REPORT OF THE EPA
REGION IV
LAND USE TASK FORCE
YOUTH ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 13, 1972
-------
9484
REPORT OF THE EPA REGION IV
LA.ND USE TASK FORCE
YOUTH ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 13, 1972
By: Graham A. Thorpe
Views and opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily
reflect the views or policies of the Region IV Environmental
Protection Agency
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I Introduction
II Georgia's Socio-Economic Setting
III Major Land Use Patterns in Georgia
IV Population Density and Land Use Planning
V Institutional Land Use Planning and Zoning
VI Constitutional and Legal Obstacles
VII Possible Legislative Proposals
Bibliography
VIII Land Use Planning In Kentucky
Bibliography
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The "quiet revolution in land use control" is making more and
more noise in the State of Georgia, especially since attention has
focused on the national proposals now pending in the Congress. It
now seems that the people, and sometimes even the decision makers,
are aware that land use planning is an environmental factor as much
as it is economic.
Georgia has not yet passed a land use policy Act which would
provide for criteria comparable to that proposed in the national
legislative proposals. Authority still lies in the hands of local
officials who attempt to cope with zoning. But it is increasingly
evident that this fragmented approach to land use control has had
the effect of causing a tremendous loss of confidence in thf zoning
process as well as all local political decision making in ^uni-rdl.
The homeowner, the developer, and the elected official arc all dis-
satisfied with the consequences of zoning and its inadequacy as a
land use control. However, while most do recognize this problem, it
remains to be seen what will emerge from the conglomeration of
alternatives and proposed solutions to the problem.
An interesting example of this increased awareness has been
the Republican primary election and runoff in DeKalb County for
Chairman of the Board of Commissioners, a campaign which was even
more- licjLly conLc'sLc-d than the concurri-nL .i IKH for t lit- II. :;. Si-n;iir
l.;in>l use lu'r.imi1 the dominant IKHUU in I lie t .ini|>:i I}1.". -IM ''•" '• "' '''"
candidates had his own ideas concerning a comprcliensJ ve Kind n:.u
-------
plan for DeKalb County. DeKalh is adjacent to Fulton County and
Atlanta. Formerly regarded as a bedroom community of Atlanta,
it has now come into its own as an urban area. The importance of
land use planning and control as the dominant issue in the campaign
points out the new awareness in this area.
Another indication that land use control has emerged in Georgia
is the formation and activity of a House of Representatives sub-
committee on State Land Use and local zoning. The subcommittee,
which was created out of the powerful Committee on State Planning
and Community Affairs, has been conducting public hearings around
the State to determine the problems and investigate possible
solutions. It is highly probable that it will present proposed
legislation in the 1971 General Assembly.
This report will attempt to deal with many of the issues involved
in the "quiet revolution". The first section sets the socio-economic
background underlying Georgia's problems. Major patterns of land
use are then set forth in the next section with emphasis on the rural
aspects, as Georgia is typical of other southeastern States in that
it still maintains to a large extent a rural character. A third
portion of the report analyzes the population facet of land use
considerations. The section dealing with the institutional arrange-
ment of land use authority provides an analysis of zoning. The fifth
section is designed to present to other Regions an analysis oT I lie-
legal cons Lde rat ions which may hamper Lliu Sl.-iU-'s uffort to lir
Sl.iLe authority ewer land use planning. Tin- I i n.i I si:f,im-iil r. .in
ciiumi'r.iL Inn nf rlii' various po.s.slbLH t Ifs ol I «•>• Is lal imi pri»|ni-i.i I.-,
Ilki'ly Lo hi* i!ii.u:Lud.
2
-------
II. Georgia's Socio-Economic Setting
To lay the foundation for analysis of Georgia's problems
concerning land use necessitates a presentation of the socio-
economic character of Georgia and its people. To do this, we
present Chapter IV of Georgia's State Investment Plan, 1971-72,
published by the Bureau of State Planning and Community Affairs
This segment of the report is contained in the following pages.
-------
CiA?TS?. IV
csoaciA's socio-Eco:.ro>a:c sSITING
It is Important for a. state Co take cognisance of chatting
social and economic conditions that occur over time. Statistical
trends sometimes signal a significant change in social
or economic emphasis and a state can better judge how to allocate
its raso-jrcei Lf it is avs.ce of c'.ic direction that basic
indicators ar=> t^kir.g. It is especially important to ba
able to recogiiza icaortant structural chp-ngas that may
b« taking pla.:£ in various social ar.d acor.oni.lc sectors
of society. C-overnmsnt Is battsr prepared to anticipate
problirs znd 10 allocate p-.bli; f^.icij judiciously if it
ear. r^cs^r^r-j -::a ;• =5_=30.1 •a?17 forsco&l :'-:r;r.•;.-.-.:; economic
ar.d social, fs'i-err.s. T^Tis-sari-as data ara usaful for such
Adcicicr.wII", cross-ssccioi-.d! ddta aid io
cut where Gu^tsia stauds relative to the r.atioTi and other
states and ra^io^s- Wealth and v. all-be :.r.'» ^ra relative
concepts, vicr. virtually the only yards tLc'.t of neasurcraent
being sr.ce ar^irrary standard sur.h as national aver-i'-ges .
The "belav avarag-a" concept tends to sat an identifiable
goal of ^arciir.; i-p, and ofilers 2 standard c^'-ns^ which
a star.^ car. rr==.3i.T3 Its progress.
Cf~«i" it i. T"J relattvii chan'-jr- Ln Llif CM'JU L tiulo of
i-:-r: ___ .1 v. L'I . -.» i -•: -^ USL--I: s i j.'i'.L L0i*rii: fl'..ui ^tbsolur.c
values- r~r '-pr-n-.o, a strifp's p^r r.'»nir:' iiicoin". mlj^'.it
o?. rlsJi-ii;, : _____ '--i aa i-crc LJ .• :.u ib : rit:'p.d.ii d of Living.
Hcwaver, if the national average is rising even faster,
then people nay fael that thtiy are actually falling behind,
and than their situation is
The charts and tables that follow illustrate sona of
-"-= ~cr= i— :~=r.t social and economic trends and data
Tbe Grcs* 5 rate Product for Georgia has been estimated
by Dr. Albert :Teiz:i of the University of Georgia. ^ Georgia's
CS? has risen in real terms frora 5.23 billion dollars in
1950 to 12.31 billion dollars in 1963. Tablas IV-1 and
IV- 2 give razes of change in GSP a:vi distribution by major
industry within econoaic sectors for Oorgi.-i, the Souther:, t
and tha I'r.it^d Szate-j. It is vorrh noting sorz of the
structur.il wh ir.ges that have occurred ovar th2 13-year
psrioij for L-;or^j.a. Manufacturer;; ;mJ i'L".-j'U"^, insiir;':i-c^
ar.d I'.oal £'.^".ee ^huw Telati-v:-. /.r.c:^c,r. ::. .-hllLe Tvansporto.tioa,
Comnunicatiord, Public Uiiliti-ss ?.-H ;•' srn J.T-.V yi-nif't r«.uit
relative f'.?i-'. Lii^o .
A CD.-J.-.O •'>• u.,^d ^S'l'uiLC- of r- •>' ..T-
t r.cci.::-; . (»'jji'?tsi's n^c r-ipLS.j i
-------
$3,071. The U. S. average for the same year was $3,680
showing a $609 gap between the two averages. Table IV-
3 compares Georgia's per capita incone with the Southeast
and the U. S. for the period 1960-1969. Chart IV-1 presents
the data in graphic form and Chart IV-2 shows percent changes
for the pest decade. Although Georgia's per capita income
remains less than the national average, it can be seen
that the present increases have been higher than U.S. averages,
indicating a tendency to close the gap. Assuming the prevailing
compound growth rates are maintained in the future, the
per capita Income gap will close in 1985.
-------
TABLE IV-1
AVERAGE ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATES OF CHANGE IN REAL PRODUCT
ECONOMIC SECTOR
Private Nonfarm
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trade
Finance, Insurance,
and Real Estate
Transportation, Com-
munication, and
Public Utilities
Service
Government
•arm
Total
Georgia
5.3
7.4
3.3
5.9
5.3
6.5
2.8
5.2
4.6
1.6
5.1
1950-1968
Southeast
4.7
2.3
3.3
5.4
4.9
6.4
1.9
4.2
4.2
1.4
4.5
United States
4.1
2.3
2.2
4.2
3.9
4.8
4.7
4.1
3.6
1.0
3.9
Jr., "Georgia's dross State Product,"
Georgia Business, Vol. 30, No. 4, Oct. 1970, p. 2.
TABLE IV-2
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL REAL GROSS PRODUCT BY MAJOR INDUSTRY
ECONOMIC SECTOR GEORGIA
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Trade -'
Finance, Insurance
and Real Estate
tatica, Comunication,
and Public Utilities
rverenent
10.7
10.1
8.0
12.1
7.4
13.7
6.9
8.2
11.2
4.0
=CURCE: Neimi, op. cit.
-------
TABLE IV-3
PER CAPITA IMCOME FOR GEORGIA, SOUTHEASTERN U.S. AND U.S.: 1960-1969
Year Georgia Southeastern U.S. U.S.
1960 1639 1611 2215
1 1678 1666 2264
2 1777 1751 2368
3 1878 1840 2455
k 2008 1956 2586
5 2173 2101 2765
6 2377 2298 2980
7 2573 2471 3162
8 2791 26SO 3421
9 3071 2903 3680
Source: Statistics OP. the Developing South, Research D°.-nrti:i?nt.
Federal f.vsjrwj lian'.c of Atlanta, 1970, p.Jl.
INCOME3
Econo^ac considerations have a strong influence on population
movements to or from a particular region. Thus, employment
opportunities, relative wage and salary levels and general
income potentials in an area are closely related to its
rate of population growth. An area's industrial growth
and composition are of major importance in influencing
these indicators, so a brief discussion of related developments
is appropriate in the assessment of local conditions.
As is well known, the agriculture industry has been
declining in relative importance to Georgia's economy for
some time. Reductions in agricultural employment have
been substantially influenced by technical innovations
in farming, causing a tremendous increase in individual
productivity. Rapid development of the manufacturing and
service, segments of the industrial mixture has overshadowed
the agricultural segment. Georgia began this shift from
an agricultural economy later than the nation and still
has a slightly higher proportion of production workers
in agriculture than does the nation as a whole.
Census data indicate that agricultural employment
accounted for the following percentages of total employment
in Georgia in 1940, 1950, and 1960 respectively: J1.0,
20.5, and 8.4. Comparable figures for the U.S. are 18.6,
12.0, and 6.4, while those for 32 soutliu;is turn .st.il.c-*. combined
are 34.5, 21.7, and 9.9. Since 1950, agricultural employment
has been a smaller proportion of total employment in Georgia
than it has bacn in any of the neighboring states except
Florida.
33
-------
PERCENT INCREASE IN PER CAPITA INCOME
GEORGIA, SOUTHEAST, UNITED STATES
1960-1970
CHART IV-
SOURCE:
•-. »-y. r-r-». (f— r-i Aiiix f\t- A -T I »«IT-A *•« A If
-------
It is not the intent 06 the preceding remarks to imply
than agriculture is a dying industry in Georgia. In fact,
although employment has steadily declined in the industry,
total output has increased. Over the span 1950 to 1968
it is estimated that cash farm receipts nearly tripled,
amounting to well over a billion dollars by the latter
date. Obviously, it would be foolhardy to consider agriculture
as a "trivial" segment of our economy.
However, an industry's employment impact is of primary
importance to local development since it is directly related
to the ability to attract and hold population and to generate
local income. Thus, a comparison of manufacturing employment
to agriculture employment gives a good indication of their
relative, impacts on development in Georgia.
e there were nearly twice as many agii cultural
workers in Georgia in 1940 as there were manufacturing
workers, by 1950 thera were About 3qual numbers of each.
3y l$oO fiere J*T-Z chret ci"t?;> us iiany Fiacuf.-ict -.ring etnplo/aes
as there vere agricultural employees, and recant ebCiinates
indicate this ratio has continued a rapid increase. The
entire southeastern region of the U.S. has experienced
similar trends, although Georgia has apparently moved in
this direction somewhat more quickly than the region as
a whole, lor example, the regional agricultural employment
was about 2.2 to 1 in 1960 compared to about 3.0 to 1 for
Georgia.
On a na-i-nal scale, however, the U.S., in 1940, already
had more aaauLs^mriiig employees than agricultural employees;
by 1950 the ratio was slightly over 2 to 1, and by 1960
there were four times as many manufacturing workers as there
were agricultural workers.
During the last 30 years, the overall rate of growth
of nanufacturing industries has been about fifty percent
greater 'in Georgia than for the nation as a whole. Although
There are no adequate data available to make a qualified
— riparison of current relationships, rough estimates are
c^^c both Georgia and the national now have about 4.5 manufacturing
-_=picyees for each agricultural worker.
Although Georgia and the nation have about equal proportions
of total employment being utilized by the manufacturing
industries, there are considerable differences between
the types of manufacturing predominating in the South and
the mixture for the U. S. as a whole. Early industriali-
zation in Georgia was concentrated in the lumber and wood
products industries (related to the State 'u yia.it forest
rcssrv-es) and the textile and apparel Industries. These
industries continue to be the most important, although
some diversification has taken place in recent years. Census
results for 1960 showed that about 18 percent of U. S.
-------
TABU- IV -'•
MANUFACTURING IN SOUTH MU»j: •:' STAl'IlS
NEW FACILITIES. EXPANDED FACILITIES,
1961
84
135
8,029
89
157
8,998
NA
HA
24,800
NA
NA
35,154
NA
NA
13,380
145
182
23,264
1962
N\
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1963
103
90
Jl ,010
125
176
19,300
NA
NA
NA
192
478
31,100
61
101
14,900
130
256
28.300
1964
1JO
120
14,340
136
177
22,474
620
80
2u,000
163
383
29,573
172
13,666
76
O/ C
— -\^
25,572
At:u ADDilD EMPLOYMENT
J'n'iS
115
21r>
:%054
IK
224
27,892
450
csu
22,000
165
373
37,042
82
143
26,447
1J8
292
35,635
19 fit
146
211
18,000
122
208
24,832
570
130
23,670
189
400
37,455
75
127
18,724
114
245
42,094
1967
155
256
20,000
92
151
17,035
NA
NA
NA
130
338
24,774
149
11,176
137
241
41,699
1968
234
282
24.1C3
111
200
23,222
NA
NA
NA
167
324
31,297
82
119
19,771
131
26 B
35,000
1969
304
332
34,203
128
171
27,939
610
250
33,000
151
358
31,067
MA
NA
20,218
153
274
32,923
Georgia
New Fj.rras
Expanded Firms
Total Additional Employment
Alabama
New Finns
Expanded Firms
Total Additional Employment
Florida
I New Firms
Expanded Firms
Total Additional Employment
North Carolina
New Firms
Expanded Firms
Total Additional Employment
South Carolina
New Finns
Expanded Firms
Total Additional Employment
T ennessee
New Firms
Expanded Firms
Total Additional Employment
:;A - Not Available
Sources: Various Issues: "Georgia Development News," Industrial Development Division, Georgia Institute of Technology
-------
INDUSTRY
Careful cop.i.ideration shoulJ be given to impending
changes in the najor industrial sectors that atfect employment
levels, skill raquirements, wages, etc. Forecasting shifts
in emphasis between major industrial sectors car. be useful
in deciding where to place resources for purposes of promoting
economic development. It behooves the State to take advantage
of all information available to avoid wasting resources
and effort in tha allocation process . It is a caso of
"hitching one's wagon to the right star."
The Industrial Development Division of the Georgia
Institute of Technology has published a document which
attempts to forecast changes in the structure of employment
in Georgia ir. 1975.3
On * ir.ro r tint indication is th.- :: lo-./i rig d'j1. n of cnplovi?.-jn t
has bea:i -" -.-.rjcrcant source ot gnirf.-.l. Lr. C-aorgu. This
decline ir. cne relative importance of manuf actur:.ny is
to be observed at the national level as wall. Transportation
and utilities are also projected at slower rates of growth,
while gains, are projected for finance, insurance, real
estate, services and construction.
"These general trends follow tlie national patrcrn,
although the Georgia distributions vary substantially from
those of the nation for the same ye.irs . By 1975, manufacturing
employment fo- the II. S. is expected to ncronnt for somo
26 percent of nona^ricultural workers, and sovernment for
18.5 percent, while the Georgia percentages... will be
in the neighborhood of 30 percent and 19.5 percent respectively.
The greatest variation from the nation, according to this
study's projections, however, will be services, with a national
figure of 17.1 percent compared with Georgia's 11.6 —
11. 7 -percent. It would appear, then, that the State will
lag behind the nation in the major expansion of services
ecplcycenc. - .but will maintain a comparatively high proportion
of can ufac curing employment."3
The significance of such sectoral changes should not
be lost on planners. The overall employment trends appear
to be toward more skilled and service type jobs, especially
in the wake of rapidly advancing technology, and toward
fewer unskilled jobs. (It has been suggested by some Lliar
one of the most Important industries of the Future Ls guinj;
to be what is termed the "knowlcdi-.i-" in>luuiry.
These rhane.es suggest that i Mt:ro.u,e«' oniplinsir. wl'L
have: to be placed «ui training and v.n-.it Imt i ! ediu-ai <'nn.
not only for thr- purpose of learn Jn;. a -I'-LIS. u:LLi j! ly ,
but also l-jr the continous upgradL-ig ot skills ay requi r-imjnts
for meeting the changing ne^ds oc our Increasing.! y
industrial world.
-------
Tables IV-5, IV-6, and IV-7 and Chart IV-3 point up
some of the possible changes in direction which certain
industries may be taking in the next five years. Two different
projections are presented, one being simply a linear trend
based on data for the 19A7-1967 period (labeled L) and
the other based on the trend in Georgia's share of U.S.
employment (labeled P). Forecasts such as these are, of
course, always subject to error and the usual caveat^ is
in order. Nonetheless, it is preferable to be alerted
to such possibilities when decisions have to be made regarding
the proper allocation of public funds to the many programs
competing for them.
POPULATION TRENDS
No single source of data can adequately serve to assess
the gereral conditions in an area. Population trends are
an important measure of human reaction r.o overall local
conditians. A. discussion of Georgia's population growth
is, er.e. -efore, pertinent to assessing general conditions
in an area.
-------
TABLE IV-5
PROJECTIONS OF NOSAGRICULTURAL WAGE AND SALARY WORKERS
IN GEORGIA, BY MAJOR INDUSTRIES, 1975
Employment (OOP)
Industry 1967 1975L 1975P
Manufacturing
Durable goods:
Lumber & wood products 26.2 12.7 19.7
Furniture & fixtures 9.4 ."0.1 11.1
Stone, clay, & glass products 14.2 17.1 17.9
Primary oetal industries 7.1 /.2 7.5
Fabricated netal products 14.5 16.5 18.5
Machinery 13.4 33.4 14.8
Electrical equipment & supplies 8.7 10.9 12.4
Trar.=:T - rt^i. i^i acuioment 44.3 5*S.9 1-5.7
^r.'.!-. '. '.M:-•"• L r.- (•? reliance, in-
strusiencs, & miscellaneous
manufacturing) 10.5 10.2 10 6
No-idurable goods:
Food & kindred products 49.0 56.9 53.9
Textile mill products 112.1 99.2 116.0
Apparel & related products 67.5 80.3 90.1
Paper & allied products 23.6 29.6 33.1
Printing, publishing & allied
industries 13.4 14.8 14.9
Chemicals & silied products 12.5 13.5 13.8
Leather & leather products 4.6 5.7 5.8
Ocher nundurabies (tobacco,
petroleum refining, rubber
& miscellaneous plastics
products) 5.7 6.3 6.9
T-Lai' manufacturing 437.2 461.3 502.7
.. 6.5 6.9 7.6
. ;-zr~act construction 74.8 85.7 100.6
Transportation & public utilities 94.9 89.7 103.0
Tride, wholesale & retail 290.0 317.1 359.4
"ir.incc, Insurance, & renl. estate 6h.2 81 .(> 87.9
•-•.-Lees I* Rilscttllanu'ius l'»f>.-'» .!"/:»./ 1'JH.l
Go /ermnt'.nt
Total 1,384.~9 "1.5J0.4 1,696.0
L - Linear trend based on data for the 1947-1967 period.
P - Based on trend of Georgia's share of U. S. employment.
SOURCE: Amy Collins, Georgia 1975: Employment Outlook by Industry Group.
Industrial Development Division, Georgia Institute of Technology,
-------
TABLE IV-6
??,0!:.CTEn EHPLOYKENT CHANGED III GEORGIA, 1967-1975
Changes, 1967-1975
Enfrloyaent (OCO) Percent
Industry L_ P_ L_ P_
Manufacturing
Durable goods:
Lumber & wood products -13.5 -6.5 -51.5 -24.8
Furniture & fixtures .7 1.7 7.4 18.1
Stone, clay & glass products 2.L1 3.7 20.4 26.1
Primary metal industries .1 .4 1.4 5.6
Fabricated metal products 2.0 4.0 13.8 27.6
Machinery - 1.4 - 10.4
Electrical equipment & supplies 2.2 3.7 25.3 42.5
Trar.&portatio.i equipment 12.1 10.9 27.0 24.3
Other durable.; (ordnance, in-
£ miscellaneous
-,: :) - .3 .- - 2.9 1.0
\cndurable goods:
Food & kindred products 7.9 4.9 J6.1 10.0
Textile nill products -12.9 3.9 -1! .5 T.5
Apparel i related products -12.8 22.6 IS .0 3:\5
Paper & allied products 6.0 9.5 25.4 40. 3
Printing, sub 1 is i ing & allied
industries 1.4 1.5 10. A 11.2
Chemicals & allied products 1.0 1.3 8.C 10.4
Leather & leather products 1.1 1.2 23.9 26.'.
Other nondurab les (tobacco,
petroleum rerLning, rubber
& niscellansous plastics !
products) _ Ji 1.2 10.5 21 .1
manufacturing 24.1 65.5 5.5 15.0
-4 1.1 6.2 16.9
::-.rr2t£ const -action 10.9 25.8 14.6 34.5
Tr-ir-Hporratior. S public utilities -- 5.2 8.1 - 5.5 8.5
'..r-^e, wholesale & retail 27.1 69.4 9.3 23.9
7 ^r.Jnce, insurance & real estate 15.4 21.7 23.3 32.8
J.=rvices & miscellaneous 19-3 41.7 12.3 26.7
-jvpm.-ein. .Al-.'l Jl^L 12-'J W-1
Ton I !?.'». 5 "»ll. I 'J.I 22.5
SO'JRCE: CoLlfiui, op. cit.
-------
i IV-7
LoTP.isurcos or f.:j-?:.^'fi::^n i:\ GEORGIA, SCIT.L'.CT^O YFMI,», i'J5i;
Percent DiiJtri
T-.-l4i=£X. 19 5U 1960 1957 1-T/5L 19J_J_P
''. .".-•. o £ a c t ur i ng
Durable goods:
Lumber & wood products 5.6 - 2.8 1,9 .3 1.2
F-irniture -S fi::curas .9 .7 .7 .7 .7
Stone, clay. S glass products .9 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1
Primary astal industries -4 .4 .5 .5 .4
Fabricated rretal products .5 .7 1.0 1.1 1.1
Machinery " .7 .8 1.0 .9 .9
Electrical sq^ipsant & supplies .1 .5 .6.7 .7
Transportation equipment 1.0 2.4 3.2 3.8 3.T
.5
.ii .7
rood .1 fcir.dr«i products 4.0 «».3 3.1) 3.8 3.2
Textile cili products 13.3 9.5 8.1 6.5 6.8
Apparel & related products 3.8 4.5 ^.9 5.3 5.3
?a?ar L allied prcducts 1.4 1.3 1.7 i.9 1.9
Printing, publishicg S allied
industries .9 .9 1.0 1.0 .9
Chemicals £ ailisd products 1.1 1.0 .9 .9 .8
Leat'iir i Iaf.r~.?r prsdizcts .3 .3 .3 .«'» .3
Crr.ar nor.d^rabi=5 (tobacco,
petroleum refi-ir.g, rubber
& "liscelisnscv-S plastics
products) -2 .3
=ar.ufaQturia5 35.5 32.4
r .5.5
:- «r.s-:r-: = :i-- 5.0 'J.3
r-rtat^c- i public utilities 8.4 7.0
. vholesaia, i retail 21.3 2L.4
22, insursr.ce, S rsal estate 3.5 4.7
zzs ti Ttiscsliar.ao.is 10.8 11.0
' -:-nt _1/"? _L7-/ -A;i-.7 if)-'
ioc.il .106" ."6" loTi.'n To'n.'i
~: Collins, up. rlu.
-------
U.S.
(Millions)
90
•:•-.» 19:31 I
!V COLLiMS, GcO^GIA 1975: ENPLOY.MZNT OUTLOOK 3Y INDUSTRY GROUP,
V.: n,-7IAL D^VzL.O."'M£iST OlVlolOri, OcO;?G!A i^!4TiTUT:.i OF TECi-iN
-------
0 -.:::- -Llj_- 2 tj..-,n has had an adverse effect on
population growth fairly consiscep.cly since cho Ci 'il '.ic-~.
The general implication of this net out-r.igratlon is th=-c,
ir. so~.e v«:y, local conditions rcus t be relatively l-jis attractive
than the conditions ir. neighboring states or the nation.
During the decade 1950 to 1960, natural increase (excess
of births over deaths) in Georgia was about 712,000, while
the population grew by or.ly about 499,000, indicating a
loss of about 213,000 people through net geographic migration.
Ituch of tha out-migration can be attributed to a heavy
r.ove=aut of tha non-white (primarily Negro) population
iron Georgia during recent years. About 204,000 of Georgia's
213,033 net out-migrants during the decade ending in I960
were r.c n-w h ice.
Georgia's I960 population count was 3,943,116, representing
r.r. ir.~r2333 cf 14.5 D = rcsrit o'/ar the 1950 poo*jl«- 1 L«n '•otil.
c<2 rctJ T-. ^rev =» d'T-i..- 1J.6 .r
s-ig'Mly iijj ^.lan che race ac which Georgia would tiav
grown, ir. t;-.-i absence of migratio-.i. The impact oC such
a :cov=cent or. relative growth ratc^ is apparent.
Ducir.g cr.e nose recent decade, however, Georgia
by 16.4 perrdr.; wnile the nation gre-.; by only abo.ti L3.3
percent. Tha rate of growth in Georgia increased dii«pit2
a substantial incline in birth rateu, and is the first
indication cf =:i improved migration figure for the State.
The 1970 ceiis-is count places Georgia's resident population
at i.539,5T5- It is estimated that about 590,000 of tiia
changa durir-5 tha decade was due to natural increase, which
near.s thai rr.a additional change of 56,459 was due to a
net gain through geographic migration into the Stata. This
in-raigration is the first such gain experienced during
any decade ia the last century. It appears that slightly
=ore people are now migrating to Georgia than are lcuvin».
Thus," for r'r.2 first time in a century, Georgia can be said
tc be "holding her own" in the nation in population growth.
This chz-is c=.r. be interpreted as an indication of ^onorc
z-zcreaSfec "iirractive-ness" of the State.
j?_5 =£-ri3r.5C earlier, conditions are quite variable
within Georgia's boundaries, and najor differences arc
notable -»-^z:i respect to population growth. Although the
-easure of Georgia's overall growth during 1960-70 w^s
higher thar. zhat for the nation, this was true of only
about 2? -rsrcaciw of the counties. Trelijiinary cauuus
ir.dica-e that 32, over halt of Georgia's 159 count, it-.. , oxjir-rf unci-
.''n .-".'nsol'it • .-'pclir.o in population .''iirlti^ i«»v <-!,vc."i,- . fi
:.:.iy be r'.::.ii •:' th.ir these counti'-:- li^iv.- J.-ti( ii-nrt.;. f,-
C.IL 1 1- i • '. :io..i'- o! ih iii-:Lr>iu rul.uii! to :iiL- j..jiii"Mi ... li-
hC'll"; o i Ji. t)ji I c .
-------
The population jrowth of Georgia's urbanized counties
was so great as to conper.saCs for the losses (or very codest
grovch) in othac areas. Sine counties which were already
lar^a in 1960, grew by over 50 percent during the decide,
while Clayton County more than doubled in size and was
nnong the castest growing in the nation.
-------
POPULATION TRENDS AND PROJECTION FOR GEORGIA
I9JQ-298Q
01
V)
-J
CD
Ui
cc
33
O
2:
o
5
_)
r>
CL
O
c.
•'r.a
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
MM+t
•r::...,;.."1
J^X-;-;-;. i-;.;-.! f-X-XvX-X
B 111
r»*»vX'."X* •* ;•'''-.• •>!"*!!•
Illi |:;:|;;|:;
111 ill
11 II
l
•
ill
ft$:W:W
*.*.*»**". ".*.*!***
'."."«*.". *.".*,"-*a|
* '!**"i""*j'i*r*"'!
111
—
•
,
,
Hill
t
::::::::::::::::::
~
!
i
1
,
:x;::Xv':!:|:
i«*"v*v»*r%*r*
x&Sx!
:;:|:;!;xOx::
1
px>¥x:x:
:::x:::::::::::::
•:::;::::::::::::::
'""*'/"*!'I*!'!*!'"
!:::x::::'-x:::>
III
!:v':£:jxj:j::
1909
1920
1930
1940
1350
1250
u.S. £'j;-?£AU Cr THE CtMSUS, STATISTICAL A3S IT? ACT Or TMr-I U.3. 1970
(Di-' EDITION) V/ASHINGTOM.D.C.I970 AMD PERSOMAL COMMUNICATION
V/i ;'M U.S. CENSUS BUREAU.
-------
SECTORAL CHANCES
In the important: social sectors of health, education,
and housing, Georgia has substantial catching up to do.
The State does not fare well in the ratio of professional
cedical personnel to population. The ratio of nurses to
population is especially low. The ratio of Infant deaths
to 1000 live births is higher than both the national and
tha southeast region averages. This is true for both white
and other races.
Likewise, in education Georgia shews 9.0 median school
years cospleted (1960), compared to the U. S. nedian of
10.6 and ths South Atlantic Region's 9.8. Georgia ranks
41st in expenditures per pupil for education. Its pupil-
teacher rat:io of 25.9 is one of the highest in the nation.
'Cniy Tinn::-!-.??'.:''.! 13 higher.)
I.ic LL: I"-' 3-.=jr.ari-25 some of tb2 .-.OTD important trend:
_ •. tre 5.3ov» r.raas.
-------
SOCIAL DATA TRENDS
HEALTH
Infant Death Rates
(Deaths per 1,000 live births)
U.S.
South Atlantic
Georgia
White
22.9
23.6
24.6
Other
Races
43.2
47.2
48.1
White
19.7
20.0
19.8
Other
Race -.
35-9
37.4
39.4
Physicians, Dentists, and Nurses,1969
(Per 100,000 Population)
63j
106 'R 156
Fede ra 1 Fo o ti As s: i..-: t an c e
Par Cent Households Per Cent Estimated Ht-rsons
r*Lth ilCLnlvJ nv>, l-'otid Unable Co ii-.iy Ono.
POST Diets, 1965 Food Assistance,_ J-'^fiy. Hargina L_ U • c-L
U.S. 19.1 3.2 " "" 25,856","OOb" ~
Georgia 23.3 _5_-3_ 1,004.000
HOIIS1 :'G
Selected Housing Characteristics, 1960
(Per Cent)
Sound Deteriorating Dolap Ldnle:'.
\£. 74.0 7.8 ~~~ ~ 18.2
-.- A-Is.-ric 67.2 6.4 26.4
-=^rsia 58.4 6.7 34.9
/.'l
-------
L'r.ito in Gaorgin
u cp.d Unoccrjiccl)
I960
i i=ber 1,170,039
1970
1,468,858
Pf-c Cent
Change
Jr 25.5
EDUCATION
School Years Completed, 1960
• ., • •
- ": "- --
,. .. l').i'i
->-•-: Atiiati'_ 9.8
'.-cr-^a 9.0
ALL CLASSES
, •
-— -'-
L0.3
9.3
s.a
. .
-- -
It)
10
9
i
-"--
.9
.2
.3
r '•* i 1 1 x i f •
•_.--.. . . '_• ..
L0.9
10.7
L0.3
8.2
7. !.
G.I
Per Cap:.:- School Expenditures and Incoma
i'i:r .-. J'.- > ' 11
3_.-..:7. i'er i'u:pil ;:..t;i!::: I.-. :,r...,
Zxpe-di-'-ires Expenditures Rank Income iutnk Sclioola PupL!
T..:,'.ch-r I! ir io
:i35;; (1970)
..:. 171 783
. .-_-. .-l^iiir 1£1 683
.- :_j. If? 600
(1969)
3,680
41 2,791 39
( L9G«J)
22.7
23.X
25.9
.-..- ilsd zrcn: L.£. bureau of the Censu;;, S tatis t: Lea I Abf. L r.ic'_ in" !.h..:
r-'::cJ Stnten: 1970 (91-Jt KdirLon), Wii".h ir./Lon, "i/.C .," 19/0
-------
. Generally upa^kla:;, tassi; broad trcMuis anJ data su^c^s i: t:i;.;r o,'.-o r.:; i. ;
h-2d substantial prublems .La its "basic social ;u\:- econ;;;.;lc .-;; i'.-...;r: -rj o-v 1 i. £:•,
Particularly if compared to national averaf^a . Monr:-.!:heia:-io, t:l:^r;:; ...re so::.;-
c.'Ys-:.: rvations to b;i ir.n.d:; on the; positive si its.-, C-icr:;!-i1:; pop:ila^ion h.'1.:; ,^"!*w
'i-.. an increasing race over th*; past d-c^caJy, p^r^ay/; Ludica?.liv; ca^.": .i:;y,»:>:.1
LL^l that GuorgLa is a place with futr.r-- grovth po u-.:rJj i .;.!.. A^.u ?:Ii.-':.•: ;'av\)t:::!:. !.
>:. r;.:cui is found in ctvo behr.vior of Georgia's per caolra icicoi:;i;. Via Lie it:
ri.-:;rins lower tha.- Lhe naLional average, it has bsen rlyins at a ;jii.r;.:tiy
faster rate of ch.'ir.ge than the-- national average since 196.1. Per cauita
ir,ccT.e is one of the basic measures of welfare, atul positive cacct; oc
_r/aa;;e in this variable ara indicative of the s'lcces^ful launching of
uConcTiic develup-r^ent.
REFERENCES •
L. Sairai, Alberc W. , "Georgia's Cros3 State Product", Georgia liujine?;:
i;-ivc-r3v:v 07 C- :.-r3i.-i. Vol. 3, No, 4. Oc.r.o::.--.-r i?7l). .
_ , biennial D9v-;:.L^-3-.-.eut Program, FY \_')l'l-~i ~i., ;.'.V.'L<•.-::: i>s' OL.ai,^ i'' L;;v_ .hi-Iu;: i.r.y f;i:_oup,
industrial L-j:v-;.".t-:;--:^nt Division, Caor..-La j":u L i. i:aL,.- o !" :!,\'<:h^a l.o^y,
Project 7.-iOC-liO, 1369.
5 ... Ibic.
;j . Biennial Div:i:l^•.:^i:;; Progrnin, fY 1972-77 > oo , cit. .
-------
III. MAJOR LAND USE PATTERNS IN GEORGIA
Georgia has a total land area of 37,295,360 acres. The major
land cover of the State is woodlands. A 1961 survey found that 60% or
25.8 million acres of the State were tree covered. This represents
an increase in total acreage of 4.5 millions acres from 1936. Most
of this increase has occurred in the Piedmont. However, only 12 million
of these 25.8 million acres are classified as good commercial forests.
While this classification is predicated on the percentage of desirable
trees per acre rather than productivity of soils, there are 5.1 million
acres of unproductive or little used land within the State.
Though agriculture is no longer the dominant industry of the
State, it is an 825 million dollar industry. Any significant fluc-
tuation that would affect farming could jeopardize an industry utilizing
8.2 million acres of land as well as affect the lives of over 83,000
farm operators and their 210,000 dependents.
In the past few years the Georgia farmer has encountered a number
of perplexing problems. The Minimum Wage Law, rising interest rates,
rising land values and the corresponding tax increases have contributed
to increased operation costs. While it is true that agriculture is
a highly subsidized industry, many agricultural economists are of
the opinion that production costs are increasing faster than c-ommodiLy
prices. Many farmers liave already turned I«» mccli.inlr.-il Inn, I.irj-c-r
and fewer farms or parr-time for farmlnp lo comhaL escalating rosls.
Crop cultivation land is being turned into commercial forestry land;
abandoned cropland is going for improved pasture, and marsh or prarie
-------
having treatment plants occasionally have to dump untreated sewage
into streams because their plant's capacity is exceeded. A number
of industries have also contributed to this problem by dumping their
raw waste into nearby streams.
There seems to be little concern for the inland marshes of the
State, other than the Okeefenokee which is under Federal protection.
A case in point is Albany, a city in the southwest part of the State
which is experiencing rapid expansion. For a number of years the
water table has been dropping and is a subject of some local concern.
Yet the city continued to permit the filling of lowlands so that
these low areas would drain and be used for residential development.
This filling was compounded when the city completed several large
drainage ditches. These ditches carry the runoff that was formerly
absorbed by these areas to the river.
Private development of waterside areas can be a pollution hazard
by fostering bank erosion. There are two major causes of bank erosion
clear cutting of vegetation and over-use. People having homes or
cabins on waterfront property want to "enjoy" the view. To make the
lake or stream more observable the owner will cut all or most of
the trees. The next step is to clear the bank of cattails and other
tall-growing grasses and weeds. Several reasons are often given for
the removal of the weeds and grasses - the danger of snakes, the
desire Lo "clu.'in-tip the place" and the "hu.'iut 11'lc.iC ion ol" the grounds.1
Whatever Lhe reasons, the results are .11 ways Llie same; b;niks erode
causing additional silting to take place downstream and wildlife and
-------
fish population are adversely affected because habitat is destroyed.
Waterside development can create several other problems. Improper
placement or design of private septic systems can allow sewage to
enter streams. The additional nutrients from this effluent can
cause rapid algae and weed growth, discouraging recreational usage.
Too much effluent can cause pollution.
Private development along streams and lakes often causes still
another problem: intensive private residence development of a
stream or lake tends to preclude any possibility of public access.
As a result waterside recreation sites accessible to the public are
often over-used. This over-use causes rapid site deterioration
and contributes to the silting of the waterways through the destruction
of existing vegetation. Through water recreation's increasing popularity
will come increased stream-bank abuse if controls are not implemented
and enforced. Appropriate zoning can control future development and
increase public access, but other programs will be needed to clear up
existing problems.
Very few zoning ordinances provide for flood plain districts.
DeKalb County attempts to discourage development by large lot zoning
within the flood plain (3 acre minimum for residential lots) and by
requiring the developer to make site improvements to remove aJ 1 danger
ol" I'loud duin.iKi- Lo that particular si i.e.
Li is IJUCUIIMMK IncrensLngly < miri-rni-il .ilioul its w.iLur
rc'sourccs (rlvur sysLc-ins and coastal nuirsliJunds) . liisLf.iil of /.(
the State has utilized permit boards to control land use practices
and pollution along Georgia's waters and waterways. One Board, the
7
-------
Water Quality Control Board, is responsible for the State's stream
system and the other, the Coastal Marshland Protection Agency,
regulates development in the coastal marshlands of the State. The
creation of these control boards clearly shows the State's feeling
In this area of water and water resources. The State's purchase of
Sapelo Island should indicate that these boards will function well.
However, the lack of controls concerning the other stream-related
problems - such as overdevelopment of the areas adjacent waterways
and lack of public access to waterways - does not promote much optimism
as to when these controls will be forthcoming.
Another area of deterioration is the roadside of the State highway
system. Although there are many more thousands of acres of tilled
farmland, the Soil Conservation Service is of the opinion that roadsides
create the greater erosion problem. They estimate that the right-of-ways
of Georgia highway system are the largest single source of silt in
the State.
The newer highways of the State seem to be well aligned in most
cases and blend well with the topography. On these newer highways
erosion control measures appear to be for the most part well maintained,
but many of the older highways are still plagued with this problem.
Coupled with this erosion the commercial and residential strip development
is reducing many potentially scenic Georgia roads to rural eyesores.
Billboards, junked automobiles, discarded appliances, dumps, abandoned
surface mines and borrow pits, and unscreened jimkyartls conLrifouLe
Lo Lhe deter ior.iLc-il s(.aLe of many of our roadsides.
H
-------
Most counties that already have adopted ordinances go to great
lengths to control the design and siting of billboards, and yet place
few if any restrictions on where billboards may be used. The federal
government attempted to discourage billboards along new federal inter-
state highways. The legislation was "watered down" because of the
billboard lobby and as yet has had little impact on Georgia. In
fact the Georgia interstate highway network probably has more
billboards per mile than any of our State highways. (Possible exceptions
might be Georgia 17 and 25 on the coast.)
One county ordinance (Columbia County) does make an attempt to
alleviate congestion by significantly increasing lot size requirements
on major thoroughfares and highways. The remaining counties seem
content with merely preserving the exclusiveness of the single family
dwelling destricts. Keeping residential development separate from
commercial and industrial districts appears to be a greater concern
than congestion.
The Georgia Highway Department, for lack of power or initiative,
contributes to the degeneration of rural roadsides. Except for
engineering requirements, width and number of driveways, the
proximity to intersections and the requiring of an access permit
there are no regulations governing access to county highways. This
permissiveness not only causes visual deterioration of the rural
landscape but actually negates the purpose of the State highway system.
As more curb cuts are permitted, development and ronni'.st ion incri-asc.
Kvcntua LLy speed limLts must be lowerL-il, Llius (k-cri'a.s iii>-. ilu- c.irry i nj-,
capacity of the highway. How long this nLLiLucle will coiiLinuc is
anyone's guess.
-------
IV POPULATION DENSITY AND LAND USE PLANNING
The world seems to be getting smaller and more limited In Its
capacity to support human beings because the per capita use of
resources in developed countries, and the per capita expectations
in undeveloped countries, keep going up. Thoughtful persons
everywhere are agreeing, perhaps reluctantly in many cases, that if
a high quality human existence is to be achieved man must now "manage"
his own population as well as the natural resources on which he depends.
This means that the population growth rate must be drastically
reduced so that an equilibrium can be reached In the very near future
if we are to avoid the very high risk of excessive population, reduction
in the per capita availability of resources and a loss in (.lie individual's
freedom of action. If this is indeed the case, then the question of
what constitutes an optimum population density for man becomes a key
issue. An ecological approach to this problem involves considering
the total demands that an individual makes on his environment, and
how these demands can be met without degrading or destroying his
environment.
Dr. Eugene P. Odum, Director of the Institute of Ecology at
the University of Georgia, has tackled the question of the "optimum
population for Georgia" on the assumption that the State was lar^e
enough and typical enough to be a sort of "microcosm" for the
Nation and the worid. The basic question asked was: How many people
C.IM Georgia support ut u reasonably hi^h standard ol living on a
continuing, self-contained equilibrium basis, In the sense LhaL imports
and exports of food and resources would be balanced. Dr. Odum
L,
found that Georgia is a good microcosm for the United States because
1ft
-------
its present density and growth rate, and the distribution of its
human and domestic animal population are close to the mean for the
whole nation. Likewise, food production and land use patterns in
Georgia are average. Furthermore, since pollution, overcrowding,
and loss of non-renewable resources have not yet reached very serious
proportions, the State, like most of the nation, has the opportunity
to plan ahead for a new kind of "progress", based on the right of
the Individual to have a quality environment and to share in the
economic benefits of wise use and recycling of resources.
Dr. Odum adopted two general principles as a background for the
Georgia inventory. His first is: "The optimum is almost always less
than the maximum". In terms of human population density, the number
of people in a given area that would be optimum from the standpoint
of the quality of the individual's life and his environment is
considerably fewer than the maximum number of people that might be
supported, that is, merely fed, housed and clothed as dehumanized
robots or "domestic animals". Perhaps, then, the idea of the "greatest
good for the greatest number" is not really a tenable principle.
The second principle is that affluence actually reduces the number
of people who can be supported by a given resource base. Thus the
optimum population for a highly developed, industrialized nation
with a high per capita G.N.P. (gross national product) is very much
lower than the population that can be supported at a subsistence
level in an undeveloped nation, because the per capita consumption
o! resourr.es nnd the production of wasLus .ire so much urcMti-r in
llu- ili-vi-lopuil loiuiirles. Dr. Oilum polnl:. oul th.il I In- Hnlli-«|
SlaU's Is now In as much danger of ovurpopu l:il Ion at. UH h'v<-l
of per capita living as Is India at her present: standard of living.
-------
MINIMUM PER CAPITA ACREAGE REQUIREMENTS
FOR A QUALITY ENVIRONMENT
Food-producing land 1.5 acres
Fiber-producing land 1 acre
Natural use areas (watershed,
airshed, greenbelt, recreation,
waste disposal, etc.) 2 acres
Artificial systems (urban,
industrial, highways,
waste treatment facilities,etc.) 0.5 acres
TOTAL 5.0 acres
Table 1
Table 1 is Odum's estimate of the minimum acreage necessary to
support one person at a standard of living now enjoyed by Americans,
Including a pollution free living space, room For outdoor recreation
and adequate biological capacity to recycle air, water, and other
vital resources. The per capita area required for food was obtained
by taking the diet recommended by the President's Council on Physical
Fitness and determined how much crop and grazing land is required
to supply the annual requirement for each item. If Americans would
be satisfied with merely getting enough calories and greatly reducing
their consumption of meat, as little as a third of an acre would be
adequate, but the kind of diet Americans now enjoy including orange
juice, bacon and eggs for breakfast and steaks for dinner - all of
which require a great deal of land space to produce - takes at
least 1.5 acres per capita. Thus, the American "demands" from
his agricultural environment 10 times Llic space tliaL is requi rcil lo
produce the rLce diet of the Oriental. The- one-acre requirement for
"f.Lbers" is based on present per capita use of paper, wood, rot ton,
etc., that equals the average annual production of one acre of forest
and other fiber-producing land. The two acres for "natural area use"
-------
are based on the minimum space needs for watersheds, airsheds, green
belt zones in urban areas, recreation areas as estimated by land
use surveys. Again, we could do less by designing more artificial
waste recycling systems and doing away with outdoor recreation, but
at a high cost to society as a whole.
Odum emphasizes two points in considering the five-acre per capita
estimate.
1) If per capita use goes up in the future, either more land
is needed or greater production per acre must be forced by increased
use of chemical controls that, in turn, tend to pollute the total
environmentf creating a cost in taxes that would reduce the individual's
take-home pay.
2) The five-acre estimate is relevant only to an area such as
Georgia that has a favorable climate (adequate rainfall and moderate
temperature). The per capita requirement would be much greater in
regions with large areas of deserts, steep mountains or other extreme
ecosystems.
Total area 37.7 million acres
Total people 4.8 million
Per capita density 1 in 8 acres
Domestic Animals
Population Equivalent 21 Million
Table 2
Per capita density of 1 in 8 acres compares with the national
average of 1 in 10 acres. A domestic animal population 5 times
that of people is also close to the national average. In considering
the impact of man on his environment, Odum states the importance of
the domestic animal is too often overlooked; yet such animals are
actually consuming more "primary production" (i.e. photosyntheUc
-------
conversion of sun energy to organic matter) than man, and they require
huge amounts of land. We could do away with all domestic animals,
of course, and substitute people, but to the ecologist that would
mean not only giving up meat in the diet, but also dehumanizing man to
the level of a domestic animal.
POPULATION GROWTH RATE IN GEORGIA
Birth rate 2.4%
Immigrat ion 0.4%
Death Rate 0.8%
Net Growth Rate 2.0%
Table 3
If we consider for the moment that one person in five acres is
a reasonable per capita density, then Georgia is rapidly approaching
that level. As shown in Table 3, the net growth rate is two percent
which, if continued, would mean a doubling of the population (leaving
only four acres per capita) in 35 years. Georgia is moving from
what was considered essentially a sparsely populated state to one
that is beginning to feel the adverse effects of population pressure.
Dr. Odum discusses how it is possible to prepare graphic models
for population growth and stabilization to show how animal populations
in nature normally regulate their density that would be imposed by
the food supply. In this event the quality of hoth the individual
.nid che IMIV I romnL'iil Is Insured, Hincu i liu liuliviclu.il is neither
likely Lo run out of food nor to "oviir>;r.i /.».•" ur otherwise piTmanc-nL J y
damage his habitat in his efforts to obtain the necessities of life.
In some populations, death controlled by predators, disease or parasites
is the regulator; in other populations, birth control is the mechanism.
-------
In some of the best regulated species of the most highly evolved
animals, namely the birds and the mammals, the essential control is
behavior that restricts the use of space.
This sort of "territorial control" would seem to be relevant to
the human population, according to Dr. Odum. Best of all, planned
and controlled land use mutually agreed upon through the democratic
process can be accomplished at the local and State level right now,
while we continue the discussions about birth control and abortion
in an effort to reach some kind of national and international consensus
that can make these approaches effective nationwide and worldwide.
In actual fact, Georgia is extremely vulnerable to overpopulation
for two reasons:
1) the immigration rate is high and can be expected to increase
as people flee from the crowded, polluted, and deteriorated
part of our country and
2) land is open to immediate exploitation on a huge scale
because there are so few protective laws and so little land
in public ownership. Many of these factors apply to other
areas of the nation. Even if the birth rate drops in Georgia
and other less crowded States, population growth rates would
remain high because of immigration that will come as people
discover the relatively cheap and quickly available "open
spaces". As already indicated, a growth rate of two per cent
per year means that Georgians would be down to one m;m Ln
4 acn-s In 3!i yoars.
Dr. Odum'a statements demonstrate that land use controls m.iy bo
our best weapon against Regional overpopulation. To Georgians, that
is important.
-------
V. INSTITUTIONAL LAND USE PLANNING & ZONING
In Georgia there are 159 counties, more than any other State
except Texas. Since there are not yet any land use controls with
any substantial implementation, Georgia remains the epitome of
localized, fragmented decision making. Georgia is typical of many
other States in that all zoning authority has been delegated to the
counties and local municipalities. The enabling legislation for zoning
was passed by the General Assembly in 1957, but only 31 counties have
a zoning ordinance. Out of approximately 500 municipalities, 173
have enacted a zoning ordinance.
Under the auspices of the 1957 Act, there are three methods of
adopting zoning ordinances:
1) County governments can adopt county-wide ordinances;
2) Cities can extend their extra-territorial zoning powers to
Include unincorporated militia districts and/or areas 500
feet wide on either or both sides of county highways, State
highways, streams, or bodies of water;
3) joint city-county ordinances can be adopted for any unincorp-
orated area that a city might zone. Under this Enabling
Act the local governments have the power to utilize and
administer any or all of the usual zoning districts.
The Enabling Act authorizes local governments to create planning
commissions, members oT which are appointed by the governing nufliori ty.
Ex-officlo members of the commission who hold public office serve
on (.lie commission during their term <>l <»ffi<-c. So ilir |>J.iim! up, roiimiis:. ion';
-------
make-up is usually Just as political as its decisions. It is the
duty of the planning commission "to make such careful and comprehensive
surveys and studies of existing conditions and probable future develop-
ments and to prepare such plans for physical, social, and economic
growth as will best promote the public health, safety, morals,
convenience, prosperity, or the general welfare as well as efficiency
and economy in the development of its political Jurisdiction."
The planning commission is also charged to prepare a master plan
for the community, to prepare and present for adoption a zoning ordinance
and map, and to prepare subdivision regulations, also to be presented
to the local governing body for adoption.
The master plan referred to has been the subject of considerable
controversy during recent hearings before the Subcommittee on a State
Land Use Policy and local zoning. Also referred to as the community
plan or the comprehensive plan, this master plan ideally should set
forth the goals and objectives of the community in such a manner that
a layman can understand where he and his property fit into the master
plan. Such is not the case. Master plans which were completed were
placed in a closet and ignored. Those that have been found were
usually too idealistic to be of any practical use in planning for the
orderly growth and development of a community.
.im
Once- .1^:1 In, Idf.illy, the- zoning ni.ip should he* dr.iwn ii|> in .in ord.i
with MIL- iiki.sU-r pi. in. However, UK- lyph.il /.lining m.ip is mil h in>>. ..... n-
than an Inventory of present land use. According Lo Rep. Cera Id HorLon,
Chairman of the land use subcommittee, when a developer petitions n
L7,
-------
local governing authority for a zoning variance, the local board should
simply be able to ask, "Is this development in accrodance with the
master plan?" If not, it would be denied. But the master plan is
not adhered to, and the zoning map is only an inventory of present
land use, so a decision to grant the zoning variance would be arbitrary,
so the local board usually has no choice but to decide in favor of
the landowner.
When such a petition for an amendment to the zoning map is presented,
It must first be submitted to the planning commission for its recom-
mendations. Nothing the planning commission has to say is in any
way binding upon the local board.
The 1957 Enabling Act also authorizes the creation of a zoning
board of appeals whose members are also political appointees. None
of its members may hold any public office, except that one member
may be also a member of the planning commission. It is rare in
Georgia for a Board of Appeals to reverse a decision of those who
appointed them. Appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals is
made to the courts.
There is one exception to this process as authorized by the
enabling legislation. By Act of the General Assembly, the joint
planning commission for the City of Macon and Bibb County is authorized
as the Final decision making body on matters of zoning. Tliis system
was the object of considerable interest to the land use suhcoinini L LL-I-
at its hearings in Macon. The City and the county alternate appoint-
ments to the Commission, and for a member to be reappoinlod, iliu
reappointment may not come from the same political body which appointed
.1 U
-------
him to his previous term. This system represents the only authority
In the State where zoning decisions are not made by elected officials.
However, the Chairman of the Commission is an architect, and it is
somewhat biased toward realtors and developers, or in other words,
it regards its decisions as economic moreso than environmental. Of
course this is typical of most decision-making bodies in the State.
One observation which should be mentioned Is that It is the
consensus of planners throughout the State as well as some State legis-
lators that a developer can always force a project through zoning
obstacles, if not In one county then in the next. If he has the
power to bring pressure in the right places and the tenacity (and
he very often has both) he can force a zoning variance. Professional
planners are frustrated people. They often blame our land use
problems on the politician, and vice versa. It is not unusual for
a local board to decide against the advice of its professional planning
staff as much as 20 or 25% of the time.
The Counties and municipalities, however, are not without the
planning assistance of the area planning and development commissions,
or APDC's. These commissions are State-sponsored and come under the
Department of Industry and Trade and the Office of Planning and Budget,
but participating counties are required to share the expenses of Lliese
commissions. There are eighteen Area Planning and Development Commissions
in Georgia, serving 5 to 10 counties each.
Georgia Act No. 1066 was enacted in 1970, and implemented the; re-
quirements of the Federal Intergovernmental Coo|jc;r.i t ion Ai:l of MHiH
(Bureau of the Budget Circular A-95). Act No. 1066 created I lit- Stall-
KI
-------
Planning and Community Affairs Policy Board which was empowered to
set boundaries for the APDC's. Section 15 of the Act requires
three things of the APDC's:
1) review and comment upon applications by units of local
government within the area to State, Federal, guasi-governmental
or private agencies for loans or project grants;
2) preparation of an Area Biennial Development Program to be
updated annually. The Program includes:
a) analysis of the current posture of area development;
a review of progress or change so as to evaluate Roals
of prior year programs,
b) objectives of existing and recommended programs,
c) six-year schedules of area capital improvements and other
major program expenditures and activities based on a
determination of relative urgency; and recommendations
for possible changes in administration, organization or
procedures to effect more efficient methods of operation;
3) preparation of an area forecast for the development of the
area of such commission in accordance with predicted future
needs and resources.
Due to the availability of "701" funds and other various Federal
assistance available to local government, great interest has been
generated in planning. For a local government to obtain any of this
assistance, it must make its application through the A1M)C. The- AIM)C
serves as a clearing house and insures that there is no conflict or
duplication with other projects and proposals. The APDC then "reviews
20
-------
and comments "to both the appropriate State and federal agencies.
Rarely does the AFDC issue a negative comment to these agencies
because it aids in the planning of the project. So the APDC
has a great deal of leverage with the local government, as a
negative comment to the federal or State agency would mean certain
failure for acceptance. As local government is then forced to use
the APDC as a vehicle for federal money, the APDC maintains good
cooperation in all aspects of its planning functions, including
land use. The APDC's also serve in a liason capacity with the Appalachian
Regional Commission, the Coastal Plains Regional Commission, and the
Economic Development Administration. As a result, these area
commissions have substantial resources with which to work.
The type of planning done by the APDC's varies, though the major
emphasis has been focused on anticipating and meeting sewage and
water needs and the formulating and adopting of building, sanitation
and subdivision codes. Other services include: Assisting in the
formation of needed committees and local planning commissions; gathering
of needed data for studies; formulating and drafting planning proposals;
drafting needed ordinances and codes to insure that the planning policies
can be realized, and providing educational and public relations advice
to insure adoption of planning proposals. If the proposal is not
adopted the area planning commission will revise the proposal. After
the proposal is adopted the APDC continues to provide profession;il
l> I.-i lining .iss IsL.mcf ;IM<| advice.
As yet, the APDC's
-------
Because they do not staff a lawyer they are unable to provide competent
legal counsel to the county and city attorneys who must defend the
ordinances. Any of the expansion of the zoning powers In Georgia
will for the present be uncoordinated and haphazard partially for
this reason.
It is becoming Increasingly apparent that dissatisfaction and
a loss of confidence In this zoning framework Is bringing more
and more attention to the need for change. As an example
Mr. Robert E. Gerber, Director of the Department of Community
Development of the City of Columbus, Georgia made the following
statement on behalf of Mayor J. R. Allen at recent hearings of the
land use subcommittee:
"Gentlemen, T "ish to be extremely candid. I am not here to
advocate or disavow zoning. However, based on Georgia enabling
legislation, antiquated by fifty years, zoning has been nothing
but a toy in the hands of those special interest groups, individuals
or agencies which could or can apply the most political pressure.
It is highly questionable whether or not, in georgia, comprehensive
planning is a prerequisite to zoning, even though zoning is predicated
on the fact that it is a tool of planning implementation. Most likely,
zoning has been used to try to zone existing conditions out of existence,
exploit certain conditions within the community, or preserve the status
quo. The State enabling legislation of Georgia should be looked at
very critically with an eye towards providing,as an absolute prerequisite
to zoning, a general plan developed and adopted by the community and
maintained and updated continually. In addition, that zoning changes
be made in conformance with the general plan, or that certain specific
criteria be present prior to undertaking a zoning change, or deviate
from the plan. I believe it is the State's responsibility to impose
upon all cities and all counties in Georgia a requirement that they
define their future growth plan and that they encourage implementaLLon
through the police power of the State. I believe it is a responsibility
of the State to emphasize the fact that property ownership is ;i privl li-j-ri
c if>lit. mid not ;il>so lul c; that the way In which l.intl is ilrvclnpnl or
clKin^cd is ol co IK urn Lo the entire commuui Ly .is it will .il U-cL lulurc
gene rat ions".
-------
Mr. Gerber alludes to the economic pressure placed on political
bodies. Georgia Is not unique In this sense, as there is a dependency
of local governments In all States upon development related tax revenues.
The economic Incentive to develop at any price often conflicts with
the long range Interests of the region. This economic incentive toward
development even appears to extend to some of the AFDC's in Georgia.
In a State such as Georgia (and all over the South) where many
areas remain economically undeveloped and sometimes even backward,
it is not difficult to explain why a development bias exists. Where
per capita income is very low, how can one expect a governing body
to make a decision favoring environmental factors rather than economic.
In these areas of the State, especially in south Georgia where there
is little other than hundreds of thousands of acres of pine trees,
people couldn"t care less about land use. They want growth, and
they are typically not particular about what kind of growth. There
are those who are aware of the pitfalls of this attitude, and stress
that growth should be orderly, but they are a minority.
This concept is one which shocks urbanists. The very idea that
the rural areas will not consider the environmental aspects of growth
and development is one which they may not accept. We must realize,
however, that as long as there is the element of "frontier" the pioneer
land ethic will continue to exist. In Europe, population density is
much greater than in the U.S., and there is a different philosophy.
Private ownership is not as strong, because tlierc- is no
-------
As was mentioned earlier, some of the APDC's are oriented
toward development rather than land use planning. Georgia Act
No. 885, enacted in 1970, authorizes the APDC's to facilitate the
development of housing. The Act even authorizes the area commissions
to "assist political subdivisions in the development of local agree-
ments between such political subdivisions for the purpose of super-
seding local building codes relative to specified housing projects."
Even with this emphasis on housing, there is no evidence whatsoever
to support the suggestion that proper planning has not been undertaken.
But to those environmentalists who support the theory that "no growth
or development should take place", the APDC's are oriented toward
development "at the expense of the environment". Chairman Gerald
Horton of the land use sub-committee emphasizes that land use planning
is comprehensive. Growth and development cannot be left out in the
planning process. To divest developmental aspects of land use would
be unfair and unrealistic. It must be considered in the broad frame-
work of the entire social, political, and economic setting.
Another problem inherent in the current zoning process is that
of conflict of interest of those who hold public office. As one
planner said, "If they ever pass a conflict of interest law with any
teeth in it in this State, half of the local politicians would have
to go". Many of the city councils and county boards of commissioners
are dominated by realtors, developers, and contractors.
A number of State-level agencies, now organized under the Came
and Fish Commission are directly or indirectly concerned with Lliu
preservation and allocation of natur.il ;ire;is in fleorgin. TMUKC
24
-------
same agencies are also concerned with the development of recreational
facilities. The Office of Planning and Budget has the duty to aid
each of these agencies, in an attempt to coordinate their overlapping
duties and responsibilities. Unfortunately, however, it lacks the
authority to make its advisory recommendations binding, and has no
legal remedies for non-compliance. Each agency, therefore, operates
without binding comprehensive guidelines to insure that desired goals
will be achieved.
The State Game and Fish Commission Is responsible for acquiring
and managing lands and waters for wildlife restoration, propagation,
and protection. Through its powers of eminent domain, the Commission
may condemn, purchase, or lease properties for game preserves or
wildlife management areas, and may thus effectively block private
or public development of areas acquired. The great expense would
preclude extensive use of the eminent domain power to effectuate a
balance between competing land and water uses.
The Game and Fish Commission can play a role in the control of
artificial lake developments through effective use of its regulatory
authority over hunting and fishing in the State. By enforcing the
licensing requirements and by imposing limitations of the quantity
of wildlife caught or killed during a specified season, the Commission
can help to preserve the wildlife remaining within a developed area.
While the commission is charged with the responsibility of enforcing
Georgia's boating regulations, no control can be exerted over priv.-itely
owned lakes, as these measures apply only to ponds or lakes open to
the general public.
24 b
-------
The basis of the entire problem is that local decision makes
too often forget that zoning is a tool for implementing a plan.
This section has dealt with the institutional framework under
which zoning and land use decisions are made in Georgia. It has
been critical in some respects, and now wishes to be more complimentary.
One reason for the need for more and better land use planning has
been the inadequacy of local government. All of the legislative
proposals pending in Congress agree that small units of government
are inherently limited by the confines of their jurisdiction. The
limits of local jurisdiction are simply not adequate to encompass
regional ecological systems or economic areas without some policy
guidance and control from larger units of government.
In almost all areas of public facility and land use planning,
a regional approach has been considered an attractive route to
better service at lower cost. Georgia early recognized the benefits
to be gained from this approach and established the APDC's. With
increasing encouragement and support from the Federal government,
other regionally based organizations, such as associations of local
governments and planning councils, as well as local and regional
economic development districts, have been created. Federal support
has been made effective through many grant programs which require
compliance with regional plans before planning or matching capital
funds are made available. This not only has encouraged more effective
planning of public facilities and of land use, but also has given
these plans considerable leverage toward implementation.
25
-------
The case for regional planning is a strong one. Many of the
legislative proposals considered for presentation in the 1973
General Assembly give the APDC's more authority to implement their
plans. This system of regional planning is considered to be one of
Georgia's chief assets for the future. Other regions of the country
would do well to consider the advantages of a strong area-wide
planning structure.
-------
VI CONSTITUTIONAL & LEGAL OBSTACLES
It Is apparent by now that great change is needed before
substantial progress can be made in an effort to solve Georgia's problems
of land use. But before practical solutions can be considered, it is
necessary that the obstacles be discussed so that the possible alter-
natives may take these into account. Before broad policy decisions
are made, those things which will be encountered in the legal and
constitutional framework should be analyzed.
In recent months several states have enacted various laws to
strengthen State control over land use controls. Others have been
slower to act for any number of reasons, one of which has often been
the constitutional barrier. Georgia is typical of those States.
For this reason the legal dilemma shall be discussed in detail.
Special attention shall be given to Georgia's efforts to deal with
one of its "critical areas", the coastal wetlands, and the questions
which have arisen concerning ownership of the marshes.
The background for this examination will be provided by selected
judicial interpretations of conservation plans of other States and
relevant facets of Georgia law. The basic and most formidable hindrance
is the State's delegation of zoning authority to local government.
This issue has been the subject of much debate as Georgia lias
-------
to local government. This problem will become even greater should
the State enact legislation for broad land use controls in other
critical areas.
Other problems include the determination of the actual property
owners of the marshes. At present it is not clear who owns the
marshes, the State claiming title, but at the same time, the tradi-
tional "Owners" claiming property rights.
First, the marine resources themselves should be examined in
more detail. In that zone where the sea meets and interacts with
the land and within Georgia's boundaries, there are approximately
400,000 acres of wetlands, and experts advise that less than one
percent of this land has been filled. Next to South Carolina this
is the largest resource of tidelands in the Atlantic Coastal States;
yet, today the pressures on the Georgia Coast are mounting. The
conflicts between the uses proposed are becoming clearer and sharper.
Some builders see the coast as a potential Florida. Others see the
marshlands as a potential site of the world's richest phosphate mines.
Some would use the land as shrimp farms, and others would pump materials
for navigational and highway improvements onto the marshes. Wildlife
lovers and conservationists would like to see the coast placed on
a deep freeze and preserved for future generations. Some see it as
this country's greatest coastal recreational area. Others see It
as the only place in the country where urolo^icul resenrcli cnn he-
conducted in unpolluted estuarine areas. lv;icli of thusi: uses ronl'l ii;Ls
in some degree with the other possible uses.
-------
It now seems that the decision is leaning toward conservation
of the marshes with the passage of the Marshlands Act. But the
more difficult question is how to go about conserving the marshlands
in a manner which can be upheld by the courts. The developmental
proposals have hinged largely upon claims of ownership to large
segments of the Georgia coastal marshes. In response to those claims,
the Attorney General of the State, Arthur K. Bolton, issued a
statement of opinion in March of 1970 which claimed that "the State
of Georgia is the legal owner to much, if not all, of the coastal
marshland now being privately claimed." The statement has no force
or effect except that "the position set forth therein are those
which this Department intends to pursue in the future concerning
the Marshlands of Georgia."
Mr. Bolton contends the basic source of State involvement in the
foreshore and inland waters of the coastal zone is the traditional
trust imposed at common law upon this area of the zone. Like the
bulk of real property law, this common-law trust doctrine has its
origin and concept in the feudal system of land tenure. Under this
feudal system, initial title to all land was in the English Crown,
which held it as trustee in official and representative capacity.
The dry land and the soil beneath fresh-water streams and bodies of
water were convertible by Crown grant into privately held property
interests. At the same time, the rivers and arms of the sea and
all lands below the high-water mark by reason of their special
adaptability to public uses were set apart and reserved as public
W.ll ITS.
-------
"Such waters, and the lands thereby covered, . . . being incapable
of ordinary and private occupation, cultivation and improvement, were
reserved to their natural and primary public uses." The title,
the jus privatum, in the lands involved was in the crown as the
sovereign; the dominion the jus publicum, in the Crown as the repre-
sentative of public trust and for the public benefit.
The original States of the United States succeeded to the Crown's
status of trustee. Both the common law rule of title in trust and
the sovereign succession concept have been recognized in Georgia.
Under the English common law, the landward boundary of the trust
property is the high-tide line. This demarcation was generally
adopted as a part of the trust concept.
Most of the early Crown grants did not convey adjacent marshlands,
and there were few individual grants from the State of these lands.
However, beginning with the Act of 1860 which extended title from
high land to the low water mark of adjacent navigable streams,
landowners have asserted title to the lands between high water and
low water in the tidal zone.
In 1901 the Supreme Court of Georgia rendered the decision of
Johnson v. State. 114 Ga. 790. This decision interpreted the Act
of 1860 extending title to the low water mark in streams as not
being applicable to the tidal zone because the water does not course
but merely rises and falls with the tide.
-------
The following year, 1902, the legislature responded to this
decision by passing an Act which purported to extend title to the
beds of all tidewaters, not adjacent to navigable waters, to the
boundary line of the next owner's property. Title to the beds of
lands adjacent to navigable tidewaters was extended to the low water
mark of said waterways. At the time this Act was passed It was
of doubtful legality because of a possible conflict with the consti-
tutional prohibition against donations and gratuities. In Art. VII,
"The General Assembly shall not by vote, resolution, or order, grant
any donation or gratuity in favor of any person, corporation or
association."
However, in the Constitution of 1945, Art. II, it undertook to
cure any possible defect: "Tidewater titles confirmed - The Act
of the General Assembly approved December 16, 1902, which extends
the title of ownership of lands abutting on tidal waters to low
water mark is hereby ratified and confirmed."
Private ownership and use of most marshlands went unquestioned
until the 1970 General Assembly passed the Coastal Marshlands Protection
Act, commonly referred to as the Reid Harris Bill. Shortly after
the adjournment of the legislative session the Attorney General issued
his position paper which held that almost all of Georgia's marshes
were owned by the State.
Now lli;iL I lie h.-ickf.round IIUK been cxpl.i I ned, I In- Attorney Onrr.i I '•.
statement, will bo more fully explained alony wJtli the ri'lxiLL.i Is hy
-------
some of Georgia's legal scholars.
The opinion rests on three basic assertions of law and of fact.
His first point is that the Act of 1902 extending title or ownership
of lands abutting all title waters to low water mark was and is
still void. The second assertion is that even if the 1945 Constitution
successfully validated the 1902 grant, the State succeeded to the
Crown's title to jus publieum lands in trust for the people and
cannot convey the land free and clear of this trust. The third
assertion is that marshes are not the beds of tidewaters and therefore!,
the 1902 Act extending the title of lands abutting on tidewaters to
the low water mark did not affect title to Georgia's marshes.
The Attorney General's first contention is that legislation
which is unconstitutional and void at the moment of its passage is
void forever. He cites three different cases, each of which involved
an unauthorized legislative act void at the time of its passage and
not reenacted once the impediment was removed by constitutional
amendment.
However, others have claimed that these are not the facts in-
volving title to Georgia's marshlands. They maintain that the
Attorney General's opinion confuses lack of authorization, which
requires reenactment, with ratification and confirmation, which duos
nut require rei-narLmi'iit. The opponents ol tin- Attorney Cciu'ra I ' s
:.L.il fluent i iLi- < ;i:.i.-:. wliL-ri1 llic rourLs rt: ji-i I i-tl UK- i on I i-nl ion I li.il
an Act void .-it NIL* time1 of its passage Is void forever. In MM-
i .-!!!<.• of Bailey v_. I liaising Authority ol Llie City of lt.i inbr idm-, 21 fi
-------
Ga. 790, (1959), Justice Hawkins stated, "What higher reenactment
of an Act of the General Assembly can be made than Its ratification
'by the people, enshrined In the written Instrument embodying their
sovereign will?" Once the people had ratified and confirmed the 1902
-Act it would be redundant on the part of the General Assembly to
reenact its provisions. As Justice Hawkins stated, "the supreme'will
has spoken and the courts are bound by said voice."
The Attorney General contends that the electorate was not notified
of the donative nature of the grant. At any rate, the legal validity
of his first contention remains in doubt.
In connection with the second point the Attorney General's position
holds that "the marshlands of Georgia are not susceptible to private
exploitation or conservation without regard to the common law trust
purposes to which these lands have been long dedicated." On this
point as well, many scholars disagree with Mr. Bolton.
At the time of the Norman Conquest all land was held by the Crown
essentially ±n privatum. But by the time of the Magna Charta, the
^King's title to various lands was of two distinct types, i.e. some
''lands were jus privatum and others were jus publicum. The former
Category encompassed the private proprietary lands of the King and
were freely alienable by him, while the latter were held by the King
in trust for the benefit of the public and could not be conveyed by
him to a private individual free and clear of the trust.
Tidelands fell within the jus publicum category of l.intls lit-lil
«>! I he ,
-------
In public trust. The purpose of the trust was the protection of
the English homeland and preservation of common rights of navigation
and fishery in the waters of the Kingdom. In adopting the position
that the State could not convey tidelands free of the limitations
placed on the Crown, the Attorney General has again made a statement
which is doubtful according to many. Opponents cite two points in
their rebuttal:
1) Even though the Crown was limited in its grant of jus publicum
lands, Parliament in its capacity as representative of the
English people could convey jus publicum lands on the behalf
of the people since they represented the beneficiaries of
the trust.
2) After the Revolution the State of Georgia became a sovereign
State with the ultimate sovereignty residing in the people,
and the validity of a grant by the General Assembly of Georgia
ratified by Lhc people must be determined on different, principles
from those formerly relating to the Crown alone.
The third position of Mr. Bolton is that marshes are not beds
of tidewaters, "and therefore landowners adjacent to marsh did not
by operation of the 1902 enactment acquire an arguable title to
abutting marshland."
Almost all early English cases describe marshlands .is Llie liuds
ol i iili'w.iLcTs. Tlu- third contention is moat doubtful .
Hence- it .-ippc.-irs th.nt the ultimate derision rr-Rnrcl i n>-. owm-r.slilp
ol" tin- m.irslies will he made by the courts. MiMiiwh i U-, l.ixi-s li.ivr
-------
been paid on the said lands, Industrial complexes, subdivisions,
homes, motels, docks, and roads have been built on the marshlands.
Like the Attorney General's controversial opinion, the Georgia
Coastal Marshlands Protection Act Is likewise considered by many
to be very susceptible to constitutional attack. The Act provides
for regulation of the coastal marshlands for the avowed purpose of
effecting a balance between "protection of the environment on the
one hand and Industrial and commercial development on the other."
This purpose is effectuated by the Coastal Marshlands Protection
Agency which has power to promulgate rules and regulations. Essentially,
the primary regulatory device used to implement the purposes of the
Act is the requirement that "no person shall remove, fill, dredge
or drain or otherwise alter any marshlands in this State within the
estuarine area thereof without first obtaining a permit from the
Coastal Marshlands Protection Agency."
This bill has many very good features, but it must withstand at
least three major tests, those being the same which face any proposal
which broadens State Authority over land use.
1) Can the General Assembly of Georgia delegate to a State agency
the right to zone?
2) Can the Coastal Marshlands Protection Agency refuse a permit
for the use of marshlands without hnvinR the courts ho hi rhr
same.1 lit hi- .in iincompen.satcd t.ikinj', of* propi-rly wi I limit
-------
Marshlands Protection Agency afford the landowner applicant
due process of law?
In the connection with the first point, the Supreme Court of
Georgia, in the case of Herrod v. O'Beirne. 210 Ga. 476 (1954),
held that the only authority of the General Assembly of Georgia to
enact zoning laws was limited to its delegation of said right to
municipalities and county governments, and an Act of the General
Assembly zoning property in DeKalb County was unconstitutional.
This decision, in effect, holds that the General Assembly has no
inherent right to zone; hence, it would have no right to delegate
zoning authority to the Coastal MarshInnds Protection Agency. Since
the zoning power is derived from the state constitution, this problem
could be avoided only by finding in the constitution an existing
grant of power or, in the alternative, amending the constitution
to provide for such a power in the legislature.
In connection with the second point, if a zoning ordinance is
so restrictive that it in effect deprives the landowner of all
practical uses of his property, it amounts to a confiscation without
just compensation. The right to free and unrestricted enjoyment ol"
private property underlies much of the common law, and while the
occasional necessity of forced subscription for public use was
recognized, citizens of the United States have been Ruarantecd proLec-L ion
I'rom abusive- j-ovi-rnmt-ntal usurpation from Liu- hog inn i ng. Nor w.is
direct condemnation the only encroachment against, which I hi: Const, i Lut ion
shielded, for it was clear that certain forms of regulation could U-
very damaging to private interest. As Mr. Justice Holmes sL.iicil:
37
-------
The general rule at leaat la, that while property nay be
regulated to a certain extent, If regulation goes too far
will be recognized as a taking .... We are in danger
of forgetting that a strong public desire to improve the
public condition is not enough to warrant achieving the
desire by a shorter cut than the Constitutional way of
paying for the change.
Recently in Connecticut a court decision Invalidated a zoning
ordinance restricting the use of tidal marshlands to parks, playgrounds,
landings and docks, farming, vehicular parking and wildlife sanctuaries.
These restrictions upon the profitable use of tidal marshlands were
held to be unreasonable and confiscatory.
In connection with the third point, the Marshlands Act provides
for public hearings prior to the adoption of rules and regulations,
/* o
but as- provision Is made in the Act requiring a public hearing on
any property owner's application for a permit. The Supreme Court
of Georgia, in the case of Slkes v. Pierce. 212 Ga. 567 (1956) held,
"Due Process of law, . . . guaranteed by Article I, Section 1,
Paragraph III of the Georgia Constitution, includes not Let- and
hearing as a matter of right in matters where one's property rights
are involved . . ".
It might be possible to adopt rules and regulations providing
for a hearing on the property owner's application for a permit. Even
this might not satisfy the case of Holland Furnace Co. v. Willis,
222 Ga. 156 (1966) which held, "Due process of law must be provided
.is .1 m.il H-r of rfj'.lir .ind not of Artier."
So in .ill Lli ice li'.sLs, it appear:. «|iK-sl ion.ihl r wlirlln-1 I lie
-------
Marshlands Act can stand up in the courts. Any other efforts In the
future to broaden State control over land use should take these legal
factors into consideration. The example of the Georgia marshlands
should serve to show the other Regions that more is Involved than
a decision in favor of conservation of a natural or critical area.
Just as important is doing so in a manner which will be upheld in
the courts. In an area such as land use where vested property rights
are always involved, the legal and constitutional questions must
be given primary consideration, as Court delays do nothing for
the conservation of these areas.
-------
VII. Possible Legislative Proposals
What will emerge from all of this activity within the
narrow confines of Georgia's present legal framework is as yet
not known. To be presented in this section are various
possibilities to be proposed as legislation. However, in a
broad sense, any person's or group's ideas and views on a
particular subject may be considered as a possibility for
legislation. Also to be discussed here are the activities of
the State Land Use and Local Zoning Subcommittee of the Mouse
Committee on Planning and Community Affairs. The subcommittee
was given the responsibility of studying the following three
areas: 1) state land use planning, 2) local planning and
zoning practices, and 3) Planned Unit Development.
The subcommittee was created in response to the bills
in Congress which give broad authority to the State Governor.
The legislature wanted to "do its homework" first, so they
may present this type legislation themselves, reserving, of
course, more authority for themselves rather than the Governor
Included in its research on state land-use planning wi]l be
a reconsideration of the State Planning and Zoning Enabling
Law. Planned unit development will be studied as a possible
specific alternative to the lot-by-lot zoning practices of
local government.
The subcommittee began its series of hearings on .July 20
in Tifton, Georgia for discussions of land use plannin]'. ami
iemulation in 1 lu« rural areas. The st-coml IK* a r i nj-.s tm»k place
-------
in Savannah for a consideration of the problems of Georgia's
coastal areas. At the third hearing in Macon, the strip
mining problem was discussed as well as a consideration of
the unique zoning ordinance of Macon as it relates to revision
of the State enabling law. Meetings are scheduled later at
Unicoia Outdoor Recreational Experiment Station in Helen, Ga.
for discussions of Georgia's unique mountainous areas and
their relation to land use planning and regulations. The
urban area of Atlanta will be the site for the next meeting
with emphasis on the problems that occur with urbanization.
Working sessions are scheduled for October and November to
review findings and develop appropriate legislation. In
December, more public hearings will take place in Atlanta to
consider alternatives, etc.
Nearly everyone involved in the effort to deal with
Georgia's problem of "fragmented localism" approach to land
use planning agrees that to enact a law with adequate imple-
mentation will necessitate a constitutional amendment. Georgia's
General Assembly is still dominated by rural elements, and a
move to place more authority in the hands of the state will
generate a great deal of controversy. As John Rigdcvn, President
of 'the Association of County Commissions of Georgia, has stated,
"II the powers of APDC's should be expanded, we woulil st-i- lionu-
rule weakened ami the sovereignty ol llie iiulivitlua] voter Jiluinl
am'iTlici di'jin.-i' in the in ing Led "soup" of b i j1 j-ovcrnmonl ." l)c-.|iil<-
-------
Mr. Rigdon's opposition, the expansion of the authority of the
APDC's has been a popular view among many planners and some
legislators.
Many proposals for consideraton have come forth from the area
public hearings of the land use subcommittee.
Planners have urged an education program for developers.
Developers have urged for an education program for the
politicians.
One problem in the establishment of a state land use policy
is the geographic diversity of the state which makes it difficult
to enact one law. Various officials of some of the larger cities
of the state have called for a Division of Metropolitan Affairs
to be established under the Office of Planning and Hudgct or
the Department of Industry and Trade.
If a state land use policy is adopted, it will likely con-
tain basic prerequisites or criteria which must be met before a
local community permits a zoning change. The most likely com-
ponent of the state land use policy would be a review of the
local comprehensive master plans. The state would not likely
dictate how the localities come up with a plan, but more likely
require that whatever plan is adopted be implemented and adhered
to. The APDC's arc likely to be a key clement in this process.
Of course flit' Irasl likely cniiipniiciil of I IK- I cj>. i'. 1.11 inn
would IK I lie .ilut I i -'.Ii i Hi'. "I Inc.-il zoniiij', Iml ilia I li.r. ITI n
meii I luncd . Mi. KohciI Savatlge oT t lu- S.ivannah Met i upo I i 1 .in
iiji Commission brought out thai Houston, Texas h;is no
42
-------
zoning ordinance. But there is no apparent difference in
appearance between it and other cities of its size.
Legislation of this sort will not be passed easily in the
General Assembly. As Gerald Horton, Chairman of the land
use subcommittee, pointed out it will take a great deal of
tenacity to keep pushing the bill until it is introduced and
passed, if not the first year, then the next. However, the-
primary drawback which faces the legislation will be the
necessary constitutional amendment.
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Abbot, Georgia State Bar Journal. "Some Legal Problems Involved
in Saving Georgia's Marshlands", August 1970
2. Bolton, "Legal Ramifications of Various Applications and Proposals
Relative to the Development of Georgia's Coastal Marshes",
March 16, 1970
3. Constitution of the State of Georgia
4. General Planning Enabling Legislation, Georgia State Planning
Bureau
5. Georgia Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. Georgia State
Planning Bureau, 1968
6. Georgia Law Review. "Regulation and Ownership of the Marshlands:
The Georgia Marshlands Act", Vol. 5: 563, 1971
7. Odum, "Optimum Population and Environment: A Georgia Microcosm",
58 Current History 355 (1970)
8. Rigdon, "We Want Planning - Not Governing from APDC's',1
Georgia County Government Magazine, Oct. 1971
9. State of Georgia, Biennial Development Program* FY 1972-77, 1970.
10. Statistics for the State and _C_o_unties_, Georgia; Census of Agri-
culture. 1964. U.S. Printing Office
11. Weatherly, Zoning and Georgia's Rural Areas (unpublished thesis)
-------
LAND USE PLANNING IN KENTUCKY
By Roger Westman
Youth Advisory Board
A review of land use planning in Kentucky becomes a study of
problems rather than applications. An examination of Kentucky's
problems is aided by an understanding of its geology. Arising in
the center of the state is the limestone peneplain of the liluegrass
Region. This large area of gently rolling land is ideal for
farming and is known for its hundreds of horse farms and its burley
tobacco production. It has the highest population density of the
state with the two largest cities as well as the capital. Geolog-
ically this is the oldest region in Kentucky and is concentrically
ringed by successfully younger periods. The most significant of
these are the coal beds which reach from the far eastern portion
southerly around to the far western part of kcntucky. In the
eastern coal fields the terrain is steep with narrow valleys as is
characteristic of Appalachia of which it is part. Daniel Boone
National Forest runs through the middle of this section. The
western Kentucky coal fields are quite Clat and the minerals
iisiuilly ne.ir I lie '-ur f;u e.. Different I ype:. <»l miniii)-. .ir» .ippliftl in
,l In- il i I I iTi-nl i <•;•.! 1'n1.: ileep in in inc., ionium ••! r i |i|>i nj1. .nnl .ni;-i-i i n.»
in l lie ea:.l ; .ire.i M r i |>|>i nj'. in the western purl inn.
-------
All of the state receives around 45 to 50 Inches of rain a
year. This considerable rain not only makes a good farming area,
but coupled with the relatively soft and soluble rocks has produced
the largest number of streams and rivers of any state except
Alaska. The striking feature however is the almost total lack of
lakes and ponds which compounds the severe flooding problems.
These factors have created a demand for public work projects for
water supply, recreation, and flood control facilities. Much of
the state land and water resources are therefore held by Federal
agencies who have the resources for the construction which the
relatively poor state government did not have.
Due to the impact on land use which these forces have, i.e.
strip mining for coal and Federal land holdings, two sub-sections
have been included which explore these further. But this is not
to say that land use problems arising from urban pressures are not
important in Kentucky. In fact, they are of at least equal im-
portance if not more important due to the larger number of people
immediately affected: nearly 50% of the state's population lives
in urban areas. However, in the opinion of this author they arc
quite typical of most urban centers throughout tliLs counl-ry and
therefore tho emphasis of this report has l>ern put un wli.il uii>-,l«l
lie coir, i (liTi-
-------
Lexington, "in the heart of the Bluegrass", is the fourteenth
fastest growing city in the nation. What originally was a small
university and tobacco town in the middle of flat agricultural land
is now sprawling in every direction due to an active campaign to
locate light industry there. Although the university has increased
many fold, its relative impact has diminished to a fraction of
what it was. Large facilities of IBM and Square D corporations are
typical of the hundreds of industries now operating. City services
have not kept pace with the growth and the green belt of prized
horse farms is quickly being turned into hastily built subdivisions.
Package sewer treatment plants are proliferating. While the down-
town stores arc closing and being replaced l>y huge shopping
centers on the edf»c of advancing growth, the inner city is degen-
erating. There seems to be no answer forthcoming to the problems
created by growth, but one can expect more of the same. Even the
City-County Planning Commission staff's proposed "urban service
area." is usually ignored as the developers advance.
Louisville, on the other hand, is a rather large city. Its
growth problems have spilled over into the five surrounding counties
and into bordering Indiana. A combination of old traditional and
new production industry makes this the economical center of llie
state .although it still lacks the political power of Llie Lobatco,
coal, and power industries in the remainder of llie sinii-. llrli.m
iLi
-------
blight is trying to be controlled by renewal and a shopping mall
has Just been created on a former downtown street. Typical of the
approach to growth, an airport authority was chosen to look for a
new 22,000 acre jetport site where ever one could be found. There
could be no land use plan by which it could be considered because
the site will probably be located in two adjacent rather rural
counties which do not have such plans. One of Kentucky's problems
is its total of 120 small counties which until recently did not
even have the right to enact ordinances.
Located between Lexington and Louisville is the capital city
of Frankfort. This is a government city. From here all regulations
flow and are administered. From here the Department of Commerce
goes out to recruit new industry to locate on the rivers of eastern
and western Kentucky. Most public hearings are held here. The
Division of Strip Mining and Reclamation in Frankfort has the powi:r
to say whether an area several hundred miles away will be strip
mined regardless of the feelings of the areas residents.
Administering to the needs of the neighboring cities of Lex-
ington and Louisville is easy but an observer often senses a feeling
of isolation when it comes to eastern or western Kentucky, especially
since high speed roads weren't constructed until the middle Sixties
and the- first interstate to cross tho Appalachians is still nor
c. oniji Id ril. Tlir (i>.il incluslTy I'liun-1 i>i «• ILLS li.ul .1 linos I ,i I r«-<- hand
In ilo .1:. i( plr.isrs, ,md massive fuilt'i'.il < cnisl rue I i on projects were
iv
-------
considered the only economic help.
Strip Mining for Coal in Kentucky
Strip mining for coal has had a favorable climate in Kentucky.
It was not until 1966 that the state legislature enacted the first
truly regulatory control on reclamation. The act gave the division
of Strip Mining and Reclamation of the Department of Natural Re-
sources the power to require permits for operation, collect
fees and bonds, and set standards for reclamation. Indicative nf
the progress which has been made, last year the Division adopted
water quality standards for run off from the mining operations.
Despite the expressed fears of coal spokesmen, the law has
not stopped the strip mining industry. Up to 1966, 155,000
acres of land had been surfaced mined, for which no law required
reclamation. Since 1966 over 100,000 more acres have been mined
with the yearly figure jumping from 9,000 acres in 1967 to 30,000
acres in 1971. Production has readily followed the rising demand
for coal.
The coal industry responds in two ways to an increasing
demand: the large operators may increase production and the number
of small operators greatly swells. This is possible because most
of eastern Kentucky coal rights wen- bought from the land ownt-rs
years ago by corporations under the broad forms deed whiili Is
si Ml Iej-.;i1 in Kentucky. This deed allows a nniu-r lo ulii.iin I li«-
-------
coal without regard to the effect on the surface-- effects of modern
technology were not envisioned at the time. Often the surface rights
are owned as well. These corporations then lease sections to oper-
ators. It Is up to the operator to decide where and how he will
mine and then apply for a permit. This situation may lead to a
doubling or more of the number of strip mine operators within one
year if the demand is sufficient.
The Division of Reclamation must respond within 20 days to
approve or disapprove a permit. Conditions for disapproval include
records or reports that landslides and pollution may occur, the
hillside slope is too steep, the area is within 100 feet of a
public road, stream or lake, or where it would adversely effect a
public park. However it has been necessary for the Army Corps oT
Engineers to investigate damage to their reservoirs £rom strip
mine drainage, and continual reports are heard that slopes in excess
"of the degree specified are still being mined. In addition,
within the last year the ridge opposite one of the most famous
'scenic'views of the state park system was strip mined and then
given an extension of the permit for an adjacent portion still
within the view of the park.
Western Kentucky is different in that fewer, but lar^e
:orporations operate there usually doinfi their own rnLninj; and Lliai
the broad form deed is not found. Since.- the land is llatirr, .irr.-i
sirippiii)- r.il lu-r tli.'in contour mininj-. is «lonr.
vi
-------
These conditions allow a greater percentage of long term planning
on the part of the coal companies. Peabody Coal for Instance has
a ten year plan for the River Queen Mine detailing all future
operations. New permits are requested as past reclamation bonds
are returned. They usually retain control of the surface after
mining is completed too. This is advantageous to the state
since it is the operators who are responsible for reclamation, not
the land owner. Often the companies in other parts of I ho stare
have long gone out of operation before the adverse conditions re-
sulting from poor reclamation appears.
The use of land after mining is not often considered. For
area stripping it must be returned to "approximate original contour";
for contour or auger mining much thought is given to preventing
landslides even though this usually requires a larger area disturbed.
The booklet "Strip Mining in Kentucky" by the Department of Natural
Resources lists twenty one future uses of strip mining areas.
Such things as golf courses, grazing land, hunting reserves, raising
Christmas trees and creating lakes for fishing and ducks during
reclamation are suggested. Another suggestion noted the abundance
of-power in western Kentucky and recommended electrolysis to re-
cover minerals from polluted mine water which could be sold. Attempts
to use the strip mine pits for the ol ten .su^m-steil practice of
s'ol-ul w.irilr il i :.p«»:;a I li.ivo never rea I I y iikil t-ri.i I i /.i-il. hi l.ul ,
VLl
-------
little of the stripped land in Kentucky is utilized. A few
demonstration plots are widely publicized but more often public
access to mined areas is-prohibited.
Of the total 45 county area in which there are strippablc
coal reserves, only 2.36% of the land area has been stripped up to
now. For Kentucky, the Sierra Club has warned that "With coal
reserves underlying one third of the state, Kentucky is in for far
more intensive stripping. In western Kentucky the area stripping
of these reserves would involve almost total disturbances to the
land in half a dozen counties. In eastern Kentucky, conLour
stripping of the out-cropping of coal seams in the lillls could
affect the largest, proportion of nearly every mile' of major si ream
and tributary watershed in twenty five counties or more". There
is no land use plan of any kind to regulate liow this is to he done.
Certainly the coal is valuable resource and is needed, but
the random process of having companies decide where to mine and
substantially what the land will be like afterwards leaves the
regions with an uncertain future.
Elmore Grim, former head of the Division of Strip Mining
and Reclamation and now with E.P.A., has advocated a change to
"watershed mining". This would require a new law giving the state
the author! Ty fo conduct all in in ing within a }-,iven wal er.-.lied -U
one I inn- ul i I i x. i ii)-, onr adc-cjii.il r I y di-.-i i j-iu:d sill.ilion li.r.ni, w.ili r
I, ri.-.il iiK'iiI nnil :inil .ic t <-:;K rti.id;:. l\r< I.nail ion toiild In- In lli-i
VI I
-------
supervised and probably most important once the mining is done
no new operations would return to redisturb the watershed. It is
often the case now that several strip mines, augerlng operations
and deep mines operate successively will leave an area affected al-
most indefinitely. "Watershed mining" is Just one approach that
could be taken under a comprehensive land use plan.
Federally Managed Land in Kentucky
The lack of natural lakes and ponds in the state has created
a demand for public works projects which provide water Tor recreation,
flood control , water supply, commercial fishing and for power
generation and cooling. Of the approximately 550 square miles of
the state covered by water in lands and streams, over half is in
man made impoundments. Including the proposed projects and those
under construction, the Corps is concerned with 34 lakes. The
Tennessee Valley Authority administers Kentucky Lake and the "Land
Between the Lakes. Kentucky Lake has 48,100 acres in the Kentucky
portion.
The sites are administered on an individual basis to meet the
objectives set forth in the legislation establishing the project.
llMi.il 1 y two or more objectives prcdomin/ire whirl) depend upon I lie
needs of Llie rej-.ion find upon I lie Corp.s I i ml i nj-.-s . Sut.li .in appi o.u li
treales major ol i lie
-------
shoreline; whereas, the Corps maintains public access on Berkley
Lake including stretches of wild areas. When goals are similar,
however, the methods of management may be similar, such as for
flood control. The Corps attempts to determine the optimum tech-
nology and then will apply that technology in all of its studies
which warrant it. Even though they may be public hearings from
time to time on some new aspect of management, the key factor in
planning is the legislative act which establishes the project.
Being a one time process and in the political arena, an act may
not give the Corps nor the public as much flexibility or input
in the planning and the long term management as might be desirable.
In contrast to the above situation, the Forest Service
has one set of national objectives which are translated into manag-
ement plans by an on-going process at the regional and local levels.
Of course it must be realized that the Forest service is not
construction orientated so that plans may be changed at will as
needs and technology change.
Since the early 1960*s when the Multiple Use Act was passed
and implementation began, the Forest Service operated by functional
resource groups. Each group was concerned with management of a
particular resource such as timber, minerals, wildlife, or recreation,
This often resulted Ln conflicts when st:vt-rnl ri-smirci-s m-i-urcil
to)',et IKT. Tlie l-'orcst Supervisor or Kej'.ion.ii l-'on-sl er would .illnnpl
in. re.solvr I lii-se conflicts. Anew approach is Ix-iii}-. :il I i-mpi nl .U I In-
-------
present time.
The new approach Is called Unit Planning. In Kentucky's
Daniel Boone National Forest their have been established twenty six
units which entirely cover the main forest. The unit boundaries
are determined by topographic and phisical features. A National
Forest Region draws up a guide which provides the broad objectives,
policies and directions to be followed by all administrators within
that region. From that guide a Unit Plan is developed which covers
all aspects of the environment, social and economic needs. It is
emphasized that all programs, activities and services must work
within the unit and all action be based upon the unit plan, it is
an interdisciplinary plan. Thought has even been given to having
sociologists on the planning team along with the landscape
architects, foresters, geologists,soil experts, etc.
The Unit Plan establishes ten year goals. The Lime table
for establishment of these plans calls for complete resource
inventories, public involvement and review by the Regional Forester
within 25 weeks. It would also be the basis for producing 102
Impact Statements. As a model for land use planning, the Unit
Plan is as close to complete a system as yet envisioned within
Kentucky.
Unit I'l.mninf, li.is been used in I In- ri-j'.iini Tor two yrar-. lml
only .MHO- Inly 1Wi in the Daniel HIHHM- NJlmn.il Kmtr.l. A-. yi I
Ilicrc art- no lund:. sprt i l~i cally apiiropi i.il ril I IT il, IMII I In- |»l.mn i ii}
x i
-------
is proceeding under monies normally used for functional group
planning. It is believed that the ideal unit size will be 20,000
to 30,000 acres for which on the average the Daniel Boonc National
Forest owns about a third of the surface land. Initially two
unit plans are being prepared around critical recreation sites;
The Red River Gorge (101,000 acre unit) and Beaver Creek (16,000
acre unit). The latter is being considered for an eastern wild
area.
Examples of how the management policies of the Forest Service
produce different results from those which the Army Corps of
Engineers is forced to work under can be seen in mining and land
acquisition. In the proposed Big South Fork National Recreation
Area which the Corps was to operate, the boundaries were a matter
of political debate decided by vote of a Congressional committee
and floor vote. Even strip mining and deep mining had to be considered
in the bill since the area has coal reserves with the final provisions
being a compromise between the sponsoring legislators. In contrast,
The Forest Service initiates its own land acquisition within the
Proclamation Boundary of the forest to obtain land which it feels
is desirable and for which it cannot enhance the management.
Even though the federal government owns only 25% of the
mineral rights within Kentucky's National Forest, and they arc
controlled by the Uureau of Land Management, there .iro no .lolivc
applications for si rip mininp, wi tin n llie I'on-SL nor or .my I-XJK-I I <•
-------
Since the surface land is controlled by the Forest Service, they
have set water quality and reclamation requirements that they believe
are compatible with other uses of the forest. By doing so they
set the standards too high to make retrieving the coal competitive.
Actually a desicion with a major effect on land use has been made
without specifically dictating that effect. It is quite possible
that some day strip mining will be practiced within the forest but
it will meet strict requirements such that other uses of the land
should not be unduly impaired.
xiii
-------
REFERENCES
Strip Mining in Kentucky. Department of Natural Resources, Frankfort,
Kentucky, 1965.
The Strip Mining of America.by Richard C. Austin and Peter Borrelli,
Sierra Club, 250 W. 57th Street, New York, 1971.
New Approaches to Strip Mining.Student Council on Pollution and the
Environment, Ohio Basin Region, Federal Water Quality Administration,
November 21, 1970.
Statistics of the Kentucky Coal Industry Bases on Production for 1970."
prepared by Ted D. Haley, Associate Professor of Mining Engineering,
University of Kentucky, February 20, 1972.
Kentucky Water Resources- 1965. Department of Natural Resources,
Frankfort Kentucky, 1965.
Systems for Managing the National Forests in the east,
Guide for managing the National Forests in the Appalachians
Regions 8 and 9, National Forest Service, Department of Agriculture.
XIV
------- |