-16, 1967.
139. Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, "Forecasts and
Alternative Plans - Land Use Transportation Study. " Planning Report
No. 7, Volume 2, Waukesha, Wisconsin, June 1966.
140. Spangler, Miller, The Role of Research and Development in Water
Resources Planning and Management for Achieving Urban Goals.
Prepared for the Office of Water Resources Research, U. S. Department
of the Interior.
172
-------
141. Special Report: "A Summary of State Land Use Laws. " Land Use
Planning Reports, Volume 1, Number 1. March 12, 1973.
142. Spicer, Richard B., Increasing State and Regional Power in the
Development Process. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 255,
American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago, Illinois, 1970.
143. Spilhaus, A., et_aL, Waste Management and Control. Federal Council
for Sciences and Technology, 1966.
144. Strong, Ann L., Flood Plain Regulation. A Report to the Tri-County
Conservancy. University of Pennsylvania, Institute of Environmental
Studies, Philadelphia, December 1971, Revised 1972.
145. . Delaware River Basin Compact; A Review with Respect to
Environmental Quality. University of Pennsylvania, Institute for
Environmental Studies, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 1, 1971.
146. Stumm, Werner, and Morgan, James J., "Stream Pollution by Algal
Nutrients. " Harvard University Sanitary Engineering Reprint No. 45,
Transactions of the 12th Annual Conference on Sanitary Engineering,
University of Kansas, 1962.
147. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Geology and Geomorphology of the
Lake Tahoe Region; A Guide for Planning. South Lake Tahoe, California,
September 1971.
148. . Lake Tahoe Region Storm Drainage. South Lake Tahoe,
California, May 1971.
149. . Climate and Air Quality of the Lake Tahoe Region: A
Guide to Planning. South Lake Tahoe, California, September 1971.
150. Tahoe Regional planning Agency, Limnology and Water Quality of the
Lake Tahoe Region; A Guide for Planning. South Lake Tahoe, California,
July 1971.
151. . Wildlife of the Lake Tahoe Region: A Guide for Planning.
South Lake Tahoe, California, May 1971.
152. _. Land Use Ordinance. South Lake Tahoe, California,
February 10, 1972.
153. . Hydrology and Water Resources of the Lake Tahoe
Region: A Guide for Planning. South Lake Tahoe, California, June 1971.
154. . The Plan for Lake Tahoe. South Lake Tahoe, California,
updated.
173
-------
155. . Water Resources in the Lake Tahoe Region. South Lake
Tahoe, California.
156. . Grading Ordinance. South Lake Tahoe, California.
February 10, 1972.
157. . Shoreline Ordinance. South Lake Tahoe, California,
March 22. 1972.
158. . Subdivision Ordinance. South Lake Tahoe, California,
March 22, 1972.
159. . Vegetation of the Lake Tahoe Region; A Guide for Planning.
South Lake Tahoe, California, July 1972.
160. ^. Land Resources of the Lake Tahoe Region; A Guide for
Planning. South Lake Tahoe, California, July 1972.
161. . Soils of the Lake Tahoe Region; A Guide for Planning. South
Lake Tahoe, California, July 1971.
162. Thelen, Edmund, et al., Investigation of Porous Pavements for Urban
Runoff Control. Report for the Environmental Protection Agency, U. S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1972.
163. Tourbier, Jachim, "The Christina Project: Environmental Protection in
Urban Growth Areas. " Urban Land, September 1972, pp. 14-20.
164. Tovar, F.H., Annual Comilation and Analysis of Hydrologic Data for
Urban Studies in Bryan, Texas Metropolitan Area. U. S. Geological
Survey, Washington, D. C., 1970.
165. TRW Systems Group, A Methodology for Flood Plain Development and
Management. A Report Submitted to the U. S. Army Engineer Institute for
Water Resources, Redondo Beach, California, December 1969.
166. Tucker, L. S., et al., Metropolitan Industrial Water Use. T. M. 16,
Urban Water Research Program, American Society of Civil Engineers,
New York, New York, May 1972, p. vi.
167.. University of California, Sanitary Engineering Research Laboratory,
College of Engineering and School of Public Health, Economic Evaluation
of Water Quality. Berkeley, California, SERL Report No. 69-8 to the
FWPCA, November 1969.
174
-------
168. University of Maryland, School of Law, Legal Problems of Coal Mine
Reclamation. Submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D. C., 1972.
169. University of Pennsylvania, Institute for Environmental Studies, The
Plan and Program for the Brandywine. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
1968.
170. Upper Trinity Comprehensive Sewerage Plan. Volumes 1-3. North
Central Texas Council of Governments.
171, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Regulatory Standards,
Guide to the Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power
Plants. August 1972.
172. U.S. Department of Agriculture, "Managing Our Environment. " Agriculture
Information Bulletin No. 351, Washington, D. C., May 1972.
173. . "A Brief: Regulations for Erosion and Sediment Control
as Adopted by the Environmental Quality Board of the Pennsylvania
Department of Natural Resources. " September 1972.
174. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development, Soil. Water, and Suburbia. U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1963.
175. U.S. Department of Agriculture, California, Land Use Conservation Act
of 1965.
176. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Department
of the Interior, Environmental Planning and Geology. U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C., December 1971.
177. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Water
Oriented Outdoor* Recreation--Lake Erie Basin. Ann Arbor, Michigan,
August 1966.
178. U. S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, A Primer on Waste Water Treatment.
179. . Water Pollution Aspects of Urban Runoff. January 1969.
180. U. S. Forest Service and Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Lake Tahoe
Basin Land Capabilities, updated.
175
-------
181. U.S. Public Health Service, Symposium on Environmental Lead
Contamination. Held on December 13-15, 1965. Washington, D. C.,
1966.
182. Utah Social Services Department, Weber River Basin, Water Quality
Management Planning; Program Design, Salt Lake City, Utah,
February 1973.
183. Viets, Frank G., Jr. and Hageman, Richard H., Factors Affecting the
Accumulation of Nitrate in Soil, Water and Plants. Agriculture Handbook
No. 413, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.,
November 1971.
184. Virginia, Fairfax County, Presentation of Alternatives, 5 Year Countywide
Development Program, Volume 1. Preliminary Staff Report, Distributed
by the Division of Administrative Services, August 7, 1972.
185. Virginia, County of Fairfax, Erosion - Siltation Control Handbook -
Draft. 1972.
186. Virginia, Fairfax County, Zoning Ordinance of the County of Fairfax,
1971 Edition.
187. Vollenweider, Richard A., Scientific Fundamentals of the Eutrophication
of Lakes and Flowing Waters, With Particular Reference to Nitrogen and
Phosphorus as Factors in Eutrophication. Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, Paris, France, September 1970.
188. Wadleigh, C. H. "Plant Nutrients with Respect to Water Quality. " Presented
Before Interstate Commission on Potomac River, Berkeley Springs,
West Virginia, November 1969.
189. Walker, Wayland, Interim Plan for Water Quality Management in the Denver
Metropolitan Area - STQRET Code 0910-B. Denver, Colorado Regional
Council of Governments, April 1971.
190. Wapora, Inc., Ecological Investigation of Mattawoman Creek, Near Indian
Head, With Reference to Proposed Dredging. Washington, D. C.
191. . Possible Ecological Effects of Proposed Dredging Near
Craney Island. Potomac River, Washington, D. C.
192. Water Resources Council, Water Resources Regions and Subregions for
the National Assessment of Water and Related Land Resources.
Washington, D. C., July 1970.
176
-------
193. Water Resources Engineers, Inc., Unit Water Requirements and Waste
Increments. Final Report on Task VI-8 to Santa Ana Watershed Planning
Agency, Walnut Creek, California, August 1970.
194. Weibel, S. R., Anderson, R. J., and Woodward, R. L., "Urban Land
Runoff as a Factor in Stream Pollution." J. WPCF. Vol. 36, No. 7,
July 1964.
195. Wendell and Schwan, Intergovernmental Relations in Water Resources
Activities Report for the National Water Commission, 1972.
196. Wenk, Victor D., A Technology Assessment Methodology. Water Pollution.
Domestic Wastes. The Mitre Corporation, June 1971.
197. Western Systems Coordinating Council, Environmental Guidelines. Southern
California Edison Company, Los Angeles, California, December 3, 1971.
198. Whitman, Ira L., et al., "Evaluating Urban Core Usage of Waterways
and Shorelines. " Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, April 1971.
199. . "Design of an Environmental Evaluation System. " Battelle
Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, June 1971.
200. Wiehe, J. E., An Analysis of Water Quality Criteria as Applied to the Big
Sioux River. South Dakota State University, 1971.
201. Wilbrech, Ted L. and Smith, George (eds.), Agriculture Practices and
Water Quality. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 1970.
202. Wilkinson, R., "The Quality of Rainfall Run-Off Water From a Housing
Estate. " J. Institution of Public Health Engineering (British), London,
1962.
203. Williams, James R., Sediment Yield from Rangeland Watershed in the
Edwards Plateau of Texas. Agriculture Research Service, U. S. Department
of Agriculture, ARS-185, October 1971.
204. Wirth, Theodore J. and Associates and Bruce Howlett, Inc., Report and
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lake Tahoe Plan and
Effectuating Ordinances. January 1972.
205. Wisconsin, Town of Belgium, Ozaukee County, Zoning Ordinance.
206. Wisconsin, Walworth County, Shoreline Zoning Ordinance.
207. Wisconsin, Laws of 1965, Chapter 614.
177
-------
208. Witzel, Stanley A., Nitrogen Cycle in Surface and Subsurface Waters.
Water Resources Center, The University of Wisconsin, December 1968.
209. Wolff, J. B., Linaweaver, Jr., F. P., and Geyer, J. C., "Water Use
in Selected Commercial and Institutional Establishments in the Baltimore
Metropolitan Area, " Report to the Department of Public Works, Baltimore
County, Maryland, The Johns Hopkins University, June 1966.
210. Wolman, M. Gordon and Schick, Asher P., "Effects of Construction on
Fluvial Sediment, Urban and Suburban Areas of Maryland. " J. Water
Resources Research, Vol. 3, No. 2, Second Quarter 1967.
211. Walker, George M. and Wengert, Norman, Urban Water Policies and
Decision-Making in the Detroit Metropolitan Region. Office of Research
Administration Report 01351010F, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
July 1970.
212. Woodruff, "Land Use Control Policies and Population Distribution in
America," 23 Hastings Law Journal. 1427, (1972)
213. Yearwood, "Subdivision Law: Timing and Location Control" 44 Journal
Urban Law. 585, (1967). "Accepted Control of Land Subdivision/' 45 Journal
Urban Law. 217, (1967).
214. Yorke, T. H. and Davis, W. J., Sediment Yields of Urban Construction
Sources. Montgomery County, Maryland. Open-File Report for the U. S.
Geological Survey, Parkville, Maryland, 1972.
215. Zanoni, A. E. and Rutkawski, R. J., "Per Capita Loadings of Domestic
Wastewater. " J. WPCF, Vol.44, No. 9, September 1972.
216. Zeitschrift Fur, Landes Kulture Deutsche Demokatische Republik
Deutsche Akademie, Der Landwirtschaflswissenchaften ze Berlin Bond
11 197ft Heft 6.
LEGAL CITATIONS
217. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 USC 4321 et seq.,
Pub. L. No. 91-190, 99 Stat. 852.
218. Pub. L. No. 92-500.
219. 42 USC 1401, 2414. 4001 notes, 4011-4027, 4041, 4051-4055, 4071,
4072, 4081-4084. 4101-4103, 4121-4127.
178
-------
220. 16 USC 459(b), (c), (d).
221. 42 USC 4321 et seq. (originally enacted as an Act of January 1, 1970,
Pub. L No. 91-190, 88 Stat. 852).
222. New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Compact, 61 Stat. 682;
Potomac River Basin Compact, 54 Stat. 748; Wabash Valley Compact,
73 Stat. 694.
223. Delaware River Basin Compact, 75 Stat. 688.
224. 83 Stat. 360 (text of compact).
225. H. R. 6482 (passed by the House of Representatives). S. 630
(reported by the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs in the
92nd Congress).
226. Welch v. Swaney, 214, J. S. 91, 29 S. Ct. 567, 53 L.Ed. 923(1909),
upheld building codes and height limitations; and Eubank v. City of
Richmond. 226 U.S. 137, 33 S. Ct. 76, 57 L. Ed. 156 (1912) upheld
building set-back regulations.
227. Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 475 S. Ct. 114, 54 A. L. R.
1016, 71 L.Ed. 303 (1926).
228. Dyer v. Sims. 341 U.S. 22 (1951); Zimmerman and Wendell, The
Interstate Compact Since 1925, 1951.
229. Arizona Rev. Stat.
230. Wisconsin Stat. Ann. Sec. 134.67.
231. Virginia Area Development Act, Code of Virginia, 1964 Replacement
Volume, Chapter 4, Sec. 15. 1-1400 et seq. (1968).
232. Comment, "Rural Zoning in Nebraska, " 44 Nebraska Law Review 151,
(1965), Note, "County Zoning in Iowa.'* 45 Iowa Law Review 743 (1961T
179
-------
APPENDIX A
SAMPLE WATER QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
OF A SMALL WATERSHED
This appendix presents a simple example in order to demonstrate the
ideas and approaches given in Chapter II. The example considers a real,
residential problem in Fairfax County, Virginia which involves a real
estate lake. Impacts for other types of waters can be studied using
similar logical arguments and approaches.
This example deals with the development of one section of a watershed
and is simplified. A development plan calls for the creation of two neighbor-
hoods with populations of 5, 000 people. Each neighborhood is served by a
commercial neighborhood center covering approximately 10 acres and
offering about 75, 000 square feet of retail space. The plan allows for the
clustering of multifamily dwellings at the neighborhood center. The area
given to high density development in each center is approximately 10 acres.
The watershed has a small section of extensive urbanization at its further
end. For the sake of simplification, the loadings from this area are
considered to be transported out of the planning section. The stream has a
fork and it is planned to build a 40-acre recreational lake at this point.
This lake drains an area of 2, 432 acres. The area is primarily, forest
land. Figure 18 shows the watershed and the proposed development.
General data for the area are:
Subareas Use Population Area Density
Neighborhood (1) Residential 5,500 640 acres 8.6
Neighborhood (2) Residential 4,500 524 acres 8.6
Center Commercial 20 acres
Center Commercial 20 acres
Total Developed Area 1, 204 acres
A-l
-------
Figure 18
Sample Watershed: Proposed Development Plan
C ju ^rT-'.^'«Cj«/**a^r^j4i_;'*JSi »^i»j>- t*y^^S
-------
The point and non-point waste loadings can be estimated according to
the following procedures:
1. POINT LOADS
The total point loads generated by the land use plan can be estimated using
Table 3 (see Chapter II). The total population is 10, 000 persons, so the
Median Yearly Per Capita Loading is computed as:
BOD = 42. 7 x 10, 000 = 427, 000 Ibs/year
N= 8.5x10,000= 85,000 Ibs/year
P= 2.1x10,000= 21,000 Ibs/year
In order to estimate the commercial loading, the square footage of developed
space is given as 150, 000 square feet and an adjusted water use rate is
estimated at 0. 309 gal/square foot/day (see Table 4). The yearly com-
mercial sewage flow is:
c
Commercial Flow = 150, 000 x . 309 x 365 = 16. 9 x 10 gal.
This is converted into waste loads by applying the factors given in Table 3.
BOD = . 17 x 10~2 x 16. 9 x 106 = 28. 730 Ibs/year
N = .06 x 10"2 x 16. 9 x 106 = 10,140 Ibs/year
/>
P = . 008 x 10'2 x 16. 9 x 10 = 1, 350 Ibs/year
There is no industrial development within the planning district, so there
are no industrial waste loads.
A-3
-------
Therefore, the total point source loadings for the development plan are:
BOD = 455, 730 IDS/year
N = 95, 140 IDS/year
P = 22,350 Ibs/year
It is assumed that these loads will be transported out of the planning district
and treated before disposal. This implies a higher level of regional planning
which must consider the impact of these waste upon a regional facility.
2. NON-POINT LOADS
It is assumed that the storm sewers in the area deposit all the land runoff
into the local streams.
a. Urban Stormwater Runoff
The best planning estimate possible without field measurements involves
the average loadings within the study area. The guidelines from Table 18
should be used. The entries in the table relate to the length of street curb
as the planning variable. The pollution loadings are keyed to this length.
The table pertains to a city setting. The presumption is that dirt in the
streets is washed off.
The design of residential suburban developments leaves more open space
than cities and it follows that the land and not the streets collects the major
part of the pollution loads. This may be reflected in a reduction in the
loading rate and in this example the loading is reduced 20 percent. The
first three rows of Table 18 are multiplied together to give the fourth row
estimates of the aerial loading rate in pounds of dirt washed off the street
per year per acre.
A-4
-------
TABLE 18
CALCULATION OF NON-POINT AREAL LOADING RATES
Land Use
A.
B.
C.
Single Family
Multifamily
Commercial
Lbs.of Dirt
Per Year per
100 ft. of curb
255.5
839.5
1,204.5
Reduction
Factor
.8
.8
.8
Hundreds of
Feet of Curb
per Acre
4.65
4.65
4.65
Lbs. of
Dirt
per Acre
950.
3123.
4481.
Note: The reduction factor is applied to the first column to revise the urban
data to a suburban setting.
The loading rates of Table 18 are given in terms of pounds of dirt per year.
Therefore, the production rates of individual pollution constituents on an
areal basis are found according to the data given in Table 19. These data
give weight of constituent per thousand pounds of dirt. The right hand
column of Table 19 gives pounds per acre of BOD, Nitrogen and Phosphates
as a function of land use.
The average loading for each constituent for the entire subbasin is cal-
culated by taking a weighted average of the loads of each land use. This
average is simply the sum of the products of each land use load and the
acreage devoted to this land use divided by the total developed area. The
loadings for this subbasin are:
A-5
-------
TABLE 19
CALCULATION OF AREAL CONSTITUENT LOADING RATES
en
BOD
A. Single Family
B. Multifamily
C. Commercial
NITROGEN
A. Single Family
B. Multifamily
C. Commercial
PHOSPHATES
A. Single Family
B. Multifamily
C. Commercial
Areal Loading Rate
Thousands of Lbs/
Acre/Year
.95
3.12
4.48
.95
3.12
4.48
.95
3.12
4.48
Constituent Loading Rate
Lbs. ol Constituent per
Thousand Lbs. of
Dirt
5.0
3.6
7.7
.48
.65
.42
.50
.53
.69
Areal Constituent
Loading Rate
Lbs /Acre
4.75
11.23
34. 50
.46
2.03
1.88
.47
1.65
3.09
-------
Load Rate Acreage Products
BOD (Lbs/Acre) (Acres) (Ibs)
Single Family 4.75 1, 164 5,529
Multifamily 11.23 20 225
Commercial 34.50 20 690
Total 1,204 6,444
Total BOD Loading (Lbs/Acre/Year) = 6,444/1,204 = 5.35
NITROGEN
Single Family . 46 1, 164 535
Multifamily 2.03 20 41
Commercial 1.88 20 38
Total 1,204 614
Land Development Loading = 614/1, 204 = .51
Rainwater Loading = (5. 5 x . 45) = 2. 31-
Total Nitrogen Loading (Lbs/Acre/Year) = 2.82
PHOSPHATES
Single Family . 47 1,164 547
Multifamily 1.65 20 33
Commercial 3.09 20 62
Total 1,204 642
Total Phosphate (P04) Loading . 642/1 204 = 53
Lbs/Acre/Year '
'Total Phosphorus (P) Loading 2/
/_ , I . /_. - . OO X . O£O - .1 I
(Lbs/Acre/Year
Rain water contributes dissolved nitrogen. An average amount of nitrogen
in rain water is 5. 5 Ibs/acre. Of this, 45 percent is assumed to wash off.
2 /
The ratio of elemental phosphorus to phosphorus is 0.326.
A-7
-------
To sum up the computations, the estimates for the non-point loads
generated by the proposed land use plan are:
Total BOD: 5. 35 Ibs/acre/year
Total N 2. 82 Ibs/acre/year
Total PO . 53 Ibs/acre/year
Total P . 17 Ibs/acre/year
The critical condition for the lake is the nutrient loadings per unit of
lake surface area. Work by Vollenweider (198) has shown a definite
correlation between this loading and the occurence of nuisance algae
conditions in lakes. Table 20 shows the results of a study of twenty lakes
and the effect of the annual phosphorus and nitrogen loading.
TABLE 20
PERMISSIBLE LOADING LEVELS FOR TOTAL NITROGEN
AND TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (BIOCHEMICALLY ACTIVE)
(LBS PER ACRE OF LAKE SURFACE PER YEAR)
Mean Depth Up To
16 Feet
33 Feet
165 Feet
330 Feet
492 Feet
656 Feet
Source: Vollenweider
1. Permissible
Up to
N
8.92
13.30
35. 68
53. 53
66.91
80.30
(198)
Loading,
P
.62
.89
2.23
3.57
4.46
5.35
2. Dangerous Loading,
In Excess of
N
17.89
26.76
71.38
107. 06
133.83
160.60
P
1.16
1.78
4.46
7.14
8. 92
10.71
With relation to storm wash off BOD loadings are not as environmentally
damaging as nutrient (N and P) loadings.
A-8
-------
The guideline boundaries for nutrient loadings given in Table 20 are subject
to many uncertainties. They do, however, offer rough yardsticks for the
initial planning process. In publishing these loading levels, Vollenweider
states, "... considering the kind of data at our disposal, it is also obvious
that the transition zones defined are probably the best we can do at the
present time, and that we can only reject them in their entirety or accept
them as preliminary guidelines."
The permissible loadings given in Table 20 are in terms of pounds per lake
surface acre. The planned lake will cover 40 acres. The calculations
indicate that nitrogen loads of 2. 82 pounds per year per acre of water shed
land and 0. 17 pounds per year of phosphorous per acre of watershed land.
There are 1, 204 acres in the watershed. Thus, the estimated lake loads
in terms of acres of lake surface are:
Phosphorous (as P) = 1,204 x . 17/40 = 5. 2 Ibs/acre/year
Nitrogen (N) = 1, 204 x 2. 82/40 = 84. 6 Ibs/acre/year'
Referring to Table 20 it is seen that these loadings are permissible for
very deep lakes. The 40 acre lake will have a maximum depth of 50 feet.
It is concluded that the lake will have algae problems and will be very green
and unsightly in periods of algae growth in the summer. Remedial measures
would be a reservation of sufficient adjacent lands for park land or very
low density development in order to reduce the lake loading rates to under
about 15 Ibs/acre/year for nitrogen and 1 Ib/acre/year for phosphorous.
A second alternative would be to intensively clean the streets in the water
shed of the lake. A third alternative would be to remove the lake from the
plan.
A-9
-------
b. Sedimentation
The final problem is sedimentation. The planning area is considered 80
percent forested at the start of development. It is 40 percent forested at
the end of the period. The construction decrease in forestation will
produce a large sediment problem during the construction phase of the
development. Based on a study by the ASCE (5) for the Potomac Basin,
sediment discharges could increase from 48 tons per square mile to 180
tons per square mile. Even though a large portion of the sediment load
may be transitory in nature, it may be enough to permanently destroy the
lake and streamcourses unless contractors are required to impose siltation
measures.
3. CONCLUSIONS
What does this profile of waste loads imply for the planner? The subbasin
is only a portion of the overall regional plan. Therefore, the loadings
impact not only the local but also the regional planning process. On the local
level the most pressing problem is the lake. Reference to the guidelines
shows that the land use imposed nutrient loadings portend undesirable algae
conditions. The lake is too small for the imposed loads. On the regional
level the ability of the existing or proposed treatment facilities to dispose
of the point loads generated by the development is the crucial planning
parameter.
The solution to the water quality problems inherent in the planned development
depends on the methodology under which the planner is operating. Under
the traditional planning approach, with land use fixed, the only avenue open
is to collect as much of the surface runoff as possible and export it from
the region for treatment. . This approach is the one currently employed in
existing developed areas and leads to increased cost in transport and treat-
ment of the runoff.
A-10
-------
Under the planning approaches discussed in Chapter IV the planner has
more options open to him. In using these approaches he combines both
the local and regional prospectives. A first option might well be to remove
the lake from the plan. After this is done the possible repercussions on
other impoundments in the region must be evaluated. A second approach
may be to increase the size of the lake. This has the effect of diluting the
nutrient loads and, therefore, keeping them below the threshold which
nuisance algae bloom. This solution naturally hinges on the technical
feasibility of increasing the lake size. In this example, it appears that a
fourfold increase in size, with the increase in depth, would suffice. Local
topography, existing settlement, and cost all enter into the evaluation of
the desirability of this alternative. A third alternative is to reduce the
population within the local planning area. This solution again calls for
evaluation of the population shift on a regional basis. Where might the
population go and what is the impact in the new area ?
Therefore, interpretation of the water quality impact leads to a myriad
of possible solutions. The planning methodology used highlights the alter-
natives and indicates the direction in which the decision process travels.
Used intelligently, with an understanding, of the uncertainties involved,
these estimates of waste loads can aid the planner in preventing the
destruction of our irreplacable resources.
A-ll
------- |