EPA-600/5-78-003
February 1978 SocioeconoiJiic Environmental Studies Series
MANUAL FOR EVALUATING SECONDARY
IMPACTS OF WASTEWATER
TREATMENT FACILITIES
^eo s%
Office of Air, Land, and Water Use
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Researcn and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES series. This series includes research on environmental management,
economic analysis, ecological impacts, comprehensive planning and fore-
casting, and analysis methodologies. Included are tools for determining varying
impacts of alternative policies; analyses of environmental planning techniques
at the regional, state, and local levels; and approaches to measuring environ-
mental quality perceptions, as well as analysis of ecological and economic im-
pacts of environmental protection measures. Such topics as urban form, industrial
mix, growth policies, control, and organizational structure are discussed in terms
of optimal environmental performance. These interdisciplinary studies and sys-
tems analyses are presented in forms varying from quantitative relational analyses
to management and policy-oriented reports.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/5-78-003
April 1977
MANUAL FOR EVALUATING SECONDARY IMPACTS
OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
by
Malcolm FitzPatrick
John Willson
Dean Ericson
Gene Fax
Dianne Wood
Contract No. 68-01-3268
Project Officer
Harry C. Torno
Office of Air, Land, and Water Use
Prepared for
OFFICE OF AIR, LAND, AND WATER USE
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON D.C. 20460
EPA - RTF
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Air, Land, and Water Use,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention
of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommen-
dation for use.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
This manual describes procedures for assessing secondary impacts of
wastewater treatment facilities. The manual guides the user through this
impact assessment process by describing EPA policy and regulations govern-
ing analysis of these impacts; approaches to refine and improve existing
projections of amount, type and location of projected growth in a service
area; and the range of potential secondary impacts and alternative approaches
for impact assessment. Application of projection and impact assessment ap-
proaches are provided for various levels of sophistication, consistent with
analysis capabilities and available resources.
The manual also provides EPA Regional Reviewers with a convenient
framework for evaluating quality of local analyses of secondary impacts and
an analytic basis for imposing any needed special conditions.
This manual is a tool for planners and engineers preparing impact
assessments; it does not supplant regulations which govern impact assessment
processes. The manual considers only secondary impact assessment. Measures
to mitigate these impacts have not been considered in the manual but should,
of course, be implemented where the impact warrants.
Fourteen areas of secondary impacts are covered in the manual, cate-
gorized into four groups: Media Impacts (i.e., ambient noise levels);
Sensitive Environmental Area Impacts (i.e., floodplains); Unique Area Impacts
(i.e., parklands); and Secondary Economic Impacts (i.e., impacts on property
values).
lil
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1 . 0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objectives of the Manual 1
1.2 Definition of Secondary Impacts 2
1.3 EPA Policy on Secondary Impacts 3
1.4 Manual Organization and Use 4
2 . 0 INTRODUCTION 6
2.1 The Basic Issue: Sewers and Growth 6
2.1.1 Review of the Literature 6
2.1.2 The Geographic Context: Some Simplifying 9
Assumptions
2.2 Use of Existing Population Forecasts 13
2.2.1 Problems with Small Area Forecasts 13
2.2.2 Selecting a Forecast 16
2.3 Projection of Future Growth 16
2.3.1 The Logic for Calculating Incremental 16
Effects
2.3.2 First-Level Approach: A Checklist 18
2.3.3 Second-Level Approach 20
2.3.4 Third- Level Approach 23
2.3.5 Determination of Induced Growth 28
2.4 A Strategy for Guiding Secondary Impact Approach 30
3.0 MEDIA IMPACTS 33
3.1 Water Quality and Quantity 34
3.1.1 Increased Peak and Total Storm Runoff Volumes 34
3.1.2 First-Level Approach 36
3.1.3 Second-Level Approach 41
3.1.4 Third-Level Approach 44
3.1.5 Increased Sediment Yield 45
3.1.6 First- Level Approach 48
3.1.7 Second- Level Approach 48
3.1.8 Third- Level Approach 49
3.1.9 Increased Pollutant Loadings 49
3.1.10 First- Level Approach 50
3.1.11 Second- Level Approach 50
3.1.12 Third- Level Approach 52
3.1.13 Water Supply 52
3.2 Air Quality 56
3.2.1 Introduction 56
3.2.2 First-Level Approach 60
3.2.3 Second-Level Approach 60
3.2.4 Third- Level Approach 62
iv
-------
Page
3.3 Noise Impacts 63
3.3.1 Introduction to Community Noise 64
3.3.2 Converting Impact Measures to L^ 72
3.3.3 First-Level Approach 75
3.3.4 Second-Level Approach 79
3.3.5 Third-Level Approach 85
3.4 Solid Waste Impacts 85
3.4.1 First/Second-Level Approach 90
4.0 SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS 93
4.1 Wetlands 93
4.1.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Wetlands 96
4.2 Coastal Areas 97
4.2.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Coastal Area 102
4.3 Flood Plains 102
4.3.1 The Frequency of Flooding 103
4.3.2 Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 104
4.3.3 First/Second-Level Approach 107
4.4 Wildlife Habitats 108
4.4.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Wildlife Habitat 110
5.0 UNIQUE AREAS 114
5.1 Parkland 115
5.1.1 First-Level Approach—Parklands 115
5.1.2 Second-Level Approach—Parklands 118
5.2 Wild and Scenic Rivers 121
5.2.1 First-Level Approach—Wild and Scenic Rivers 122
5.2.2 Second-Level Approach—Wild and Scenic Rivers 124
5.3 Areas of Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, or 125
Cultural Value
5.3.1 First-Level Approach 128
5.3.2 Second-Level Approach 131
6.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURAL ENTERPRISE, ENERGY 135
PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION, AND LAND VALUES
6.1 Impact on Agriculture
6.1.1 First-Level Approach—Agriculture
6.1.2 Second-Level Approach—Agriculture I40
-------
Page
6.2 Impact on Demand for Energy 143
6.2.1 National Patterns of Energy Availability 144
and Use
6.2.2 Sewer-Induced Land Use Change and Energy 146
Use Patterns
6.2.3 First/Second-Level Assessment of Energy Impact 148
6.3 Impacts on Property Values 153
6.3.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Land Value Changes 154
References 157
Bibliography of Noncited Sources 169
VI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.6
Figure 3.7
Figure 3.8
Figure 3.9
Figure 3.10
Figure 3.11
Figure 3.12
Figure 3.13
Figure 3.14
Figure 3.15
Interrelationship of Service Area, Growth Area
and Economic Area
Interrelationship of Transportation Corridor
and Subareas
Determination of Subarea Affected by Wastewater
Treatment Facility
Interrelationships of Urbanization, Construction
of Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Impact on
Water
Values of Runoff Coefficient for Use With
Rational Formula
Statistical Method for the Assessment of Runoff
Urban/Non-Urban Drainage Models
Annual Non-Point Pollutional Loads by Land Use
Type
Graphs Showing Trends in Use of Water for Public
Supplies, Rural Supplies, Irrigation, and Self-
Supplied Industry. 1950-1970
National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air
Quality Standards
Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels
Approximate Addition of Noise Levels
Design Noise Level/Land Use Relationships
Land Use Rating System Suggested by HUD
Yearly Average Equivalent Sound Levels Identified
by EPA as Requisite to Protect the Public Health
and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety
Correction Factor for Converting Leg(h) to L, For
Highway Noise
Correction Factor for Converting L (24) to L
Highway Noise
Correction Factor for Converting L (day) and
night) to L^ for Highway Noise
For
Page
10
12
14
35
38
43
46
51
53
57
66
67
68
70
71
73
74
75
vii
-------
Figure 3.16
Figure 3.17
Figure 3.18
Figure 3.19
Figure 3.20
Figure 3.21
Figure 3.22
Figure 3.23
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.3
Figure 6.4
Illustration of How to Construct Noise Border
for First-Level Estimation of Aircraft Noise
Impacts
Day-Night Equivalent Noise Level (L^)
Municipal Solid Wastes Collection Rates
Solid Waste Generation by Dwelling Type
Solid Waste Generation Rates by Dwelling Type
Estimates of Municipal Wastes
Baseline Estimates and Projection of Solid Waste
Generation, Resource Recovery and Disposal, 1971
to 1990
Estimates of Manufacturing Wastes
Approximate Flow of Energy Through the United
States Economy, 1971
Energy Consumption
Average Per Capita Energy Consumption by
Alternative Development Patterns (In 106 Btu/Yr.)
Average Energy Consumption by Alternative
Development (In 106 Btu/Yr.)
Page
77
84
86
86
87
87
88
89
145
147
151
152
viii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, it has been the practice, when constructing waste-
water treatment and conveyance facilities, to consider only primary impacts
(such as the impact of treatment plan discharges on the quality of receiv-
ing water) when assessing the environmental impacts of these facilities.
The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) (1), guidelines of the
Council on Environmental Quality, and recent federal regulations and policy
development impose the additional requirement of assessing secondary or in-
duced environmental impacts. This manual, a guide to assessing the secon-
dary impacts of wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) construction, was
developed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a tool to
aid in such assessment and to assist in better community decision-making.
This manual is intended to serve as an aid in the assessment of
secondary impacts and not to supplant any regulations that govern the
assessment of environmental impacts.
The manual considers only the assessment of secondary impacts and
not their mitigation. It should be obvious that, before any plan is fina-
lized or facility constructed, appropriate actions should be taken to
mitigate any significant secondary impact.
1.1 Objectives of the Manual
This manual on secondary impacts of publicly owned wastewater
treatment facilities (WWTFs) and associated collection systems is in-
tended for two user groups:
(1) Local officials and their consultants responsible for
identification and assessment of secondary impacts in
preparing Step 1 facilities plans under EPA's Construc-
tion Grants Program; and
(2) EPA Regional staff and state officials responsible for
environmental review of local Step 1 facilities plans
and the subsequent decision whether to issue a negative
declaration or call for preparation of an environmental
impact statement.
For both of these user groups, this manual is designed to increase
their understanding of:
-------
• the range of potential secondary impacts of wastewater treat-
ment facilities; and
• current EPA policy and regulations governing analysis of these
secondary impacts.
Specifically, for local planners, the manual provides:
• a basis for refining and improving upon existing projections
of economic and population growth;
• procedures to determine the amount, type, and location of the
projected growth within the area to be directly served by the
facility;
• step-by-step methodologies to identify and assess the full
range of secondary impacts of WWTF construction; and
• a flexible approach to perform this analysis at varying levels
of detail, depending upon local need, capabilities, and availa-
ble time and resources.
The manual provides EPA Regional reviewers with:
• a convenient framework for judging the comprehensiveness and
depth of local analyses of secondary impacts; and
• an analytic basis for imposing any needed special conditions
upon localities as a part of the construction grants process.
1.2 Definition of Secondary Impacts
Final EPA regulations governing preparation of environmental im-
pact statements defined secondary impacts of wastewater treatment facili-
ties and other EPA construction activities as follows: (2)
"Secondary impacts are indirect or induced changes. If the
action involves construction of a facility, the secondary
impacts would include the environmental impacts related to:
(1) induced changes in the pattern of land use, population
density and related effects on air and water quality
or other natural resources
(2) increased growth at a faster rate than planned for or
above the total level planned by the existing community."
EPA Program Guidance Memo #50 (circulated to Regional Administrators
in June 1975) has restated this definition in even briefer terms: (3)
"Secondary effects of a project are indirect or induced
changes in population and economic growth and land use, and
other environmental effects resulting from these changes in
land use, population, and economic growth. "
-------
These secondary impact definitions make clear the twofold nature
of the secondary impact assessment task. First, local planners must be
able to project future demographic, economic, and land use changes, with
and without the wastewater treatment facilities. The difference between
these two projections would represent the changes attributable to the pro-
posed WWTF. Second, local planners must then be able to identify and
assess the significance of environmental impacts resulting from these in-
duced changes.
1.3 EPA Policy on Secondary Impacts
Current EPA policy and procedures for analysis of secondary impacts
of wastewater treatment facilities are defined in Title 40, Part 6 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 6) and Program Guidance Memo No. 50. (3)
The Program Guidance Memo No. 50 states:
(1) Localities must identify and assess potential secondary
impacts as an integral part of the Step 1 facilities
planning process, using "best available data and ana-
lytical techniques."
(2) The critical determination is whether or not any potential
secondary impacts will result in contravention of any
existing federal, state or local environmental law or
regulation, or any plan or standard required by such laws
or regulations.
(3) Where secondary impacts resulting from a wastewater
treatment facility "can reasonably be anticipated" to
contravene an environmental law or regulation, plan or
standard, the EPA Regional Administrator shall withhold
approval of Step 2 or Step 3 construction grants until
the local applicant either (a) revises the Step 1
facilities plan, (b) initiates steps to mitigate the
adverse effects, or (c) agrees to special grant condi-
tions requiring actions to minimize the effects. Further-
more, the locality must demonstrate "good faith" and be
"clearly moving toward proper mitigative action" before
a Step 2 grant is awarded.
(4) Any special grant conditions imposed by the EPA Regional
Administrator must be "reasonable," and the local appli-
cant must possess the requisite authority to fulfill the
conditions.
(5) EPA follow-up of grantee compliance with any special con-
ditions is required once the Step 2 grant is awarded. If
an applicant fails to abide by grant agreement conditions,
the Regional Administrator may take a number of actions,
including:
-------
— withholding grant payments
— refusing to process subsequent grant applications
from the locality
— refusing to approve grants for future phases of the
same project
— entering an injunction against the grantee
— suspending all work on the project
— terminating the grant and recovering unexpended EPA
funds
1.4 Manual Organization and Use
The structure of this manual reflects the two parts of the assess-
ment task: growth and land use projection and estimation of environmental
impacts resulting from WWTF-induced growth.
Chapter 2 is designed to provide local planners with tools necessary
to refine and improve upon existing population and land use projections, in
order to determine the types, rate, and location of future growth in the
WWTF service area, which is attributable to the facility. Three alternative
and increasingly sophisticated approaches are suggested for projecting
growth.
Chapters 3 through 6 in turn provide step-by-step methodologies
for identifying and assessing secondary environmental impacts of this pro-
jected growth. Fourteen such secondary impacts are covered by the manual,
categorized under four headings:
Chapter 3 — Media Impacts
• surface water and groundwater quantity and quality
• ambient air quality
• ambient noise levels
• solid waste generation
Chapter 4 — Sensitive Environmental Area Impacts
• wetlands
• floodplains
• coastal zone
• wildlife habitat
-------
Chapter 5 — Unique Area Impacts
• parklands
• wild and scenic rivers
• areas of historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural
value
Chapter 6 — Secondary Economic Impacts
• agricultural land availability
• availability or demand for energy
• property values
Two or three approaches to secondary impact assessment are provided
for each type of secondary impact. The approaches differ according to the
analytical rigor with which the assessment is carried out. Alternatives
are provided so that the user of the manual can apply an approach which is
tailored to the potential seriousness of the individual impact, as well as
the user's analytical capabilities and available resources.
Section 2.4 contains a procedure for conducting an initial assessment
of the relative seriousness of these fourteen types of impact. The result
of this preliminary "screening" is a prioritized list of impact types, which
excludes impacts which are simply not expected to be present in the WWTF
service area. The remaining impacts on this priority list are intended to
be addressed sequentially beginning with the most serious, to which is
applied the most sophisticated assessment alternative necessary.
The result of applying the procedures presented in this manual
should be a statement of the type and magnitude of all secondary impacts
which are expected to occur in a facility planning area due to the pattern
and rate of growth induced by the facility.
-------
2.0 INDUCED GROWTH RESULTING FROM WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
This section provides the basic framework for projecting growth and
land use changes, with and without the proposed waste treatment facility, so
as to then determine the type, amount, and location of induced development
in the area served by the proposed WWTF.
Section 2.1 summarizes the available technical literature on the re-
lationship between sewer investments and urban growth patterns, and then de-
fines a series of concepts useful for organizing the problem of sewer-induced
growth. Section 2.2 provides the manual user with background information on
the problems associated with using available substate population pro-
jections and general guidance on how to select the appropriate forecast
for his particular locality. Section 2.3 supplies a series of three in-
creasingly sophisticated procedures for projecting anticipated development
without the proposed facility; it then discusses these same three procedures,
this time assuming construction of the facility, and shows how induced
growth is determined. Finally, Section 2.4 provides an initial "screening"
method to help the local analyst identify which types of secondary environ-
mental impacts are likely to present the most serious problems for his
particular area, and thus a strategy for guiding the analysis in the most
productive directions.
2.1 The Basic Issue: Sewers and Growth
2.1.1 Review of the Literature
Increased attention has been devoted recently to understanding what
causes development to occur at particular locations, in a particular pat-
tern, at particular points in time. Of special interest to planners are
those growth stimulants which can be directly controlled by public policy,
e.g., tax measures, land use and environmental regulations, and new public
facility investments (4). While tax and regulatory policy may affect broad
development patterns, the funding of new public facilities has a more imme-
diate impact on specific land areas. As the Council on Environmental Quality
noted in its Fifth Annual Report, "New sewers are becoming in many metro-
politan areas the prime determinants of where and how fast new develop-
ment occurs." (4) The CEQ underscored this point in its Sixth Annual
Report, stating that "highways and sewers are especially significant growth
stimulants." (5)
-------
The most commonly recognized area of secondary impacts of sewers is
new development. The location of new interceptors can significantly increase
the number of "buildable" lots along their rights-of-way. A recent study of
fifty-two federally funded interceptor sewer projects found that such lines
tend to be oversized, in anticipation of future development based on in-
flated population projections which are at best "speculative" and filled
with "great uncertainty." The oversizing itself contributes to the extent
of the resulting development and "a circular and self-fulfilling process of
growth occurs." (6) Regional interceptors also tend to run for long dis-
tances between existing towns and can encourage unwanted development of
open space in the absence of effective development management. Combined with
the tendency of developers to move immediately to the end of the new sewer
line to take advantage of the available service where land prices are still
relatively low, "the result is a costly leapfrog and fill-in development
pattern, which increases the difficulty of properly planning the timing and
sizing of other public facilities and spreads the urban area out in a
pattern that is wasteful of land and energy resources." (4) From the stand-
point of this manual on secondary impacts, the most important finding is
that of the CEQ-funded study of interceptor sewer projects, namely that
"on the local scale sewers actually induce growth that would not otherwise
occur." (6)
To put the impact of sewer projects in perspective, it should be
stressed that land use patterns are the result of a complex set of historical,
economic, social and political interactions. "No angle factor can be
isolated as the cause of current land use practices...the role of inter-
ceptor sewers must, therefore, be seen as contributory rather than de-
cisive." (6) Furthermore, lack of public sewer investments does not neces-
sarily stop further development; if development pressures are intense, pri-
vate sewerage systems can become financially feasible, e.g., individual
septic tanks, package treatment plants. Thus, "development can continue
unchecked without public investment in sewer facilities, but the form,
intensity, and rate of development may be significantly altered." (7) Sewers,
therefore, are neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for development
to take place. A recent EPA-sponsored study of secondary impacts reached a
suitably guarded conclusion: "The limited empirical analysis available
-------
suggests that sewerage systems cannot always be isolated as instrumental
causes of development. However, under a set of limited conditions not un-
common today, they may serve as a principal stimulus for localized develop-
ment." (7)
The "limiting conditions" under which a new sewer investment will
have important secondary effects are important to understand. Industrial
location decisions depend primarily on access to labor and to external mar-
kets, with the influence of public sewer service usually being small. When,
however, related urban highway investments in an area lead to lower land
prices than central locations with equivalent access to labor and improved
access to external markets, "a new sewer investment within the area will stimu-
late industrial development." (7) Commercial location is primarily sensi-
tive to population distribution and access to households and, again, the
relative influence of sewer service is probably small. The conditions under
which a new sewer investment will likely have important secondary effects
for commercial development are: "availability of vacant, previously un-
sewered land available at low cost, relative to average cost for comparable
commercial sites, and having high access to households," (7) Of course,
the secondary effects of sewers on residential development can in turn
have an important lagged effect on the location of commercial activity.
The principal link between housing location and sewer service is the den-
sity of residential development; sewers permit a more intense use of the
land and therefore a larger return on the developer's land investment. The
evidence from existing studies of the residential development process is
mixed, pointing to, but not in all cases confirming, the key role of sewer
investments in accounting for observed growth patterns. (8) These studies
do, however, uniformly support the conclusion that lack of sewers can act
as a constraint on development of all types. (7)
While the literature on the secondary impacts of sewers is far from
unambiguous, the tack taken in this manual will be to assume, initially,
that a proposed sewer project will serve as a stimulus to induce growth
into the sewered area. This is an environmentally conservative approach,
placing the burden on the local analyst to ask the appropriate questions
and do the analysis required in order to substantiate, refute, or qualify
the basic assumption according to local circumstances.
-------
2.1.2 The Geographic Context: Some Simplifying Assumptions
An important task at the outset is to establish the bounds of the
area within which secondary impacts will be analyzed.
It is assumed that the proposed wastewater treatment facility through
its associated sewers will induce additional growth, over and above that
which would occur in the absence of the project, into the area directly
served by the facility. For convenience this area will be referred to as
the project's service area. It will be defined in terms of communities (or
parts of communities) served and will be given by the proposed Section 201
facilities plan.
The service area will be nested within a larger regional economy
of which it is a part. This larger entity will be referred to as the
economic area. Depending on the location of the proposed service area the
relevant economic area will include either a Standard Metropolitan Statisti-
cal Area (SMSA) or, for rural parts of the country, a single county or
multiple county region tied economically to a non-SMSA center, typically a
city of 25,000 to 50,000 population. Geographic definitions of these eco-
nomic areas are available to local analysts through the OBERS Series E
Population Projections Volumes. (9)
Also lying within the economic area are other potentially competing
growth areas, which can be identified as having essentially the same growth
characteristics and prospects as the proposed service area. These areas,
which would logically be the source of any additional growth induced into
the service area as a result of sewering, will most likely have the follow-
ing features in common with the service area: similar availability of unde-
veloped but developable land, close to existing developed areas; comparable
land prices; similar access to employment, shopping and recreation opportuni-
ties; and similar community attitudes toward accommodating future growth.
These three types of areas (service area, growth area, economic area)
comprise the spatial context of the secondary impact assessment task. They
are shown for a hypothetical project in Figure 2.1 on the following page.
The local analyst's job now is to define, according to his best judgment based
on familiarity with the particular locality, the spatial bounds of a fourth
area: the subarea within which the analysis of secondary impacts will be
confined. The subarea is that portion of the economic area which contains
-------
FIGURE 2.1
o
-------
the proposed service area as well as those growth areas (or portions of
growth areas) from which the analyst judges the proposed facility is most
likely to induce future growth.
Certain simplifying assumptions are already implicit in this for-
mulation of the secondary impacts problem. First, it is assumed that lo-
cation of the facility in the service area will not induce growth from
outside the bounds of the economic area. This assumption is consistent with
the definition of economic areas as largely self-contained regional economies.
The economic area represents the outer bound in terms of growth areas from
which the service area could conceivably induce development; conversely, at
this level of aggregation the impacts of the facility location decision will
be insignificant relative to the larger economic forces which determine the
overall regional rate of growth. Second, this formulation assumes that there
can be defined a smaller and, for analytic purposes, a more manageable area
(i.e., the subarea) which retains the essential characteristics of the larger
economic area: that, with respect to its bounds sewer location decisions do
not influence the growth rate of the subarea but only the distribution of that
growth. The definition of the subarea sets the limits of the search for in-
duced growth and its secondary environmental impacts. The more geographically
inclusive the bounds of the subarea, the greater the certainty that the
analysis will capture all the potential for induced growth; on the other hand,
the wider the subarea, the more extensive and more burdensome the analysis
which is required.
To help the local analyst define the subarea for a particular pro-
posed facility, several additional assumptions are necessary. Some basis is
needed for discriminating among comparable growth areas in terms of their
likelihood for contributing induced growth to the service area, and hence
for inclusion in the subarea. A reasonable first step would be to limit
consideration of candidate growth areas to those that fall within the same
"sector" or "corridor" as the proposed service area, as determined by the
location of major access highways. (10) The logic of this procedure is to
focus attention on those growth areas having essentially the same access to
industry and jobs as the service area, on the assumption that such access
limits the substitutability of residential development among competing
growth areas. (11) The effect of the procedure is to delimit the subarea
to those growth areas closest to the service area. Such a transportation
corridor is shown in Figure 2.2.
11
-------
FIGURE 2.2
-------
Another assumption useful for defining a subarea which is manage-
able for analytic purposes is to arbitrarily draw the boundaries so that
the subarea is compact, its constituent growth areas contiguous with the
service area and each other. Again, mainly for practical reasons, the
subarea should be drawn as that collection of whole political subdivisions
(communities, townships, etc.) which most closely approximates the compact
subarea. The results of this procedure are illustrated in Figure 2.3. While
such a rendering of the subarea may violate reality slightly by including
certain nongrowth areas as well, it more than compensates for this deficiency
by the ease with which it can be presented and understood and the needed data
assembled.
What we are left with, in conceptual terms at least, is a series of
nested geographic areas which spatially define the scope of secondary impact
analysis. The service area is that area which is directly served by the pro-
posed facility and into which future growth may be diverted as a result of
sewering. The economic area defines the outer bound within which sewering
could conceivably lead to induced growth in the service area. The subarea
represents the best available local judgment as to that area from which
future growth might be diverted as a result of sewering the service area.
It is this middle area, the subarea, which is critical to the analysis of
induced growth and secondary environmental effects. It is this area for
which projects of anticipated growth are required.
2.2 Use of Existing Population Forecasts
2.2.1 Problems With Small Area Forecasts
The 1974 CEQ-funded study of Section 201 facility projects cited
earlier found that interceptor sizing decisions tended to be based on in-
flated forecasts of future population growth. "The question...is not whether
such future populations will be reached or not, but whether they will be
artificially induced because of the presence of new interceptors designed
with capacity in excess of that required..." (6) Determining what capacity
is really "required" is thus an important early consideration in the analy-
sis of potential secondary impacts. The secondary impact assessment pro-
cess affords local planners a useful opportunity to reexamine the popula-
tion forecast used for the subarea, from the standpoint of data sources,
projection methodology and key planning assumptions.
13
-------
FIGURE 2.3
-------
All population projection approaches share the characteristic that
their forecast accuracy rapidly diminishes as the relevant time horizon
lengthens; but small area projections must also deal with the added problem
of human migration. Net migration is typically the component most responsi-
ble for small area population changes and the most difficult to project;
projections of migration involve considerable uncertainty because of the
absence both of suitable data and of an adequate theoretical foundation for
projection. (12) Available subnational population forecast series handle
migration differently. The U.S. Bureau of the Census projections estimate
all components of population change, fertility and mortality as well as
migration, using strictly demographic methods; a "component" method is used
to estimate age-specific migration rates. In contrast, OBERS (Bureau of
Economic Analysis, Economic Research Service) and National Planning Associa-
tion migration techniques rest on assumptions about labor's responsiveness
to projected economic change. (13) Because OBERS and NPA deal with migration
from the viewpoint of the labor market, they should be able to be used to
identify fluctuations and reversals in migration linked with changes in
economic behavior, as compared to the more simple demographic assumptions
of the Census based on historical trends.
A recent study of these three subnational series found, as expected,
that they disagreed most frequently regarding migration. However, any sup-
posed advantage of OBERS and NPA projections over those of the Census on
this point was more than overshadowed by the tendency of all three series
to grossly misrepresent 1973 expected population levels for a substantial
majority of the states. More dramatic still, for 13 states at least one of
the three series projected a 1980 population level that had already been
exceeded in 1973. (13) The study concluded that "none is particularly
adequate as a baseline forecast of practical use to state, regional or local
planners, although each will certainly be put to use by these groups." (13)
On balance, the study recommended local reliance on the standard cohort-
component framework used by the Bureau of the Census over the OBERS and
NPA series, on grounds that it is more easily adaptable to local needs and
peculiarities.
The importance of local "judgmental" inputs as to distinctive local
forces affecting population growth cannot be overemphasized. In appraising
these local factors the analyst should take account of developments that may
15
-------
alter existing patterns of in- and out-migration or may place upper limits
on further expansion of population. Among this first group are major in-
dustrial location decisions, sharp changes in unemployment, plans for large
public facilities like universities and new transportation routes. Growth
may be constructed by zoning, land capacity limits, availability of public
services, etc.
2.2.2 Selecting a Forecast
The utilization of an existing forecast as the basis to estimate
subarea population growth should be subject to a. number of evaluative
criteria.
Projections of growth should be applicable to the subarea of con-
cern. If the geographic scope of the projection area is larger than the
subarea, the projection may not be useful simply because broader area charac-
teristics may differ significantly from those prevailing in the subarea. If
these differences can be identified, refinements in the forecast for applica-
tion within the subarea can be made to reflect these differences. The fore-
cast should be examined in terms of critical underlying assumptions, the
quality of historical data upon which the forecasts are based, and the tech-
nical rigor with which forecast procedures were applied. The forecasted
growth should cover a period of sufficient length for adequate assessment of
secondary impacts; hence, a twenty-year time horizon is the minimum which
should be considered before relying on an existing population projection re-
sult. Finally, the forecasting procedures used should be consistent with the
nature of the forecasting problem; that is, the level of sophistication and
the approach itself should be consistent with the need to determine sewer
induced growth and secondary impacts at a subarea level, using the assumptions
and definitions outlined in Section 2.1.2.
2.3 Projection for Future Growth
2.3.1 The Logic for Calculating Incremental Effects
It is essential to bear in mind that secondary impact assessment is
concerned with incremental effects; that is, an area in which a sewer sys-
tem is proposed would undoubtedly be subject to change even in the absence
of the sewer system. Established patterns of growth (or decline) in the
16
-------
population and related institutions, as well as their spatial allocation,
would continue; moreover, secondary impacts associated with these changes
would develop and/or continue to be felt.
What will be the projected growth
and distribution of population
and economic institutions in the
service area in the absence of
the sewer treatment facility?
What will be the projected growth
and distribution of population and
economic institutions in the
service area if the sewer treatment
facility is constructed?
What are the secondary impacts
associated with existing
growth trends?
What are the secondary impacts
associated with the growth trends
following construction of the
treatment facility?
What are the significant differences
in secondary impacts associated with
growth trends projected for the area
with and without the sewer treatment
facility?
Any approach to growth forecasting, either with or without the
existance of a wastewater treatment facility, should encompass the follow-
ing sequence of steps:
1. Collect and analyze data on local characteristics:
- existing land use patterns,
- availability of municipal services,
- physical features,
- natural resources, and
- economic base.
2. Develop a forecast of population and employment growth
over a twenty-year period.
3. Identify potential land use changes and locate probable
growth within the area.
4. Identify local constraints which could affect growth and
its location:
- community attitudes,
- unique factors (military base closing, sewer moratoria,
etc.)
5. Finalize the estimate of growth and its location.
17
-------
The above steps may be used to evaluate existing forecasts or to carry out
a forecast.
Once it is determined how the population will grow and where it
will locate, with and without the presence of treatment facilities, the
secondary impacts associated with these two situations would be determined
using the following steps:
1. For each type of environmental concern (see listing at the end
of Section 2), determine its present quality and location
attributes.
2. Identify locations within the subarea where projected growth
might have an impact on one or more of these environmental
concerns.
3. Where such points exist, determine the magnitude of secondary
impacts associated with the projected rate and distribution
of growth.
The secondary impacts associated with sewer-induced growth are then
assessed by comparing the results of Step 3 above for the projected growth
with and without the sewer treatment facility.
2.3.2 First-Level Approach; A Checklist
The objective of this first level approach is to provide the frame-
work for developing an initial estimate of expected growth in order to de-
termine if more detailed analysis is necessary.
The analyst should use best judgment, drawing on available secondary
source data and opinions of local public and private sector representatives
knowledgeable about economic development prospects to develop responses to
the following questions:
1. What has been the annual population growth rate
for the subarea? In any of the past five years
has it equalled or exceeded .75% per annum? YES NO
(Three quarters of one percent is approximately
the average annual growth rate of the U.S.) (14)
2. Under any circumstance, does the expected popu-
lation growth in the subarea over the next
twenty years exceed 15% of the present popula-
tion? (Fifteen percent is the result of YES NO
multiplying .75% per year times 20 years.)
3. Area there any special characteristics of the
subarea which indicate that development and/
or expansion would lead to accelerated popula-
tion growth? YES NO
18
-------
4. Is there any reason to believe that industry
growth (measured by number of employees) will
exceed 1% per annum over the next twenty years? YES NO
(One percent is the present average annual
rate.) (15)
5. Are portions of the subarea expected to undergo
significant changes in use? Is it likely that
more than 15% of the land area will undergo
change? (This assumes the same rate as in YES NO
No. 2 above.)
If none of the participants in this exercise are able to provide a
reasonably strong rationale for a "yes" or "no" response to any of these
questions, the following data and analysis procedures should be utilized
as appropriate to generate responses to these questions:
• Question #1 - Historical growth rate data may be available
from the most recent local census, U.S. Series E. Census pro-
jections, building permits, school enrollment figures, tele-
phone connections, etc.
• Question #2 - Estimates of future growth may be available
from a number of state, regional, or local sources. At
this level of analysis, one or more of these studies should
be quickly accessed, without spending significant amounts
of time on examining, evaluating, and comparing their metho-
dological bases and/or rigor.
• Question #3 - Public natural resource management and recrea-
tion agencies should be checked to determine if there are
any significant subarea characteristics which could contri-
bute to major changes in subarea growth trends. In addition,
representatives in public agencies involved in infrastructure
development decisions (highways, dams, waterways, power-siting,
and so forth) should be contacted to identify any major anti-
cipated actions.
• Question #4 - Data are available from OBERS projections
(Series E) , Office of Business Economics (U.S. Department
of Commerce), Business Statistics, and local, state, or
regional industrial development authorities to assist in
judging the rate of subarea industrial growth.
U.S. Department of Commerce industrial growth projections
for the region can be applied to present employment by in-
dustry to generate one measure of industrial growth.
Other public agencies may have already done their own pro-
jections covering the subarea.
A quick survey of major local industrial firms, and perhaps
a sample of smaller businesses, could be used to determine
if there are plans underway to expand operations within the
subarea.
19
-------
Finally, a simple linear extrapolation of historical trends
in industrial growth can be used to assist in answering
this question.
• Question #5 - A zoning map of the subarea defines the gen-
eral pattern of current land uses. In conjunction with
the data developed to answer the previous questions, par-
ticular portions of the subarea which are likely to be
under considerable development pressure and are likely to
be shifted from one use to another through major zoning
changes should be identified. Discussions with planning
board personnel, assessors, and other individuals in local
(community, county, regional, or state) government should
assist in determining if portions of the subarea are likely
to witness significant changes in use.
If the participants respond in the affirmative to any one or more
of these questions, the second level approach should be applied in order to
develop a more rigorous estimate of population growth and distribution for
the subarea.
If the responses to all of these questions are negative, the
analyst should turn to Sections 2.3.5 and 2.4 of this chapter, where direc-
tions are provided for determining induced growth effects and giving initial
consideration to the types of secondary impact which are likely to occur.
2.3.3 Second-Level Approach
The objective of the second-level approach is to refine initial
judgmental findings by forecasting subarea land use patterns using esti-
mated growth rates and anticipated distributions of population and industry.
This approach follows closely the sequence of steps outlined in Section 2.3.2.
It differs from the first-level approach mainly by relying less on local
expert opinion and more on available secondary source data.
Step 1 - Collect and analyze data on local characteristics. The
following attributes of the subarea should be identified and mapped through
use of simple overlays:
• Vacant land: Local zoning maps encompassing the subarea should
be examined in order to determine the number of acres of prop-
erty within each type of zone (e.g., industrial, commercial,
high-density residential, low-density residential, etc.) which
are presently underutilized.
• The drainage characteristics of the land which could affect
the ability of the property to support on-lot waste disposal,
i.e., development dependent on septic systems.
20
-------
• The physical features of the land (topographical profile, wet-
land and floodplain areas, etc.) which might limit more inten-
sive use. Features ought to be differentiated according to
whether they can be changed to allow for more intensive develop-
ment or whether they are relatively inflexible in terms of
alteration by man.
• The adequacy of water supply sources (ground and surface) to
serve vacant and underdeveloped land in the community at higher
densities.
• Existing land uses should be categorized, focusing on the types
and density of residential, commercial, and industrial use
which exist on property within the subarea.
The analyst should collect and evaluate this information in the
simplest, most efficient manner possible, drawing on existing sources (i.e.,
SCS, USCS, State Departments of Transportation). The output of the analysis
should be a clear understanding of the present distribution of land use
activities within the subarea and attributes of the land which could influence
the distribution of estimated growth for the subarea.
Step 2 - Develop a forecast of population growth over a twenty-year
period. The use of OBERS Series E population data is a relatively simple
option open for demographic projections. (9) Of particular interest to the
local analyst is Volume III, where the data are aggregated by water resources
regions and subareas. The units of aggregation in this volume include
twenty major regions defined by hydrologic boundaries that are further divided
into tributary and main-stem reaches entitled water resources subregions.
The subregions cut across county lines to coincide with drainage patterns.
However, the water resources subareas are actually county-defined approxima-
tions of the actual hydrologic units they represent. In some instances, the
208 areawide agency's planning area may closely approximate the water resource
subarea boundaries, in which case their population projections can be uti-
lized directly. One note of caution is in order, however. The assumptions
made to arrive at the OBERS projections are explicitly stated in Volume I.
If these assumptions represent significant violations of the prevailing
conditions in the subarea, then extrapolations using different assumptions
would be more appropriate.
It should also be noted that many states have their own programs
that generate population and economic projections. Likewise, many univer-
sities engage in similar projection activities. It is conceivable that
projections formulated from such sources would be more appropriate for some
localities.
21
-------
Step 3 - Identify potential land use changes and spatially locate
probable growth within the service area. The population and industrial ac-
tivity projections from Step 2 can be used along with existing zoning maps
to estimate the extent of urban development that will occur over the twenty-
year planning horizon. The allocation of anticipated population increases
using graphic overlays of present zoning restrictions will provide the
analyst with a picture of how the existing land use pattern might be ex-
pected to change over the twenty-year study period.
Step 4 - Identify local constraints which could affect growth and
its location. While the forecasted growth rate and distribution of that
growth is, up to this point, consistent with existing land use and zoning
constraints, the analyst should now attempt to refine the forecast through
consideration of a number of other critical factors which could influence
the final, calculated fiaures. Thus, the planner should attempt to con-
sider the effects of all of the following attributes on the forecasted
population and industry figures:
• community attitudes - a community's attitude toward growth can
determine the level of land use planning that occurs in an
area, the nature of the community's response to development
pressures, and extent of enforcement of growth controls. The
local planner should, using the judgments of knowledgeable
individuals, determine the likelihood of community attitudes
strongly affecting the projected population and/or employment
growth and distribution;
• development of significant energy resources located in the
subarea;
• expansion (or cutback) of military facilities;
• location of new federal, state, or local facilities in the
subarea;
• development moratoria in surrounding subareas which might be
duplicated with the subarea under study;
• major transportation developments within the larger economic
area which could strongly influence the subarea;
• presence of natural resources (water, recreation, wilderness,
cultural and historical values) which are likely to become
more important in the near future;
• changes in zoning to meet development pressures.
22
-------
For each of these factors, the analyst should contact individuals
who are intimately familiar with the subarea and its immediate surroundings
in order to develop a soundly based judgment regarding the effect(s) of
each of these attributes on the growth rate and distribution conclusions
developed rhrough the previous steps.
Step 5 - Finalize the estimate of growth and its location. In
this final step, the local planner should take the estimates of growth and
its distribution derived in Step 4 and cycle back through the previous
steps to determine if the final estimates are consistent with the major
conclusions drawn at each step; that is, considering the present uses of
land and the various constraints on its future use, does the projected
growth and distribution of population and industrial activity seem reason-
able, given land availability as well as any special features of the land
which could influence its future use and the attitudes of residents of the
subarea?
2.3.4 Ihird-Level Approach
Projection of growth and allocation of population and industrial
activity at this third level consists of a more rigorous approach to the
land use change and allocation step (Step 3) of the second-level approach. (16)
All other analysis steps are the same as in the second level approach.
At this level, spatial allocation of growth to determine land use
changes involves four essential steps:
• identification and ranking of available parcels according to
their relative attractiveness for development;
« allocation of industrial firms to individual parcels based
upon rank;
• allocation of projected residential growth to individual
parcels; and
• development of a projected land use map based upon the above
allocations of future growth.
Allocation of commercial activity is not done as part of this ap-
proach, since this activity is sensitive to population distribution and
access by households, and is therefore assumed to follow these distribu-
tions closely.
23
-------
Step 1 - Identify and rank parcels of land. Allocations should be
done sequentially for each type of land use—industrial, high-density, resi-
dential, medium- and finally, low-density residential. The analyst should
use a subarea land use (and zoning) map and divide the entire subarea into
small units (parcels) of about 10 acres each, noting the "available land"
in each parcel. Available land is defined as that which can be more inten-
sively developed, over and above its present use; that is, property having
potential uses which can capture a "higher land rent," providing that other
conditions (such as zoning) permit this.
Each parcel should be ranked according to its relative attractive-
ness for future development, depending on the use being allocated. (19,20)
The following criteria of attractiveness for potential development, ranked
in descending order of importance, should be used:
A. Is it zoned according to the intended use (industrial, resi-
dential—by density, commercial)?
B. Is it intended to be a part of a development unit (industrial
park, large-scale development, planned unit development)?
C. Does it have high accessibility by roadway?
D. Does it have rail access?
E. Does it have public wastewater treatment available?
F. Does it have electric or gas available?
Each parcel should be ranked by judgmentally applying and summing
these numbers for each parcel. This recommended method perhaps overempha-
sizes the criteria with the higher priorities. However, the method is
simple and direct. (If one wishes to attach some other priority, based on
experience, then the user may state the basis and proceed.)
It should be noted that included in the above criteria is the
availability of wastewater treatment (E). The availability of wastewater
treatment depends, of course, on whether the forecast and allocation of
growth is being done with or without the construction of the sewer treat-
ment facility which is the subject of this investigation.
As an example of how the process would work, assume that one is
ranking lots in order to allocate industrial uses. A specific parcel of
ten acres is undeveloped (forest) except for a two-acre parcel containing
an old house. For industrial purposes, this parcel has 100% available land.
24
-------
Criteria for Ranking Land
Criteria Industrial
A 6
B 5
C 4
D 3
E 2
F 1
Residential
High
6
5
4
N/A
4
2
Ranking value associated with criteria given
Medium
6
5
3
N/A
4
2
in text.
Low
6
5
3
N/A
4
2
Since it is not zoned industrial nor planned for an industrial park,
no values are assigned under A or B. However, since it has good access, it
is assigned a 4 under C, and a 1 under F; assume it has no sewer currently
available (or planned) and is without access by rail. Therefore, the parcel
has associated with it a rank value of 5 (C and F). This parcel would not
be allocated an industrial use until all other available parcels in the
subarea with rankings of 6 or higher had already been allocated.
Step 2 - Allocate projected industrial growth to individual parcels
based upon industrial use ranking. To do this the analyst must project the
number of industrial facilities likely to locate (or expand) in the subarea
and their associated land requirements.
In order to project the number of facilities, the analyst must esti-
mate expected industrial employment for the subarea, which in turn requires
a reliable estimate of expected total employment. This section provides a
simple procedure for making these determinations.
First, the analyst should calculate future total employment for the
subarea. The suggested approach consists of multiplying the total popula-
tion forecast (see Step 1 above) and multiplying it by a base year (1970,
for instance) ratio of OBERS employment to population in the subarea:
1970 OBERS employment
Employment forecast = population forecast x 1970 OBERS population
25
-------
This method does not attempt to adjust for differences between the
boundaries of the subarea of interest and the OBERS area.
Having forecast total employment, the analyst should next identify
that portion of the total which is industrial (manufacturing) employment.
This is done by multiplying total employment forecast by the ratio of manu-
facturing to total earnings for the OBERS area:
1990 manufacturing _ 1990 employment 1990 OBERS mfg. earn.
employment in subarea for subarea 1990 OBERS total earn.
It should be emphasized that the OBERS figures should be "adjusted," as
needed, to reflect the employment opportunities actually expected to be
available in the subarea. (The reader is referred back to Section 2.2.1.)
Third, the planner must be able to translate the projected indus-
trial employment into the number of firms which will actually locate or ex-
pand operations within the subarea. The size distribution of these firms,
as measured by a number of employees, can also be generated at this point;
its main use comes when spatial allocation decisions are made.
The results of the most recent Department of Commerce Industrial
Location Survey can be useful to this task (18); however, these are national
averages and should be used with caution in specific local situations.
That survey established the following size distribution of firms seeking
new locations:
17% will employ 75 persons
27% will employ 175 persons
41% will employ 325 persons
15% will employ 625 persons
Thus, for a typical 100 firms, the industrial employment would be
28,700 persons, or 287 persons per firm. The projected 1990 industrial
employment figure obtained in the previous step can then be divided by 287
to yield an estimate of the total number of firms which would have to lo-
cate or expand to account for the expected industrial growth:
No. of firms locating _ 1990 industrial employment in subarea
in subarea, 1990 287 workers/firm
To quickly estimate a size distribution, the planner should list
the number of firms expected to locate in the subarea. The first 17% of
the firms should be assigned 75 employees, the next 27% assigned 175 employ-
26
-------
ees, and so forth. Although clearly there is no absolute relationship be-
tween a firm's employee size and its land consumption requirements, employee
size can be used as a proxy to land needs in allocating individual firms to
individual parcels.
Using the list of firms expected to locate in the subarea, select
firms randomly from this list and allocate each to the central piece of
land with the highest industrial use. If the available land on the parcel
is not sufficient for the acreage needs of the firm, add adjacent parcels
when possible. If this firm requires a site for which contiguous industrial
use land is not sufficient, replace it, and select another firm at random.
Proceed with this random selection and allocation until all the projected
firms have been allocated to available land in order of their ranking as
determined by relative attractiveness for industrial development.
Step 3 - Allocation of projected residential growth. High-density
residential uses can pay the next highest land rent and therefore should
be the next use to be allocated within the subarea. Before proceeding, the
planner should rerank the remaining available parcels to reflect the new
use to which the land is being allocated. For example, the percent of
"available land" within a given parcel may be less due to the lower rent that
high-density residential (compared to industrial) development can afford
to pay. Furthermore, any remaining parcel whose ranking includes a value
for rail access should be revalued because this factor generally has no
weight for various residential uses.
High density residential uses should now be distributed among
available parcels, according to their rank on descending order and con-
sistent with limits on density imposed on each parcel either by natural
conditions (soil type) or zoning requirements. If there are no natural
or man-imposed limits on density development on a particular parcel,
then the planner should assume that the future density will be no greater
than
Present highest density 20-year projected population in subarea
in the subarea current population in subarea
Projected future population is distributed to high-density residential use
until all suitable parcels are allocated; then the remaining population
is distributed to medium-density use in the same fashion, then low-density
27
-------
use, until all the remaining projected population is allocated. It is
only the projected (i.e., 20-year) population that is being allocated;
when this population has been exhausted, the procedure is stopped.
An example of this allocation process follows: Assume that
the highest ranking parcel (10 acres) for high-density land use is zoned
for 40 units per acre. At an average of 4 persons per unit, and with 50%
of the parcel "available" land, 800 persons will be located on this parcel.
If the projected population which has to be allocated is 41,500, then 40,700
persons remain to be allocated, where possible to the highest density resi-
dential land in rank order of attractiveness attached to the parcel. Assume
that, in all, one assigns 8,225 persons to available parcels zoned for high-
density residential use. Then the planner must assign the remaining projected
population, 33,225 persons, at the medium-density use level or below. If
the highest ranking parcel remaining for medium-density residential use
(i.e., approximately 20 persons per acre) has 100% available land, then 200
persons would be assigned to that parcel and 33,005 persons would remain to
be assigned. The assignment of remaining projected population growth will
proceed in this fashion until the total projected population is allocated to
parcels.
This process completed, the planner should prepare a new map for
the subarea which overlaps projected land uses and population densities
on a composite land use map.
2.3.5 Determination of Induced Growth
In order to isolate and determine that growth resulting specifically
from the construction of wastewater treatment facilities, only the
last step (i.e., spatial location of land uses) of any of these three
approaches need be repeated. Ihe only assumption which must be changed
is that a wastewater treatment facility of the size and location proposed
will be constructed.
The determination of how much future growth or activity will be
attracted from elsewhere within the subarea to the smaller area directly
served by the project involves, in part, determining what constraints are
relaxed by the presence of the wastewater treatment facilities—i.e.,
what parcels of land can now be developed at higher densities or for a
more economic use of the lot than previously? Certain parcels of land
28
-------
will no longer be constrained in their density of development by soil
conditions; the constraint now will be the flow which can be handled by
the sewers and treatment facility serving these parcels. Other parcels
which were previously undevelopable, or which could be developed only at low
densities due to site conditions, may now be developed profitably due to the
higher density which the parcel can support. The development actions taken
as a result of these changed conditions will ultimately depend on many fac-
tors, including the community's attitudes toward regulation of growth and
community preferences for the residential lifestyles made feasible by new
sewering.
For the first level approach (the checklist approach outlined in
Section 2.3.2) the induced growth effect of the wastewater treatment facility
on the distribution of population and industrial activity within the sub-
area is determined by asking Question #5 again, this time assuming con-
struction of the facility. This first level approach relies mainly on in-
formed local judgments, i.e., from planning board and staff personnel, local
assessors, etc.
The second level approach introduces more explicit consideration
of data on land characteristics, existing zoning, regulations and community
attitudes toward growth into the analysis of secondary growth impacts.
The analyst repeats Steps 3, 4 and 5 (see Section 2.3.3) assuming construc-
tion of the proposed facility, the output being a series of overlays on the
existing zoning map showing anticipated changes in land use patterns given
sewering.
For the third level, or land use forecasting approach, the separ-
ate impact of the provision of wastewater treatment facilities can be intro-
duced in an even more explicit fashion. The spatial allocation of future
land use changes (refer to Section 2.3.4) would be repeated, this time
using a new ranking of available parcels by their attractiveness for
development as reflected in changed values assigned to those parcels pre-
viously unsewered but now served by the new facility (i.e., application of
criterion E). The entire sequence of allocating project growth first to
industrial uses, then high-, medium-, and low-density residential uses,
would be redone, with the resulting difference in the two final mappings
constituting the induced growth within the service area of the treatment
facility.
29
-------
2.4 A Strategy for Guiding Secondary Impact Assessment
The following four chapters recommend approaches for assessing in-
duced secondary impacts based on the growth estimates developed in this
chapter. For each of fourteen types of impact, alternative impact assess-
ment approaches are described; the choice of approach depends upon the ex-
istence and seriousness of the impact expected.
The three step procedure described in this section is intended to
assist in focusing this secondary impact assessment on the impact types
which are most likely to occur in the subarea being examined. This ini-
tial "screen" is intended to make the assessment of secondary impacts more
efficient by: 1) identifying impacts which are unlikely to occur and can,
therefore, be ignored; and 2) initially assessing the relative seriousness
of impacts as a guide to application of an appropriate level of impact
analysis to assess secondary impact effects.
Step 1 - The analyst should first read the introductory sections
for each of the fourteen secondary impact types. The purpose of this re-
view is to make sure that the user is familiar with the definition of each
impact type and the attributes of wastewater treatment facilities (and
their location) which may cause these impacts.
Step 2 - The analyst should refer to maps (developed in forecasting
growth) displaying existing land use patterns and projected spatial alloca-
tion of residential, commercial, and industrial growth. For each type of
induced secondary impact the analyst should answer the question:
"Will the growth induced by the wastewater treatment
facility have any impact on this area of environmental
concern?"
The analyst should use his/her knowledge of the subarea and best
judgment regarding probable impact to answer this question for each impact
type. The answer to the question should be a characterization of probable
sewer-induced impact using the following scale:
• Serious Impact - The existence and location of the waste-
water treatment facility (WWTF) clearly poses a serious
threat to this area of environmental concern.
• Modest Impact - The WWTF will have an impact, although
ameliorating steps can be taken so there will be no
fundamental threat to environmental values.
30
-------
• Slight Impact - Environmental impact is likely to occur,
but the WWTF will only slightly affect the environmental
values.
• No Impact - The WWTF location will have no induced
impact on a particular type of environmental concern,
Step 3 - The analyst should begin the process of secondary impact
assessment by focusing on the impact types for which the effects are
judged to be potentially "serious." Moreover, the type of secondary im-
pact assessment done for these serious impacts should probably be at a
relatively high level of sophistication.
Following the analysis of these "serious impacts" the analyst
should proceed to consider successively the areas of modest and light im-
pact, tailoring the type of analysis used to the expected seriousness of
the impact.
Finally, the analyst should again check the introductions to the
impact sections for those impact types for which "no impact" is expected
to occur. If no impact is expected, this conclusion and the reasons for
it should be stated in the introduction to the secondary impact assessment
document, and these impact types should be eliminated from further considera-
tion.
Listed below are the fourteen types of secondary environmental im-
pacts dealt with in this manual. The list provides references to the ap-
propriate introductory sections and space to note the anticipated serious-
ness of each type of impact:
31
-------
Media Impacts
Sensitive
Environmental Areas
Unique Areas
i
Encounter Impacts
Impact
Types
Water Quality
and Quantity
Air Quality
Noise Impacts
Solid Waste Impacts
Wetlands
Coastal Areas
Flood Plains
Wildlife Habitats
Parkland
Wild & Scenic Rivers
Areas of Historic,
Architectural, Archaeo-
logical, or Cultural
Values
Agriculture Impacts
Energy Demand Impacts
Property Value Impacts
Introductory
Material
Section
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5.1
5.2
5.3
6.1
6.2
6.3
Page
34
56
63
85
93
97
102
108
115
121
125
135
143
153
Significance
Judgment
32
-------
3.0 MEDIA IMPACTS
This chapter is the first of four substantive chapters which pro-
vide local analysts with the capability, at several levels of precision.,
to characterize the specific environmental impacts of development induced
into the service area by the provision of wastewater treatment facilities.
The grouping of environmental impacts addressed in this chapter includes
the various environmental media affected by induced growth—water, air,
noise, and solid wastes.
Section 3.1 covers four major areas of impact upon Water Quality
and Quantity—stormwater runoff, sediment yield, specific pollutant loadings,
and the quality and quantity of water supplies.
Section 3.2 deals with impacts of induced growth on Air Quality.
Recognizing the limitations on the types of analysis which can be performed
locally in lieu of computer-based models, this section reviews applicable
EPA regulations, stresses reconciliation of development projections with
the State Implementation Plan, and refers th^ user to available analysis
methodology including computerized techniques.
Section 3.3 provides a basis for local estimation of induced growth
impacts on Noise levels emitted by highway traffic, aircraft, railroads,
and general urban activity, as well as a convenient methodology for combin-
ing these estimates into one overall noise impact index.
Section 3.4 takes up the impact of induced residential and indus-
trial development on the total amounts of Solid Waste generated in the
service area, with and without the wastewater treatment facility, and re-
lates it to available local disposal capacity.
It should be noted that potential conflicts are apparent when one
examines the issue of community growth—where should it occur, be distri-
buted, and how much should be allowed? The wastewater treatment program can
induce concentration of growth along a sewer, and thereby may or may not
increase overall air pollution levels. Enforcement of standards to control
one kind of pollutant may exacerbate other pollution problems. (17) More-
over, pollutants originally found in one medium (air, water, or land) can
migrate into another, where they might cause greater damage or be more diffi-
cult to remove. For example, nutrients, pesticides, and other chemicals
applied to the land may be transported to receiving waters by leaching and
runoff. Aerosols and airborne dust containing pollutants may enter surface
33
-------
waters as fallout or in precipitation. Wastewater treatment processes also
provide pathways by which pollutants are transported from the water back to
the land and air media. Land disposal of residual wastes may introduce heavy
metals, pathogens, and persistent organic compounds into the human food chain.
Sludge incineration can emit gases and particulates containing these same
toxic substances into the air. These intermedia relationships are important,
and should be considered when evaluating secondary impacts (18,19,20).
3.1 Water Quality and Quantity
An analysis of the secondary impacts of construction of wastewater
treatment facilities must consider the impact of induced growth on surface
and ground water quality and quantity. (21) Growth of population and asso-
ciated land use changes affect water quantity by altering part or all of
the natural hydrologic cycle—precipitation, infiltration, surface and sub-
surface runoff, and stream flow. Water quality is affected by the addition
of pollutants during one or more parts of this cycle, and by discharges
from man-made facilities. Figure 3.1 illustrates the significant inter-
relationship among the types of environmental changes resulting from urban
growth and development and impacts on water quality and quantity.
While the interrelationships are complex, key variables for deter-
mining the secondary impacts of urbanization and the construction of waste-
water treatment facilities include:
a. Increased total and peak runoff and reduced time of flow con-
centration (3.1.1)
b. Sediment yield (3.1.2)
c. Pollutant loadings (3.1.3)
d. Quality and quantity of water supplies (3.1.4)
3.1.1 Increased Peak and Total Storm Runoff Volumes
The effect of urbanization is to increase the imperviousness of an
area, thereby decreasing infiltration of rainfall into the ground. This
results in increases in peak runoff and total runoff volumes, and an earlier
peaking of the runoff from rainfall. Projects such as stream channelization
and the installation of storm drainage systems further reduce the time of
concentration of this increased runoff, resulting in even greater in-
creases in peak flow and runoff volume. The results of these changes are
increased flooding, erosion, and storm-generated pollution.
34
-------
Figure 3.1
INTERRELATIONSHIPS OF URBANIZATION, CONSTRUCTION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AND IMPACT ON WATER
URBANIZATION
Ul
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
REMOVAL OF VEGETATION
AND SOIL
COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM
EFFLUENT DISCHARGE
CHANGE IN FACTOR
AFFECTING RUNOFF
REDUCTION OF SEPTIC SEEPAGE
NECESSITATE SURFACE
DRAINAGE SYSTEM
INCREASE IN EROSION
SEDIMENTATION OF STREAMS
AND WATER BODIES
DEVELOPMENT OF NEW WATER
SUPPLY SOURCES: WELLS
SURFACE
NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION
POINT SOURCE POLLUTION
CHANGE IN FLOOD
VOLUME AND
FLOOD PLAIN AREA
REDUCED
INFILTRATION
IMPROVED QUALITY
REDUCED QUANTITY
OF GROUNDWATER
REDUCTION OF
DRY WEATHER
FLOW
-------
Any increases in peak runoff or total runoff volume can be con-
sidered as significant (22), though the degree depends on local conditions.
In the context of a secondary impact assessment each site will have to be
analyzed separately, and the analyst will have to judge whether runoff
impacts are significant.
There are a number of methods for assessing these impacts. Three
of the methods, with differing levels of sophistication, will be outlined
here. The user is referred to basic documents for complete descriptions of
each method.
Before using one of these methods, however, the analyst should as-
certain what, if any, urban runoff impacts were considered in the design of
the facility under construction. It is very likely that some will have
been evaluated, and the analyst may be able to use these results without
performing a separate analysis.
3.1.2 First-Level Approach
The "rational" method (23) is the most commonly used method for
estimating flows for storm drainage design. It is applicable only to pre-
dictions of peak flows and not to flow volumes, and does not account for
the time-variant nature of the rainfall-runoff process. Its reliability
decreases with areas greater than 10 acres, and practice generally limits
its use to areas less than 5 square miles in area (24). It is, however,
a very simple method and has wide acceptance.
The rational method predicts peak flow by the following equation:
Q = CiA
where:
Q = peak discharge, cubic feet per second
C = an empirical runoff coefficient
i = rainfall intensity, inches per hour
A = drainage area, acres
It is assumed that peak flow is produced by a rainfall of uniform intensity
maintained for the time it takes to "concentrate" the flow at the point
under consideration. This time of concentration is assumed to be equal to
the longest combination of overland flow time and channel flow time which
36
-------
exists up to the point of concern (usually the downstream end of the catch-
ment) . Average values for the runoff coefficient for different land uses
and surface characteristics are shown in Figure 3.2.
These coefficients are applicable for storms of five- to ten-
year frequencies. Information on the intensity, duration, and frequency
of the rainfall should be extracted from U.S. Weather Bureau data (25),
unless there is better local data available. The rational formula permits
one to estimate the impact of increased peak runoff by comparing a situation
before and after development. In making such a comparison, one must remem-
ber that the selected rainfall intensity, i, is dependent on time of con-
centration, which changes when the runoff coefficient changes. It is not
adequate merely to change the runoff coefficient.
For the first-level approach, the following two questions should be
answered. Examples of calculations that can be used to answer these
questions are provided.
1. Will the overall peak runoff increase by more than 3% (on the
average) for the subarea, or more than 25% for the project service area due
to the construction of the wastewater treatment facilities?
Example: A small community presently developed on 1000 acres shows the
following land use pattern:
suburban residential 40%
apartment residential 12%
paved 18%
open (improved) 16%
commercial and industrial 14%
A treatment facility is planned, which will serve 1400 acres (ex-
isting area plus 400 acres which are presently undeveloped). With the
facility, forecasts indicate that there will be an increase in apartment
residential, resulting in a higher percentage of paved surface but lower
overall development—showing as an increase in percent open (unimproved)
land. It is further assumed that, even if the facility were not built,
the 400 additional acres would be developed, through the development would
be less dense.
37
-------
Figure 3.2
Values of Runoff Coefficient For Use
With Rational Formula
Land Use
Business Runoff Coefficients
Downtown 0.70 to 0.95
Neighborhood 0.50 to 0.70
Residential
Single-family 0.30 to 0.50
Multiunits, detached 0.40 to 0.60
Multiunits, attached 0.60 to 0.75
Residential (suburban) 0.25 to 0.40
Apartment 0.50 to 0.70
Industrial
Light 0.50 to 0.80
Heavy 0.60 to 0.90
Parks, cemeteries 0.10 to 0.25
Playgrounds 0.20 to 0.35
Railroad yard 0.20 to 0. 30
Unimproved 0.10 to 0.30
Character of Surface Runoff Coefficients
Pavement
Asphaltic and Concrete 0.70 to 0.95
Brick 0.70 to 0.85
Roofs 0.75 to 0.95
Lawns, sandy soil
Flat, 2 percent 0.05 to 0.10
Average, 2 to 7 percent 0.10 to 0.15
Steep, 7 percent 0.15 to 0.20
Lawns, heavy soil
Flat, 2 percent 0.13 to 0.17
Average, 2 to 7 percent 0.18 to 0.22
Steep, 7 percent 0.25 to 0.35
Source: Design and Construction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers,
ASCE Manual No. 37, (8).
38
-------
The following tables summarize the difference in peak runoff with
and without development. C1 is a weighted runoff coefficient. The tables
show, for instance, that peak runoff from the presently (1975) developed
area is approximately 50% of rainfall, and that if no facility is built,
the peak runoff in 1975 is 42.3% of rainfall.
Type
suburban residential
apartment residential
paved
percent open (unimproved)
commercial and industrial
Type
suburban residential
apartment residential
paved
commercial and industrial
open
C
.3
.65
.90
.2
.8
C
.3
.65
.9
.8
.2
1975
1000A
% land use C1
40%
12%
18%
16%
14%
100%
1995
1400
Without
%
47%
14%
13%
10%
16%
100%
.12
.078
.162
.032
.112
.504
Acres
Sewers
C1
.141
.09
.117
.080
.032
.460
1400A
% land use
29%
9%
13%
40%
10%
100%
1400 Acres
With Sewers
%
43%
16%
13%
10%
18%
100%
C1
.087
.059
.117
.08
.08
.423
C1
.132
.104
.117
.08
.036
.469
The overall increase in the peak runoff, with sewers, can be calculated by
taking the percent increase in runoff:
(C'iA)
95
75
(C'iA)
75
75
.469 - .423
.423
= 10.8%
Note, however, that a significant amount of development would have taken
place without sewers. The probable increase in the peak runoff for the
development without sewers can be calculated similarly.
39
-------
«95 - 875 °'95 - C'75 -460 " '
Therefore, the overall increase in peak runoff for the subarea is the dif-
ference between development with and without the sewers, or 2.05%, which
is less than 3%.
The analyst should now determine whether there will be an increase
of more than 25% runoff for the project service area. For this example,
the project service area is the additional 400 acres, which has a runoff
coefficient (1975) of .20 and will have a runoff coefficient (1995) of .38
with sewers and a runoff coefficient (1995) of .35 without sewers. There-
fore, the increase in the peak runoff for the project area with sewers is:
»95 - 875 C'95 - °'75 -38 - '2°
The increase in the peak runoff for the project area, without sewers, is:
%5 - 875 C'9S - C'75 '3S - '20 „
~~ " = ~~ "
The above calculations indicate that the increaes in peak runoff
from the development of the additional 400 acres can be expected to be 90%.
However, without sewers the increase would have been 75%; therefore, only
15% can be attributed to induced growth. Since this is less than 25%, these
calculations indicate that the increase in peak runoff due to the construction
of WWTF will not be significant.
2. Will the increase in peak runoff from the local "design" storm
for the project service area exceed the average annual flow of the stream
to which the project service drains by more than 5%?
Example ; 400 acres of land in the previous example will undergo development
changes because of the proposed sewer, increasing the runoff coefficient
from .20 to .38; the rainfall intensity is assumed to be 3.0 inches per
hour. Therefore, the additional peak flow from the project service area
developed with sewers is equal to:
(CiA)g5 - (CiA)?5 = .18 (3.0) (400) = 216 cfs
40
-------
The additional peak flow from the area developed without sewers
(C increases from .20 to .35) is equal to:
(CiA)95 - (CiA)?5 = -15 (3.0) (400) = 180 cfs
The average annual stream flow (determined from local records) is
2400 cfs. The increased peak flow due to facility construction is:
216 - 180 = 36/2400 = 1.5%, which is less than 5%.
2400
One can conclude, then, that although development (with the facility)
of the additional 400 acres will have a significant impact on the stream
receiving the flow from this project area, only a relatively small portion
can be attributed to growth induced by the facility.
3.1.3 Second- Level Approach
Several techniques have been recently developed in an attempt to
overcome the shortcomings of the "rational" method, and to provide a broader
framework for the assessment of stormwater impacts. Two of these techniques
will be described here. They have several attractive features, which include;
• They are simple, easy to use, and well documented.
• They recognize the time-variant nature of the rainfall-runoff
process .
• They enable the user to get a "feel" for the impacts of land-
use alternatives on his system.
• They provide the ability to assess water quality (see 3.1) in
addition to runoff quantity.
The simpler of the two methods, at least for the user, is one out-
lined in the Areawide Assessment Procedures Manual (AAPM) , developed for
EPA by Hydroscience , Inc. and others. (26) This method, a simplified
statistical method for the assessment of runoff and treatment, provides a
flexible tool for the initial analysis of stormwater loads, their impacts,
and alternative control strategies. It is a methodology rather than a
specific computer model with fixed inputs, algorithms, and results. The
basic statistical attributes of the rain fall- runoff process are used to pro-
vide simple initial estimates of the quantities pertinent to stormwater
assessments. The statistical method may be applied initially without ex-
41
-------
tensive data requirements and sophisticated urban runoff models. More
complex models may be subsequently incorporated if more refined estimates
are needed.
The statistical method begins with an analysis of rainfall, the
basic driving force in the generation of stormwater loads. Raingage data
is analyzed to provide a statistical summary of the rainfall process. The
characteristics of the drainage area are then used to determine the runoff
flow and associated pollutant load. This load may be modified by treat-
ment or storage, either by the existing conveyance system, or by special
stormwater control facilities. The stormwater loads thus developed are
subsequently applied to the receiving water to determine the severity of
their impacts. Figure 3.3 summarizes the method. The method uses the
coefficient of variation of each parameter and cumulative density functions
to enable the user to calculate the number of times, over a specific period,
that a given parameter value will be exceeded.
Copies of the referenced publication are available from:
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West St. Clair Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
The second of the two methods is called a Simplified Stormwater
Management Model (27). While simpler conceptually than the previous method
described in AAPM, this method does require more work on the part of the
user, since it is a combination of hand computations and small computer pro-
grams. The chief advantage of this method is that it allows, on a site-
specific basis:
a. Analysis of the total system and its interactions.
b. The establishment of size-effectiveness relationships of vari-
ous treatment/storage alternatives.
In applying the Simplified Model, five tasks are performed:
a. Data Preparation, which includes schematization of the system
and gathering of data on overflow quantities and qualities.
b. Rainfall Analysis—raw rainfall data from the local"area are
collected and analyzed, and critical rainfall characteristics
are ranked.
42
-------
Figure 3.3
STATISTICAL METHOD FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF RUNOFF
Inputs
''Rain Gage Data (Hourly)
a) U.S. Weather Bureau
b) Local Gages
"a) Monitored Runoff Data
or
b) Land Use Data
q) Population Density
d) Rain Gage Density
"a) Monitored Quality Data
or
b) Land Use
c) Combined or Separate
Sewers
Procedure
I. STATISTICAL
RAINFALL
CHARACTERIZATION
II. DETERMINE RUNOFF
III. DETERMINE LOADS
Results
Mean and Variation of:
a) Storm Intensity
b) Duration
c) Volume
d) Time Internal
Be twe en S to rms
_k
Mean and Variation of:
a) Runoff Coefficient
b) Resultant Runoff
Volumes and Flows
Mean and Variation of:
a) Pollutant Concentra- •
tions
b) Resultant Runoff Loads
and Loading Rates /
Treatment Specifications:
a) Interceptor Capacity
b) Storage Capacity
c) Concentration Reduction
Receiving Water
Characteristics:
a) Advection
b) Dispersion
c) Reaction
d) Background Concentrations
IV. MODIFY LOADS
V. RECEIVING WATER
QUALITY IMPACT
ANALYSIS
Mean and Variation of:
a) Resultant Runoff Loads
and Loading Rates x
Mean and Variation of:
a) Transient Pollutant
Concentrations
(During Storms)
b) Long Term Pollutant
Concentrations
c) Resultant Violations
of Standards
43
-------
c. Storage-Treatment Balance—rainfall is imposed on the area under
consideration and runoff is calculated. The interrelationship
between storage and treatment is also analyzed.
d. Overflow Quality Assessment—magnitude of overflow constituents
is calculated.
e. Receiving Water Response—the effect of overflows on receiving
waters is analyzed.
Documentation of this model and the related computer programs are available
from:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Storm & Combined Sewer Section
Edison Water Quality Research Lab
Edison, New Jersey 08817
These methods (AAPM and Simplified Stormwater Management Model) are desir-
able because:
a. Runoff quantity is estimated based on actual local rainfall,
not on a "design" storm.
b. They make no pretenses at providing any more than a rough esti-
mate.
c. They incorporate methods for examining impacts of runoff changes
on receiving waters.
For the purposes of the secondary impact assessment, both methods
utilize a runoff coefficient, similar to the "rational" method. Both
methods describe techniques for calculating the runoff coefficient based
on such factors as land use and population density. Initial estimates of
secondary impacts may be made (and first level results checked) by calculat-
ing runoff coefficients under either of these methods and substituting the
coefficients so derived in the equations used in the first-level approach.
It should be stressed, however, that both of these methods differ
considerably from the "rational" method. The potential user should read
the reference documents and familiarize himself with each technique before
attempting to use them.
3.1.4 Third-Level Approach
In most cases, the second-level approach will be adequate to de-
scribe the secondary Stormwater runoff effects. In those few cases where
the second level is not adequate, it will be appropriate to use one of a
number of computer-based mathematical models of the rainfall/runoff pro-
44
-------
cess. These have been well documented in an appendix to the AAPM, and are
listed in Figure 3.4. Most of them include water quality considerations,
and two also model erosion and sedimentation. The models listed are of
varying degrees of complexity, and differ greatly in input data require-
ments. All, however, require some skill on the part of the user, parti-
cularly in the interpretation of results.
3.1.5 Increased Sediment Yield
Sedimentation is the result of a physical process by which water
removes and transports soil particles from one place and deposits them in
another. The amount of sedimentation depends upon the water's velocity and
volume and soil characteristics. The process of erosion with resulting
sedimentation is one which occurs when natural forces expose earth to the
forces of water. However, it is a process to which the activities of man
greatly contribute; the average sediment yield from the landscape and the
condition of stream channels tend to change with the advancing forms of man's
land-use activities. The intensity, rate of change, and scale of development
all affect the production of sediment. Therefore, sedimentation is likely
to be most severe during the construction period and can continue until the
surface and channel have again become stabilized, by natural vegetation or
man-made intervention.
Sediment yield in streams flowing from forest and natural areas is
considered negligible; even at peak periods of flow, the water is usually of
high quality. Sediment yields in streams flowing from already urbanized
watersheds vary from approximately 200 to 500 tons per square mile per year.
In comparison, areas in the process of urbanization often show sediment
yields of from 1,000 to 100,000 tons per square mile per year. (28) The
basic data available for analyzing the effect of urbanization on sediment
yield, though sparse, have been summarized for easy reference in several publi-
cations (29,30) and handbooks. (31,32,33,34) The user of this manual should
probably be familiar with at least one of these sources.
Environmental impacts associated with increased sediment yield often
result from the following construction practices:
1. Large areas exposed to storm runoff and soil erosion.
2\ Increased volumes of storm runoff, accelerated soil erosion, and
higher peak flows caused by:
45
-------
Figure 3.4
URBAN/NON-URBAN DRAINAGE MODELS
MODEL
ORIGIN
Corps of
Engineers
Env. Protection
Agency
Massachusetts
Inst. of Technology
Dorsch
Consultant
Metcalf S,
Eddy
Water Resources
Engineers
111. State
Water Survey
MODEL
ACRONYM
STORM
SWMM
AGRUN
I LLUDAS
Catchment Hydrology
g
Multiple
Catchment Infl
*
e
3
o
Dry-Weather Fl
•
*
id
Input of Sever
Hyetoqraphs
•
0
r-H
C
U]
•d
Runo f f From
Impervious Are
•
•
Runoff From
Pervious Areas
e
e
Water Balance
Between Storms
Flow Routing
In Sewers
*
•
Sewer
n
4J
w
c
Upstr. and Dow
Flow Control
*
•o
Surcharging an
Pressure Flow
*
Hydraulics
Diversions
*
en
£
Pumping Static
*
Storage
*
•
Prints State
•
W
V
•H
•Prints Velocit
Wastewater Quality
4J
•H
Id
Dry-Weather Qu
*
4J
•H
Stormwater Qua
*
o<
Quality Routin
*
Sedimentation
and Scour
*
-------
a. Removal of existing protective vegetative cover.
b. Exposure of underlying soil or geologic formations less
pervious and/or more erodible than original soil surface.
c. Reduced capacity of exposed soils to absorb rainfall due
to compaction caused by heavy equipment.
d. Enlarged drainage areas caused by grading operations, di-
versions, and street construction.
e. Prolonged exposure of unprotected disturbed areas due
to scheduling problems and/or delayed construction.
f. Shortened times of concentration of surface runoff caused
by altering steepness, distance, and surface roughness and
through installation of "improved" storm drainage facilities.
g. Increased impervious surfaces associated with the construc-
tion of streets, buildings, sidewalks, paved driveways, and
parking lots.
3. Alteration of the ground water regime, adversely affecting
drainage systems, slope stability and survival of existing and/or
newly established vegetation.
4. Creation of exposures facing south and west that may hinder plant /"
growth due to adverse temperature and moisture conditions. ('|J
5. Exposure of subsurface materials that are rocky, acid, droughty, '')
or otherwise unfavorable to the establishment of vegetation. ' «
i "
6. Adverse alteration of surface runoff patterns of construction •"'
and development. ""'
III,
There are a number of basic principles which can be followed in [.<•
?!.'•
order to significantly reduce erosion and sedimentation from developing h"
areas: t
s,i(
1. Fit the development to the particular topography, soils, !!'.«
waterways and natural vegetation at the site. J
-------
erosion control practices and sediment-trapping facilities will often prove
to be the most practical method for controlling erosion and the transport
and sedimentation of resulting soils.
3.1.6 First-Level Approach
If modeling work has been done during facility planning or design,
or during water quantity analysis in preceding Section 3.1.1, the analyst
should determine if the model used is capable of estimating erosion and
sediment. If so, this is probably the best way to determine impacts. If
not, a simple checklist for assessing the potential seriousness of the
sedimentation impact resulting from development induced by a wastewater
treatment facility would include the following three questions:
1. Are there local standards and specifications for erosion and
sediment control in the project subarea?
If yes, these standards and specifications should be enumerated.
Probable sources of information include U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
field offices and local planning boards.
2. Are there standards and specifications adequate to solve poten-
tial erosion and sedimentation problems?
Areas of potential problems can be identified by assuming that the
extent of the problem is directly related to expected changes in runoff, as
determined in Section 3.1.1. The analyst has to make a judgment whether the
control practices and principles are adequate to solve the potential problems.
3. Is there adequate enforcement of these standards and specifica-
tions?
The determination of whether enforcement actually occurs is a diffi-
cult task. Probable sources of information include planning boards, the
field offices of SCS, building inspectors, and local developers.
3.1.7 Second-Level Approach
If the manual user cannot answer a definite "yes" to the above ques-
tions, there are potential sedimentation problems which should then be iden-
tified and described. Specific sites should be identified and mapped where:
1. Large parcels under single ownership would be suited to large-
scale development.
2. Underlying soil and geological formations are comparatively im-
pervious and/or more erodible than the original soil cover.
48
-------
3. Heavy construction equipment will be required, leading to
compacting of the soil and exterior removal of vegetation.
4. Heavy grading operations will be required, or drainage divi-
sions or street construction will be needed to accommodate
expected development.
5. Shortened times of concentration are projected due to altera-
tions in slope, distance and surface roughness and installa-
tion of drainage facilities.
This set of maps should enable the analyst to identify problem areas
and, by matching them against local erosion and sedimentation control prac-
tices, allow him to determine potential remedies. If these remedies are
enforceable by law, then there is a potential solution to the negative impact.
If not, then the potential impact and the area in which it will likely occur
should be clearly defined.
3.1.8 Third-Level Approach
As described previously in Section 3.1.1, mathematical models may be
used in estimating impacts from erosion and sedimentation. The user is re-
ferred to Figure 3.4 for information on which of the models are appropriate.
The AAPM also includes provisions for estimation of erosion and sedimentation.
3.1.9 Increased Pollutant Loadings
Pollutants are discharged into the nation's waters from various sources
categorized as "point" and "nonpoint." The goals of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act (PL 92-500) are that the discharge of pollutants into navi-
gable water be eliminated by 1985 and that wherever attainable an interim
goal of water quality which provides for the protection and propagation of
fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on to the
water be achieved by July 1, 1983.
If one assumes that new point sources attracted to the service area
due to sewering are likely to be controlled by discharge regulations and
the sewer treatment facility itself, then the principal uncontrolled dis-
charges will be from nonpoint sources. The analyst's problem, therefore, is
to determine, for that increment of additional development in the service
area due to the project, what the impact will be on nonpoint loadings. It
is becoming increasingly clear that nonpoint sources have significant, if
not overriding, importance on urban water quality, particularly if all
point sources receive the equivalent of secondary or higher treatment. One
49
-------
study (35) compared contribution of urban runoff and municipal wastes to
the total potential stream loading. The study found that even if the munici-
pality were to remove all organics and suspended solids from municipal
wastes, the net reduction in total raw waste components would be comparatively
small, due to pollutants in the urban runoff (a total reduction of only 52
percent of the COD, 59 percent of the ultimate BOD and only 5 percent of the
total suspended solids, on an average annual basis). The pollutants were the
greatest during wet-weather periods, when the stormwater contributed 82 per-
cent of the COD, 77 percent of the BOD and 99 percent of the suspended solids.
Before analyzing these effects, however, the analyst should review
the facility planning documents. As stated previously, it is highly likely
that some analysis of nonpoint sources has already been done, or that at
least pertinent local data have been gathered to support estimates of sec-
ondary impacts.
3.1.10 First-Level Approach
At this level, the analyst uses data gathered on a national basis to
make gross estimates of secondary impacts. These data are derived from re-
search in a limited number of urban areas and should not be used for purposes
other than making first-level approximations of water quality impacts.
One estimate of annual nonpoint loads from various types and intensi-
ties of land use is shown in Figure 3.5. (36,37) These estimates, in con-
junction with projections made in Chapter 2 of the number of additional acres
of each land use type resulting from the installation of the sewers, can be
used to make very rough estimates of increased pollution levels.
If, after having made these very rough estimates, it appears that
increased pollutant loadings will result, the second level of analysis
should be undertaken.
3.1.11 Second-Level Approach
For analysis at this level, the Simplified Storm Water Management
Model (27) or the Areawide Assessment Procedures Manual (26), previously
described in Section 3.1.1, should be used.
50
-------
Figure 3.5
Annual Non-Point Pollutional Loads by Land Use Type
LAND USE
NATURAL
FORESTS
(GRASSLANDS!
AGRICULTURE
(FARMS!
FEEQLOTS
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
COM'/ERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
RESOURCE
EXTRACTION
RECREATION
URBAN & ROAD
CONSTRUCTION
QUALITY PARAMETERS
IMPEHVI
O US NESS
(DEGREE!
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW.
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
VERY
HIGH
BOO LSS/
ACRE/
YEAR
SMALL
N LBS/
ACRE/
YEAR
89
24.
24
f LBS/
ACHE/
YEAR
.069
92
388
fOi LBS/
ACHE/
YEAR
3
VARYING WITH ANIMAL TYPE
DENSITY & MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
59
14.
43
234
6
2.5
2.4
33
J2
67
1.3
.56
.6
2.1
39
1.7
EROSION
LOW
HIGH
POTENTIAL
HIGH
POTENTIAL
m,
%ajijjij>
TEMPERATURE
CHANGE
SMALL
SMALL
VARIES WITH
DEGREE OF COVER
REMOVED AND
SURFACES HEATED
15° to 15°)
VARIES WITH METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
VARIES WITH INTENSITY OF USE-EXTREMELY
SENSITIVE TO OVERUSE
30.000-
150.000
TONS/ACRE
Source: Environmental Impact, Proceedings of the ASCE Urban Transportation
Division Specialty Conference, Chicago, 1973, p. 193.
Definitions: BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand
N - Nitrogen
P - Phosphorous
PO4 - Phosphate
"Universal" equations for predicting urban stormwater pollution: (37)
Total Suspended Solids (mg/1) = 147 + 2.58 x (fall (in feet) of
watershed)
Total Solids (mg/1) = 332 + 31.0 x (percent unused space)
BOD (mg/1) = 12.9 - 0.362 x (percent unused space)
BOD (mg/1) = 63.5 - 0.956 x (mean annual number of thunderstorms)
COD (mg/1) = 865 - 14.7 x (mean annual number of thunderstorms)
Suspended Solids (mg/1) = 5031 - 93.5 x (mean annual number of
thunderstorms)
COD (mg/1) = 377 - 3.14 x (mean annual number of days with minimum
<_ 32°F)
COD (mg/1) = 438 - 0.0843 x (mean seasonal number of degree days)
COD (mg/1) = 374 - 7.15 x (mean annual precipitation (in.))
Median Fecal Coliform (thousands/100 ml) = 287 - 6.78 x (mean annual
precipitation (.in.))
Median Fecal Coliform (thousands/100 ml) = 279 - 2.94 x (mean annual no.
of days with minimum <32°F)
51
-------
To determine the potential seriousness of the water quality im-
pacts of the development induced by sewering, it is necessary to evaluate
these impacts on existing and projected water quality levels for the af-
fected streams. Both of these methods include techniques for evaluating
the impact of nonpoint sources on water quality.
3.1.12 Third-Level Approach
If the second level approach still reveals potential problems
requiring further analysis, it is then appropriate to use one of the mathe-
matical models previously described in Section 3.1.1. These require con-
siderable skill and the gathering of local data, and hence should not be
used unless it is clear that the secondary impacts on water quality are so
important as to warrant these expenditures of effort.
3.1.13 Water Supply
Water is a resource which may be used several times for different
purposes. Therefore, the demands for water use are not necessarily additive.
Moreover, there can be conflicting water uses; for example, an industry
locating in a rural area may depend on a large groundwater supply. The in-
dustrial demand may lower the water table significantly, thereby forcing
surrounding residences to have new wells drilled. Water for public and pri-
vate supply systems comes primarily from two sources: ground water and
surface water. Figure 3.6 shows the trends in water for public supplies,
rural supplies, irrigation, and self-supplied industry, for the period 1950-
1970. (38) (The reader should note that, for all of these uses except rural
supplies, surface water is the principal source.)
Projection of water use is a difficult task, for use depends upon
demand for water by different users, the management of water resources, and
requirements for an assured quantity and quality. Serious degradation of
both surface and groundwater quality has occured in parts of the U.S. (39)
In terms of quantity, a comparison of national requirements and supplies
indicates an adequate water supply, although there are and will continue to
be severe problems in localized areas. (40) There are serious water quality
problems in parts of the Northeast and in some areas of the West, and limited
water supplies are a threat in the West and Southwest. (41,42)
52
-------
Figure 3.6
20
in
iS]0
5 5
a
J
•»
-
00
1
? 1
i i
1 i
0 1950 1955
^
i
1
1960
m
i
pssa
'%,
^
3
1965 1970
4
1/5
!«2
^ i
_j *
CO
-
-
n
1950 19S5 1960
PUBLIC SUPPLIES
200
180
160
5 140
0
«O
r
tn
!
!
1
I
° 1950 1955
\
1960
\
—.
|
m
1965 1970
1
i
i
si
1950 1955
1
r— :
1965
~
R-
1970
RURAL SUPPLIES
1
.1960
1965
1
O4;
•yy
%%
4
^
1970
IRRIGATION
INDUSTRV
Graphs showing trends in use of water for public supplies, rural supplies, irrigation, and self-supplied
industry, 1950-70.
Source: Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 1970 (38)
53
-------
The excessive "mining" of ground water—for agriculture, industrial
and domestic purposes—has resulted in salt-water intrusion and subsidence
of land. For example, various coastal areas—Southern California; Dade
County, Florida; Long Island, N.Y.; and some areas in New Jersey and Dela-
ware—have experienced saltwater intrusion due to the heavy withdrawal of
groundwater. (43,44) In Houston, Texas, excessive withdrawal of ground-
water has created subsidence of land, up to nine feet, and has led to exten-
sive damage (over $14 million dollars per year in a 300 square mile area).
Moreover, the subsidence has increased the potential damage from flooding. (45)
Subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal has also been a problem in Long Beach,
California. (46)
In response to serious drinking water supply quality problems throughout
the country, Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. In general,
this legislation does the following: (47)
1. It requires the Environmental Protection Agency to prescribe
national primary drinking water standards designed to protect
health to the extent feasible; national secondary drinking
water standards are designed to protect public welfare.
2. It provides primary enforcement authority to the States, pro-
vided the States have adopted drinking water regulations as
stringent as national standards and have adopted adequate
procedures for enforcement and monitoring of public drinking
water supplies.
3. It provides, in those cases where States fail to adopt ade-
quate drinking water standards and enforcement measures, that
EPA would have the authority to enforce the drinking water
regulations and grant variances, wherever practicable.
4. It establishes a program for the protection of underground
sources of drinking water.
5. It provides for the emergency allocation of chlorine to public
drinking water systems.
Under this Act, states have primary enforcement responsibility for
public water systems, provided that EPA determines that the states have
adopted drinking water regulations as stringent as the national standards,
as well as adequate procedures for enforcement and maintenance of records.
The Act also requires regulation by States for underground injection control
programs. These regulations must contain minimum requirements for effective
programs to prevent the endangerment of underground drinking water sources
due to injection.
54
-------
An approach to assessing the impacts of sewer-induced development
on water supply should incorporate the following major steps:
Step 1. For the projected population, with and without
sewers, determine the probable source of water supply.
Development without sewers may necessitate development of a public
water supply from a source which will not be contaminated by septic systems.
Step 2. For the probable source of water supply, estimate
its quantity, quality and dependability.
The availability of groundwater is very difficult to establish,
and can perhaps be estimated best by determining the extent the water table
has dropped over a period of time when additional wells have used this as
the source. Additional data, such as estimating the aquifer recharge using
U.S. Geological Survey data, can provide insight into the quantity of ground-
water which is probably available. The availability of surface water as a
water supply system usually necessitates the construction of a holding
structure, and therefore the start of a public water supply system. Dependa-
bility of such a system will depend upon its design.
Step 3. Determine the demand for water for the projected
populations with and without sewers.
The quantity of water used per capita is a key concern in the design
of wastewater treatment facilities. One hundred gallons per person per day
is a figure commonly used by design engineers for residential consumption.
However, higher per capita consumption is often realized, depending on the
locality and local industrial use. The dilemma is whether to accept some
"standard" projected per capita consumption or to use that projection based
on present actual consumption. An error in this judgment could have the same
effect as an error in estimating future population: capacity greater than
use will necessitate increased costs; capacity less than demand will necessi-
tate fewer residences being able to concentrate along the sewer and to use
the facility.
One should also ascertain whether the probable source of water selec-
ted to support the projected development in the subarea is not also that
believed to be the source for another nearby subarea. If so, then, it is
necessary to note this and to determine the probability of the immediate
subarea utilizing this source.
55
-------
Step 4. Compare the probable source of water (along with its
quality and dependability) to the expected demand,
and rationalize any difference; this should be done
for the expected development with and without sewers.
In areas where water demand exceeds supply, in terms of quality or
quantity, water supply is a limiting factor on population growth. If this
is the case, then the initial population projection should be revised, and
previous work based on the higher projection redone.
3.2 Air Quality
3.2.1 Introduction
Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970, the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency is responsible for establishing national standards for ambi-
ent air quality (primary standards to protect health, and secondary stan-
dards to protect the public welfare, specifically property, vegetation, and
aesthetics). (48) In April 1971, EPA established standards for major air
pollutants—sulfur dioxide (SO ), particulate matter, carbon monoxide (CO),
hydrocarbons (HC), nitrogen dioxide (NO ), and photochemical oxidants. (49)
These standards are summarized in Figure 3.7. These national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) became the basis for the development of State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) by mid-1972. Each state was required to adopt
and submit to EPA a plan which provided for the attainment and maintenance
of these national ambient air quality standards within each air quality con-
trol region, or portion thereof.
A successful court suit brought by the Natural Resources Defense
Council forced EPA to reject the first round of State Implementation Plans
developed under the 1970 legislation because they failed to include adequate
measures to maintain national ambient air quality standards once attained.
While most SIPs had adequate maintenance provisions to ensure that major
stationary sources did not by themselves cause the standards to be exceeded,
few plans had specific provisions to ensure that standards would not be
exceeded due to (1) clustering of mobile sources, (2) clustering of small
point sources which individually were not subject to review, (3) rapid and
extensive growth of area sources such as light industry, and (4) major shifts
in population centers with associated residential and commercial growth.
56
-------
Figure 3.7: NATIONAL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant
Carbon
monoxide
Hydrocarbons
(nonme thane)
Nitrogen
dioxide
Photochemi ca 1
oxidants
Particulate
matter
Sulfur
dioxide
Type of
Standard
Primary and
secondary
Primary and
secondary
Primary and
secondary
Primary and
secondary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Averaging
Time
1 hour
8 hours
3 hours
(6 to 9
a.m. )
1 year
1 hour
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
1 year
3 hours
Frequency Parameter
a/
Annual maximum-
Annual maximum
Annual maximum
Arithmetic mean
Annual maximum
a/
Annual maximum-
Annual geometric mean
Annual maximum
Annual geometric mean
Annual maximum-
Arithmetic mean
Annual maximum
Concentration
. 3
uq/m
40,000
10,000
b/
160-'
100
160
260
75
15° /
60^7
365
80
1,300
ppm
35
9
b/
0.24-
0.05
0.08
_
—
-
-
0.14
0.03
0.5
Ul
a/Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
b/As a guide in devising implementation plans for achieving oxidant standards.
c/As a guide to be used in assessing implementation plans for achieving the annual
maximum 24-hour standard.
Source; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Natural Primary and Secondary
Ambient Air Quality Standards." (49)
-------
In response, EPA developed a new planning approach: preparation of
Air Quality Maintenance Area (AQMA) plans. The AQMA Planning Program is
aimed at long-range planning solutions. In requires states, as an amendment
to their SIP, to designate areas which, due to projected growth rates, may
present threats to continued maintenance of air standards. Over 150 such
AWMAs have been so designated, the vast majority representing the major
urbanized areas of the country; however, a few AQMAs are areas which, al-
though currently sparsely populated, are expected to undergo massive develop-
ment in the relatively near future. AQMA analysis will project population
and economic growth for at least the next 10 years and determine the impact of
that growth on air quality. The effects of existing controls are to be
factored into the analysis, and if the results show that these controls are
indeed adequate to ensure maintenance of standards, then no further action
is necessary. However, it is anticipated that in most AQMAs existing controls
will not be adequate because, in the development of these controls, the com-
bined impact of new large point sources and the multitude of new small sources
typical of high-growth urbanizing areas were not sufficiently considered. In
these cases, AQMA plans have to be developed, consisting of those additional
regulations and/or modifications to existing regulations necessary to ensure
maintenance of air quality standards in the future. These will be primarily
land use and transportation control measures. In the future, states will be
required to reassess these air quality maintenance areas at intervals of not
more than five years. Guidance for states in planning for these problem areas
is available in EPA's multi-volume Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Plan-
ning and Analysis. (50)
A second successful court suit, this one brought by the Sierra Club,
challenged EPA's practice of allowing deterioration of air quality in relatively
clean areas. As a result, no "significant deterioration" will be allowed in
these areas in the future. The current EPA regulations covering particulates
and SO have three important features: (1) all new major sources in nineteen
specified categories must incorporte best available control technology regard-
less of where they are located, (2) states must define, with extensive public
participation, and within the framework of the federal regulations, what the
term "significant deterioration" means in their areas, and (3) any major new
source whose construction would violate that concept of significant deteriora-
tion would be prohibited from locating in that area. These regulations will
58
-------
have a direct impact only on large industrial sources. One effect will be to
identify certain areas of the country where major pollution-prone industrial
growth is essentially prohibited. Implicit in this will also be conscious
local decisions regarding those areas in which major industry is to be attrac-
ted; hence, the effect will be to provide a priori guidance to industry where
to locate major new facilities. Moreover, it is important to realize that
any growth and development, with resulting emissions of SO or particulate
matter, could "use up" the increment associated with each of the following
classifications, thus precluding any of the 19 sources from locating in the
area in the future.
The nonsignificant deterioration regulations provide for state desig-
nation of all areas within their jurisdiction under one of three types:
Class I areas: practically any change in air quality would be
considered significant.
Class II areas: deterioration normally accompanying moderate,
orderly growth would be considered insignificant.
Class III areas: deterioration up to a national standard would
be considered insignificant. (51)
However, areas that pervasively exceed national standards for parti-
culate matter or sulphur dioxide are exempt from classification. All other
areas are classified as Class II until a state chooses to reclassify them.
It is important to understand that the AQMA plan—and similarly the
transportation control plan, the regulations to prevent significant deteriora-
tion, and the provisions for indirect source review—constitutes an integral
part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The choice of specific actions
that are needed to maintain the national air quality standards are those
selected by each state, which has developed the SIP using the technical and
procedural framework provided in EPA regulations. It is therefore imperative
that the user of this manual determine, in the First-Level Approach, whether
the projected growth for the subarea will be in accord with the SIP (and
therefore all of its components). In the Second-Level Approach, which should
be used whenever the projected growth does not meet all the constraints of the
First-Level, one should consult with the appropriate State agency responsible
for air pollution control in order to determine the available information and
technical approaches used to project and allocate air pollution emissions.
59
-------
3.2.2 First-Level Approach
The future air quality of the subarea will depend upon population
growth and distribution of that population in the region. In a subarea for
which growth projections indicate that there will be no construction of major
stationary or indirect sources (including highway construction), there
probably will be no significant air quality impact warranting further analysis,
assuming the following conditions hold:
• The population growth rate will not exceed an annual average
of .75% over the next twenty years (this is based on the
present national population growth rate being 7.5 per 1000
and the fact that this average growth has to be accommodated.)
• There are no special local resources whose future development
and/or expansion could lead to accelerated population growth
(e.g., energy sources, unique recreational opportunities, etc.).
• Industrial growth over the next twenty years will not exceed
1% per year, as meaured by employment opportunities (this
is based on the estimated average annual national increase
in employment opportunities).
• No more than 15% of the total land use in the subarea is ex-
pected to change use in the next twenty years (this was de-
termined by multiplying .75% by 20 years).
• No projected growth and distribution are in accord with
the SIP.
• No part of the subarea is part of a designated AQMA or an
area for which there exists transportation control plan.
Most of the data needed to determine if these conditions hold is
available from the analysis done earlier in Chapter 2, or the State agency
responsible for air pollution control. It should be recognized that although
certain variables, such as changes in technology, could lead to growth patterns
different from those projected, one has to carry out the present analysis
using the best data available. (52)
3.2.3 Second-Level Approach
In cases where any or all of the conditions of the First-Level Approach
do not hold for a particular subarea, the Second-Level Approach should be
used. Current EPA regulations (53), require that the SIP idenfify areas that
may, as a consequence of current air quality and/or the air quality associated
with the projected growth rate for the area, have the potential for exceeding
a national standard within a ten-year forecast period.
60
-------
The EPA Administrator presently can specify: (1) those areas that
need plans from among those he has or will have identified as problem areas;
and (2) individual dates for submission of each area's analysis and plan
depending on the individual needs of each area. (52) As of October 20, 1975
the EPA had identified a total of one hundred and sixty-eight AQMA's for at
least one pollutant. (52)
The analyst should determine from the State agency responsible for
air pollution the following:
• whether the subarea is in an area where there is now, or is
expected to be in the next 20 years, inadequate attainment
or maintenance of air quality standards;
• the standards which have been or might be violated;
• the current and forecast levels of pollutants for the
subarea; and
• the transportation plan and its process of implementation and
controls (for this could affect the projected population
distribution).
In some situations, the analyst may have to refer to computer models
which simulate air quality conditions in complex situations. If such a
model is used, it is critical that the modeling be consistent with the regula-
tions which are expected to be in effect when the WWTF is constructed. The
state agency or other lead agency involved should be able to provide this
information.
This information should assist in addressing the following questions:
1. Will future growth violate National Ambient Air
Quality Standards?
Whether future growth will violate the NAAQS depends, among other
things, upon the effective implementation of the SIP to reduce or eliminate
present sources of pollutants and to control future sources. The extent to
which future growth in the subarea will contribute to a potential violation
can be estimated based on the proportion of the subarea1s population to the
total population for the area. Application of this simple algorithm is based
on the assumption that the concentration at a location is directly propor-
tional to the overall emissions in the environs; e.g., (for nonreactive
pollutants) the pollution is proportional to the distribution of population.
Therefore, any reductions in emissions which are reflected in proportional
improvements in air quality through the area are in proportion to the popula-
tion.
61
-------
2. Will projected growth and the resulting pollution
be consistent with the conditions established in
the State Implementation Plan?
Whether future growth and resulting pollutants will be in accord with
the SIP will depend upon its maintenance provisions and the enforcement of the
regulations which are part of the SIP. This enforcement strategy includes
review of new and modified sources (stationary and indirect), control strate-
gies , review of transportation plans, air quality monitoring, and enforcement
actions.
3. Will future growth violate any of the standards for
significant deterioration?
Whether future growth will result in a violation of the standards for
significant deterioration will depend not only on the SIP, the class in which
the subarea is located, but also the local growth patterns and the sources
of the emissions. The significant deterioration regulations apply only to
19 specific sources, and in particular to SO emissions and particulate
matter from these sources. Even though air quality maintenance regulations
are designed to maintain air quality areas at a level superior to the NAAQS's,
it is conceivable that future growth and development (exclusive of the 19
sources) could have emissions which would "use up" the increment associated
with the classification of the subarea, thereby precluding any future develop-
ment of these 19 sources in the area.
Since the development of an air pollution control strategy designed
to attain and maintain the NAAQS requires an analysis of current and possible
future air quality problems, a series of publications have been designed to
provide guidance in the development of an analysis conforming tc the require-
ments of the current federal regulations. (50,54,55) These should be used
as source documents to determine the impact of development, with and without
the proposed wastewater treatment facility, on the quality of the air.
3.2.4 Third-Level Approach
The field of modeling in air pollution is fairly well advanced. For
the modeling of some emissions, specific models are recommended. The appli-
cation of atmospheric simulation models to AQMAs is discussed in Vol. 12 of
the Guidelines for Designation of Air Quality Maintenance Areas (50); models
62
-------
discussed in this volume include modified rollback, Miller-Holzworth, Hanna-
Gifford, HIWAY, APRAC-IA, AQDM, CDM, the Sampled Chronological Input Model
and the SAI photochemical model.
Under the new regulations for projecting air quality concentrations
of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide, the Air Quality Display Model (AQDM)
or an equivalent model is required, unless an alternative is permitted. (52)
Since AQDM and similar models yield long-term concentrations (seasonal or
annual), States must apply a model to relate the long-term concentrations to
short-term concentrations. (52) The recommended model for obtaining short-
term concentrations for the general urban area is that of Larsen. (56) These
and other required models may be determined by reference to the proper regula-
tions and the Guidelines. There are many private firms and states which have
these models "on line."
3.3 Noise Impacts
At present, there is no single universally accepted method of pro-
jecting community noise exposure from all sources. Most attempts to formu-
late an integrated approach have been directed either at evaluating individual
building sites (57) or at formulating national policy. (58) Those projection
methods useful for regional planning typically relate to a specific noise
source (e.g., aircraft), and treat other sources as background. The method
used here attempts to integrate these different approaches into a single im-
pact forecast.
Development tends to increase people's exposure to noise primarily by
bringing them close to existing noise sources such as highways and air corri-
dors. It is not sufficient, however, simply to project population changes
around each source. We must also take into account future changes in the
noise levels themselves which will occur as noise sources grow and as new
ones come into being. The procedure we must follow, therefore, is to compare:
a) the existing population's exposure to present
noise levels with
b) the future population's exposure to projected
noise levels.
The purpose of this section is to provide a step-by-step method for making
this comparison. Since the subject of population projections has been
addressed in detail in Chapter 2 above, most of the discussion in this section
talks about projecting noise levels and estimating total community exposure.
63
-------
The following discussion is divided into four sections. The first
consists of an introduction to community noise, including relevant regulations,
important noise sources, units in which noise levels are measured and mani-
pulated, and the common indicators of community noise impact. The other
sections describe three impact assessment techniques at different levels of
complexity, and the conditions under which each should be used.
3.3.1 Introduction to Community Noise
Noise has come to be recognized as one of the most important en-
vironmental problems in an urban area, particularly since the passage of
the Noise Control Act of 1972.
Historical evidence shows that excessive noise has long been
considered a menace to the public health and welfare. Over
the past two centuries industrial development has resulted in
a steady increase in the extent of noise impact.
Noise can affect the ability to communicate or to understand
speech and other signals. This may arise from either actual
impairment of the hearing mechanism or as a result of in-
trusions of sounds such that the desired ones cannot be under-
stood by the listener. (59)
Other adverse effects include loss of sleep, interference with activities,
and general loss of amenity termed "quietness."
Numerous agencies at all governmental levels have issued or are in
the process of issuing regulations regarding the design and operation of
noisy equipment and setting allowable levels of noise emissions (see below).
In addition, public works projects are being increasingly subjected to
scrutiny, and in some cases litigation, from interested parties concerned
with noise emissions (see, for example, Tiber Island Condominium, et al. v.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority). (60) It is clearly in the
interests of both the community and the developer that noise be considered
in the earliest stages of the planning process.
At present, there are two Federal noise regulations of direct
interest to land use planners. These are:
• Federal Highway Administration FHPM 7-7-3. (61) Issued in
1976, it sets noise guidelines for all Federally aided
highway construction and expansion.
• HUD Circular 1390.2 (62) Sets noise exposure guidelines
for construction of housing assisted by HUD funding.
64
-------
In addition, the EPA has specified noise levels "requisite to protect
public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. " (63) These
specifications do not have the force of law, but they could serve as the
basis for community action against overly noisy projects. Some of the
provisions of the above standards are discussed below where appropriate. A
complete listing of Federal Noise control activities and regulations has been
published. (64)
In addition to Federal standards, many states and municipalities
also have noise ordinances . These should be obtained from the relevant
agencies and considered in the planning process. A summary of such ordinances
as they existed in 1973 has been published by the EPA. (65)
For purposes of this manual we can identify four categories of noise
sources in the urban environment. These are:
• highway traffic
• aircraft ,,,,,
• railroads ,!l!,
';)'
• urban activity ,!',)
.In
' l'j
This last is a composite category which includes a number of types of noise ;;{
generated simply by the presence of an urban environment (street traffic, '"'
•ii '
construction, industrial activity, and other operated equipment). '["]
Noise levels are commonly expressed in units of "A-weighted" deci- ,)!,',
bels (abbreviated, "dB(A)"), a measure of sound intensity which is weighted i
•if
to simulate the variation of the ear's sensitivity with frequency. For most ;"'•
1 1'1'
noises the level decreases with distance from the source; therefore, the ,|J
characteristic noise level of a particular source (e.g., a truck) is typi-
cally expressed in terms of dB(A) at a stated "reference" distance. Figure
3.8 shows the A-weighted noise levels produced by some common sources. (66)
Because noise levels are computed logarithmically, they do not add in the
conventional manner. A convenient method for adding decibel levels is
shown in Figure 3.9. (66)
People react not just to noise levels alone but also to the number
of noisy events, the duration of each event, and the time of day in which
the event occurs. Some noise sources have relatively low, constant levels
(e.g., street traffic), whereas others, such as aircraft, may be relatively
infrequent but of high intensity. Numerous attempts have been made to come
65
-------
Figure 3.8
TYPICAL A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVELS
AT A OVEN DISTANCE FROM NOISE SOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL
DECIBELS
REJOIN.-3
140
50 HP SIREN (IW I
130
JET TAKEOFF (200-) I
120
•RIVETING MACHINE ||0 CASTING SHAKEOUT AREA
•CUT-OFF SAW I
•PNEUMATIC PEEN HAMMER I
100 ELECTRIC FURNACc AREA
•TEXTILE WEAVING PLANT
SUBWAY TRAIN IW> 9Q 80ILES ROOM
PRINTING PRESS PLANT
PNEUMATIC ORILL (»'l
QO TABULATING ROOM
I INSIDE SPORT CAR ISO MPH)
FREIGHT TRAIN UOO'i I
VACUUM CLEANER 110") 70
SPEECH ID
NEAR FREEWAY (AUTO TRAFFIC)
LARGE STORE
ACCOUNTING OFFICE
LARGE TRANSFORMER • JOO' I PRIVATE BUSINESS OFFICE
50 LIGHT TRAFFIC (lOO'l
, AVERAGE RESIDENCE
40 MIN LEVELS-RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN
CHICAGO AT NIGHT
SOFT WHISPER 13')
30 STUDIO (SPEECHI
20 STUDIO FOR SOUND PICTURES
10
THRESHOLD Of HEARING C I
YOUTHS • 1000 . 4000 c/i 4 0
•OPERATOR'S POSITION
Source: Handbook of Noise Measurement (66)
66
-------
up with an index that takes into account the variability of noise as well as
its level. These indices are usually expressed in terms of a dB(A) level
which is modified to include the variability of the effects mentioned above.
For reasons as much historical as technical, different indices have come to
be associated with particular noises. We shall briefly review the commonly
used indices of noise impact according to the sources listed above. Then
we will define a single index which should be used for the purposes of the
manual and describe how to relate the other indices to it.
Figure 3.9
Approximate Addition of
Noise Levels
Difference Between Two
Noise Levels
1 dB or less
2 to 3 dB
4 to 9 dB
10 dB or more
Add to the Higher
of the Two
3 dB
2 dB
1 dB
0 dB
Highway traffic. Noise from highway traffic (trucks and automobiles)
has usually been expressed in terms of the statistical distribution of A-
weighted noise levels. Typical indices are L , the noise level which is
exceeded 50% of the time, and L , the level which is exceeded 10% of the
time. Figure 3.10 shows the highway design noise levels presently enforced
by the Federal Highway Administration. (67) These noise levels for different
land uses are expressed in terms of the maximum allowable hourly L and L ,
10 eq
which measures the time-averaged dB(A) level. (L is explained further
eq
under "Urban Activity" below).
Aircraft. Because aircraft noise tends to be intermittent, indices
related to it have emphasized the frequency and duration of flyovers as well
as the noise produced by each flyover. The most commonly used noise descrip-
67
-------
FIGURE 3.10
DESIGN NOISE LEVEL/LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS
Activity
Category
ADOPTED BY FHWA
Design Noise Levels - dBA
eg 10
Description of Activity Category
01
CO
A 3/
D
57
(Exterior)
67
(Exterior)
72
(Exterior)
52
(Interior)
60
(Exterior)
70
(Exterior)
75
(Exterior)
55
(Interior)
Tracts of land where serenity and quiet are
of extraordinary significance and serve an
important public need and where the preser-
vation of those qualities is essential if
the area is to continue to serve its intended
purpose. Such areas could include amphi-
theaters, particular parks or portions of
parks, open spaces, or historic districts
which are dedicated or recognized by appropriate
local officials for activities requiring special
qualities of serenity and quiet.
Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds,
active sports areas, and parks which are not
included in Category A and residences, motels,
hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches,
libraries and hospitals.
Developed lands, properties or activities not
included in Categories A or B above.
For requirements on undeveloped lands see
paragraphs lla and c.
Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting
rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hos-
pitals, and auditoriums.
Either L or L (but not both) design noise levels may be used on a project.
10 eq
Parks in Categories A and B include all such lands (public or private) which are actually used as
parks as well as those public lands officially set aside or designated by a governmental agency as
parks on the date of public knowledge of the proposed highway project.
See paragraphs 8c, d, and e for method of application.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Federal Highway Program Manual (67).
-------
tor has been the Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF), a decibel quantity which
measures the noise for each flyover in terms of a unit called the Tone Cor-
rected Perceived Noise Level (a measure similar in purpose to the A-weighted
level but derived differently) and which adds correction terms for the dura-
tion of each event, the number of events, and the time of day (0 dB for day-
time, 12 dB for nighttime [10 p.m. to 7 a.m.]). Figure 3.11 shows the NEF
land use rating system suggested by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. These NEF values can be converted to Day-Night Equivalent
Noise Levels (L ) using the procedure developed in Section 3.3.2. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency has encouraged the use of L, noise descrip-
dn
tor for all environmental noise sources, including aircraft, and has pre-
pared a document which permits the computation of L, contours by hand. (69)
dn
Railroads. Noise from railroads has received relatively little
attention compared to the two sources discussed above, largely because
attempts to regulate railroad noise are relatively recent. The two sources
(70) (71) which treat community exposure to rail noise in terms of overall ','J
''H
impact use the Day-Night Equivalent Noise Level (L ) , an index which is 'I1
dn :||
discussed below. U
'!]
Urban activity. As we mentioned previously, "urban activity" is a >u
nj
catch-all for a group of sources which have comparatively low individual T
iin
noise levels, are distributed fairly uniformly over urban areas, and, there- ,m
:i*
fore, have a large cumulative noise impact. The EPA, which has primary '"
i
responsibility for regulating such sources, has concluded that their impact '
is best measured in terms of L , the equivalent of A-weighted sound level. (72) -!''
eq :|i,,
L represents the steady-state sound level which would contain the same ,-|J
acoustic energy as the actual time-varying level when measured over a speci-
fied period. When the measurement period is 24 hours, the equivalent sound
level is written as "L (24)". This is the impact measure which the EPA
eq
feels is most meaningful when people's health and welfare are concerned.
When noise interference with speech, sleep, and other activities is the
problem, the EPA uses the Day-Night Equivalent Noise Level (L- )• This is
defined as the A-weighted average sound level during a 24-hour period with
a 10 dB penalty added to nighttime (10 P.M. - 7 A.M.) noise levels.
The EPA does not restrict the use of L, to "urban activity" noises,
dn
but uses it to characterize the total community exposure to noise from all
sources. Figure 3.12 shows the levels which EPA has established as desir-
69
-------
Figure 3.11 LAND USE RATING SYSTEM SUGGESTED BY HUD
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES
AIRCRAFT HOISE ENVIROIIMINTS
fOf.
LAND USE CATEGORY
Residential - Single Family,
Duplex, Mtibi Ic Homes
Residential - Multiple family.
Dormitories, etc.
Trans irnl l.odgi ng
.
Chui clics
Hospitals, Mm'. Ing II. ii, ITS
Avid i tor Uiws , Concert Halls,
Music Shel Is
Sports AII-II.-IS , Outdo.. r
Spectator Si'oi is
Playgrounds, lie i ijhlioi luiod Parks
Golf Courses, P.iding SUibles,
W.iler Ri-c., Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Personal,
Business .md Profrss iona 1
C"i'ii«-i c i.il - P.oloil, Movie
Ihc-alci'S, Pi:sl.itir.ints
r.n..:iei cial - t/liolesalf , Some
P.c-lai 1 , hid. , Mfg. , Ut i 1 .
Ma nu f .ic 1 in i ng. Ci >n«"nn i c/it ions
(No i sc ',cns i t i vc)
Livestock farming, Anii<*al
ttiTvilimj
Agiioilturir (i-xc-pt Livestock),
Mining, 1 i sit i iiy
Puhl ic f.i'iht -of -Way
f-te-nsivc IMtui.il F'i-<: i r>jl i im
A.C..S
r. — : r ~ '.:." ~.~ ~ '.~.~.~. ".' " ~;
i
SLUCM
CODE
3
llx
llx. 12,
13. 19
15
68
7111
651
7ZI
722
761, 762
7'ilx, 7'Ox,
61 , 62,
f>3, f>9, 65''
r.3. V>.
56. 57, 59
51. 52. 6't,
2, 3. <<
35. ''7
815. 816.
817
81 . 8?., 85,
«''.H5.yl.y>
''5
91 . 92, '13,
••9.7VJI./!,
NSC2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
t<
2
3
5
5
3
1
LAND USE INTERPRETATION
FOR NEF VALUE
10 20 30 1*0 50
-
--
\\s
\\v
—
N
s\
^
.\\
^
i
M
\v
\\
T •
'
•. ' '
^
. ...
(
j 1
— ^\^~\
Sn
II
v : ' . • .
..^.J-J
"* i—]
1 )
1 "" ' ^ ' '
•' I
i"
,\\\v
$Wv
\\\\N
$S$X
s\X
SS>
^
^vXS^
v\\\\
X^VVN
— T"^
— -LJ
33
"r13
i
'^" i
J.J
'• ,-j-j
^N
XV ._.
L .
r-U
L_. _
"v^^^
^^\
^ '
-
...Jj
NOTES i
Clearly
Acceptable
Normally
Acceptable
Normally
Unaccepl.iblc
Clearly
Unacceptable
Clearly acceptable: The noise exposure is such that
the activities associated with the land use may be carried
out with essentially no Interference from aircraft noise.
(Residential areas: both Indoor, and outdoor noise environ-
ments are pleasant.)
Normally acceptable: The noise exposure is great enough
to be of some concern, but convnon building constructions will
make the Indoor environment acceptable, even for sleeping
quarters. (Residential areas: the outdoor environment will
be reasonably pleasant for recreation and play.)
Normally unacceptable: The noise exposure is signifi-
cantly more severe so that unusual and costly building con-
structions are necessary to ensure adequate performance of
activities. (Residential areas: barriers must be erected
between the site and prominent noise sources to make tlie
outdoor environment tolerable.)
Clearly unacceptable: The noise exposure at the site
Is so severe that construction costs to make the indoor
environment acceptable for performance of activities v/ould
be prohibitive. (Residential areas: the outdoor environment
would be intolerable for normal residential use.)
Stand.ird Ltlnd Use Coding Manual.
Noise Sensitivity Code (sue uage 53).
x retirements SLUCM category broader or nar iov«cr tli.'in, but
generally inclusive o(, the category described.
If
Excluding hospitals.
Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Aircraft Noise Impact - Planning Guidelines
for Local Agencies. (68)
-------
Figure 3.12
YEARLY AVERAGE EQUIVALENT SOUND LEVELS IDENTIFIED BY
EPA AS REQUISITE TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND
WELFARE WITH AN ADEQUATE MARGIN OF SAFETY
Residential with Out-
side Space and Farm
Residences
Residential with No
Outside Space
Commercial
Inside Transportation
Industrial
Hospitals
Educational
Recreational Areas
Farm Land and
General Unpopulated
Land
Measure
Ldn
Leq<24)
Ldn
Leq(24)
Leq(24)
Leq(24)
Leq(24) (d)
Ldn
Leq(24)
Leq(24)
Leq(24) (d)
Leq(24)
Leq(24)
Indoor
Activity Hearing To Protect
Inter- Loss Con- Against
ference sideration Both Ef-
fects (b)
45
45
(a!
(a)
(a)
45
45
U>
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
45
45
70 (c)
(a)
70(c)
45
45
70(0
Outdoor
Activity Hearing To Protect
Inter- Loss Con- Against
ference sideration Both Ef-
fects (b)
55
(a)
(a)
55
55
(a)
(a)
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
55
70 (c)
70 (c)
55
55
70(c)
70(c)
b.
c.
d.
Code:
a. Since different types of activities appear to be associated with different levels, identifi-
cation of a maximum level for activity interference may be difficult except in those cir-
cumstances where speech communication is a critical activity. (See Figure D-2 for noise
levels as a function of distance which allow satisfactory communication.)
Based on lowest level.
Based only on hearing loss.
An Leq(8) of 75 dB may be identified in these situations so long as the exposure over the
remaining 16 hours per day is low enough to result in a negligible contribution to the
24-hour average, i.e., no greater than an Lgq of 60 dB.
Note: Explanation of identified level for hearing loss: The exposure period which results
in hearing loss at the identified level is a period of 40 years.
Refers to energy rather than arithmetic averages.
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to
Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin. (72)
71
-------
able for various community purposes. (72) Our concern here is with the
social impacts of noise; we shall therefore adopt L, as our index of noise
an
impact.
The use of L, to characterize noise from a variety of sources is
dn
becoming increasingly widespread. The Federal Aviation Administration, for
example, has issued procedures for direct computation of L contours from
general aviation airports. (73) This trend is expected to accelerate; at
present, however, much of the noise literature relevant to regional plan-
ning employs a variety of uncommensurable indices. The next section
therefore gives procedures for obtaining estimates of L where noise
dn
levels are given in other units.
3.3.2 Converting Impact Measures to L
Because the various impact measures each take into account different
properties of noise, there is no totally accurate way to convert from one
measure to another. The EPA, however, has established procedures which pro-
duce minimal error in most cases. (74) To convert aircraft noise impacts
(usually expressed in terms of NEF or CNEL) to L, , use the expression
dn
L,, ~ CNEL ~ NEF + 35 (1) i
dn ~
To obtain L for highway noise, several conversion techniques are
available depending on what noise measure one is starting with. In all of
the expressions below, "day" is defined as the period between 7 A.M. and
10 P.M.
Converting from L (h) to L,
_ eg dn
L (h) represents L during the design or peak traffic hour. Use
the expression
L = L (h) + A (2)
dn eq v '
where A is a correction factor which depends on the percentage of traffic
(expressed in terms of total vehicles) carried during the day, i.e., percen-
tage total day traffic is of the total traffic during the 24 hour period.
Values of A are given in Figure 3.13.
*
Equation (1) is accurate to within + 3 dB.
72
-------
Figure 3.13
Correction Factor for Converting L (h) to L,
eq an
For Highway Noise (75)
% Vehicles Carried
During the Day
7 a.m.-10 p.m.
of Total 24 Hour
Period
A(dB)
62.5
75
85
90
95
100
3
2
1
0
-1
-3
Converting From L (h) to L
L (h) represents L during the design or peak traffic hour. Con-
vert L, ^(h) to L (h) using the expression
10 eq
Leq(h) =L10(h) - 2dB
Then convert L (h) to L, using equation (2) above.
eq dn
Converting From L (24) to L,
eg dn
L (24) represents L averaged over a 24-hour period (see above).
eq eq
Use the expression
I, = L (24) + B
dn eq
(3)
where B is a correction factor which depends on the percentage of traffic
(expressed in terms of total vehicles) carried during the day (day traffic
compared to that carried during the 24 hour period). Values of B are given
in Figure 3.14.
73
-------
Figure 3.14
Correction Factor for Converting
*-eq (24) to Ldn for Highway Noise
B(dB)
10
IU
t\
i
o
i ' ' '
I'M
i • • ,
1-'-*^1^
: ' 1
' ' !
• ; i .
! 1 i
• - i
l ' • •
ii1:
i . : ,
1 . !
' .
ii''
: , .
• ill
• • •
i i • i
, • • :
; - I .
••^fc^. • .
: ; •
• • ,
t L • i
• • 1 :
i l i :
i : ' i
• ' 1 '
: i • ;
ill;
• ; • '
i . : •
l ' ' :
. ' i :
. • • i
.J • ' '
r^»^
. : t
• ' ' i
i ' t
•i|
, i .
i • •
i p .
l ' •
i ' i
i : -
l ;
~^^
">>^
'
1 • . '
' '
1
1 ' i .
! . ' '
,
' ' .
1 .
. ' l .
t .
>C • 1 '
• ^Sy •
1 ' ^S
I
1 . • •
• : i :
• j ;
ii1.
i ' • i
: |
i
i .
. 1 .
^
Nu
N,
: X
• . ' \
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLES
CARRIED DURING THE DAY
Converting From L (day) and L (night) to L
Use the expression
L^ = L (day) + C
dn eq 3 '
(4)
where C is a correction factor which depends on the value of L (day)-L (night)
eq eq
Values of C are given in Figure 3.15.
Converting From L (day) and L (night) to L
10
10
dn
Convert L, .(day) to L (day) and L..(night) to L (night) using the
10 eq 10 eq
expressions
Le (day) = L (day) - 2dB and
L (night) = L (night) - 2dB
eq 10
respectively. Then use Equation (4) to obtain L, .
dn
74
-------
Figure 3.15
Correction Factor for Converting
L (day) and L (night) to L, for Highway Noise
eq eq dn
C(dB)
AJ
10
—10
-1
II-:
, ' '. '
: ! •
X.' !
x
X,
• : ' x
1 • 1 :
1 ! !
1 1
1 1
1 1 1
ill:
i i i '
1 i i
I i i i
1 : ' '
i . : i
• i • •
! ! ! :
i '. 1 •
IP1'
1 i i 1
1 i !
1 1 1
1 t • 1
0
i : i
• ' •
,
Sy • :
1 Tx :
1 :X
i i '^
i • •
» t
• • i .
• ' 1 :
! | i i
• ' • I
i • : .
i • • :
l J . :
| ...
I'll
i • ! '
1 ! '
| 1 ! !
(
: ' • .
i • ' :
,
i : ;
i i i
*. : ! 1
V 1 '
• X •
• i ><
: : ' "N
i
. •
, . i
> .
' 1 i
i 1 '
: ' !
| 1
1 '
: ' 1
3
! ' ! :
' i : l
•ill
. . ; :
1 1
1 1 : 1
' 1 . 1
• 1 1
•I.I
TJ_ ' :
^^^ • -
' "*»»s^
1 1
; ' : !
•11;
>)!;
! 1 1 l
1 ! , :
• l i •
! |
1
' ' i :
' . . .
I r i •
III!
i ! 1
1 1 '
i , 1
i . -
^-^_
••••«
' i i :
. • • '•
i . i '
i ; i .
' , i .
1 ' ' 1
• i • :
0
I ;
' i :
. ' •
i
• .
•— — •
- . i .
! 1
• 1 ' '
' 1
2
• : 1
i ' ' •
. •
' :
i
i
1 :
0
. .
; • • .
.' • .
i • •
i • . '
• . ! '
31
(day) - L (night) (dB)
3.3.3 First-Level Approach
Noise from Aircraft Operations
(1) Determine (a) whether there are any commercial or military
airports in the subarea or within 15 miles of the boundaries of
the subarea, or (b) whether there are any plans or proposals for
airport construction. If the answer to both questions is "no,"
proceed to the First-Level Approach for Highways (below). If the
answer to question (a) only is "yes," proceed to the next step.
If the answer to question (b) only, or to both (a) and (b), if "yes,"
proceed to the Second-Level Approach.
75
-------
(2) On a map, draw a border around each existing airport ac-
cording to the following rules (see Figure 3.16).
—along each major flight route, draw a corridor
10 miles long and 1 mile wide
—in every other direction, draw a border 2
miles from the airport boundary line.
Determine whether a) any part of the analysis subarea falls
within this border and b) for that part of the subarea which
does fall within the border, the population will increase more
than 10% as a result of constructing the treatment facility.
If the answer to either a) or b) is "no," proceed to the next
step. If the answer to both a) and b) is "yes," proceed to
the Second-Level Approach.
(3) Determine, for existing airports, whether any significant
changes in their pattern of operations are projected such that
noise levels will increase. Such changes could include a change
in the proportion of jet flights, a change in the distribution of
flights between night and day, or an overall expansion program.
If the answer is "yes," proceed to the Second-Level Approach. If
the answer is "no," proceed to the next step.
(4) Determine from the airport management, the FAA, or other
appropriate agency whether the projected change over the next
20 years in the number of flights per day will be more than
50% of the present number. If the answer is "yes," proceed to
the Second-Level Approach. If the answer is "no," proceed to the
First-Level Approach for Highways (below).
Noise from Highways
(1) Determine a) whether there are any existing or planned
highways within one mile of the boundaries of the project subarea
or b) whether there are any plans or proposals for such highways.
If the answer to both questions is "no," proceed to the First-Level
Approach for Railroads (below). If the answer to question a) only
is "yes," proceed to the next step. If the answer to question
b) only, or to both a) and b), is "yes," proceed to the Second-
Level Approach.
76
-------
Major Flight
Routes N. >
Noise Border
Figure 3.16
Illustration of How to Construct Noise Border for
First Level Estimation of Aircraft Noise Impacts
77
-------
(2) Determine, for those parts of the subarea which lie within
one mile of an existing highway, whether the population will
increase by more than 10% as a result of project construction.
If the answer is "yes," proceed to the Second- level Approach.
If the answer is "no," proceed to the next step.
(3) Determine, for existing highways, whether any significant
changes in highway usage are projected such that noise levels
will increase. Such changes could include an increase in
truck traffic or a change in the distribution of traffic between
night and day. If the answer is "yes," proceed to the Second-
Level Approach. If the answer is "no," proceed to the next step.
(4) Determine, for the appropriate agency (State Bureau of
Roads, in the case of state highways; FHWA in the case of
Interstates) whether the projected change over the next 20
years in the number of vehicles per day will be more than 50%
of present levels. If the answer is "yes," proceed to the
Second- Level Approach. If the answer is "no," ignore highways
as a noise source .
Noise from Railroads
(1) Determine a) whether there are any existing rail lines within
one mile of the boundaries of the project subarea, or b) whether
there are plans or proposals for any. If the answer to both
questions is "no," proceed to the First-Level Approach for Urban
Activity (below). If the answer to question a) only is "yes,"
proceed to the next step. If the answer to question b) only, or
to both a) and b) , is "yes," proceed to the Second-Level Approach.
(2) Determine, for those parts of the subarea within one mile
of an existing rail line, whether the population will increase by
more than 10% as a result of project construction. If the answer
is "yes," proceed to the Second- Level Approach. If the answer is
"no," proceed to the next step.
(3) Determine whether any significant changes in the pattern of
operations are projected, such that noise levels will increase.
Significant changes include a change in the distribution of traffic
78
-------
between passenger and freight or between night and day;
a change in average train speed; or a change in the average
number of cars per train. This information may be obtained
from the railroad or rail transit system which operates the
line. If the answer is "yes," proceed up the Second-Level
Approach.
(4) Determine, from the operator of the line, whether the
projected change over the next 20 years in the number of
trains per day will be more than + 50% of present levels.
If the answer is "yes," proceed to the Second-Level Approach.
If the answer is "no," proceed to the First-Level Approach
for Urban Activity (below).
Noise from Urban Activity
(1) Determine a) whether there are any existing or planned
I' f'
industrial sites which have exposed machinery and which are , |(
Li
within ^-mile of residences, or b) whether any such sites are 'I'
' M
planned. If the answer to either a) or b) is "yes," proceed In
n!
to the Second-Level Approach. If the answer to both is "no," '.!!
proceed to the next step. (Note that zoning ordinances can
ll,.
provide a guide as to the future likelihood of such developments.) ,<«
i,'<
! lit
(2) Determine from with-sewer development projections made in ,
i
Chapter 2 whether the projected 20-year change in population .ii'
Mi
density at any point within the subarea averaged over a square j;,.
mile, will exceed + 50% of its present value. If the answer "
is "yes," proceed to the Second-Level Approach. If the answer
is "no," then there is not likely to be any significant increase
in community noise exposure as a result of the sewer development.
3.3.4 Second-Level Approach
If the approach outlined above shows that any one of the four noise
source categories may present a problem, then the entire noise situation must
be examined in some detail. Unfortunately, there are no "quick-and-easy"
methods for obtaining projections of community noise impact; each source
must be analyzed separately and combined with other sources and with alterna-
tive population distributions. Because of the highly technical nature of the
79
-------
subject matter, it is recommended that the planner or developer obtain the
services of an individual or organization which is professionally qualified
to perform community noise studies. Such a consultant will be able to assist
not only by predicting noise impacts but also by suggesting planning and
design features to minimize problems where they occur. The following discus-
cussion will not replace such services, but it will act as a guide to the
planner in analyzing the nature of the specific problem at hand, in describ-
ing the problem to the consultant, and in evaluating the quality of the con-
sultant's work.
The object of the procedure described below is to obtain a graph or
table showing, for each level of L , how many people in the service area of
dn
the project would be exposed to that level or higher. The difference between
this population distribution as projected with and without development is a
direct measure of the effect of development on community noise exposure.
The approach is divided into three steps: 1} establishing current noise
levels; 2) projecting noise levels with and without development; and 3)
obtaining the distribution of people exposed to different noise levels with
and without development.
(1) Establishing Current Noise Levels
Before noise levels can be projected, the current situation
must be defined. In particular, one must determine how much
noise is coming from each of the four source categories, even
if some of those categories were determined not to be a
problem under the First-Level Approach.
It is possible that noise surveys may already exist for the
area in question, particularly if any large public works projects
(highways, airport expansion, etc.) had been undertaken in the
vicinity in the last few years. Queries should be made with the
Regional Office of EPA, the State Bureau of Roads, the FAA, state
environmental affairs offices, and similar organizations having
responsibility for environmental matters.
To the extent that such existing information fails to account
for any of the important source categories or is out of date, an
independent survey should be undertaken. The Department of Trans-
portation has sponsored development of plans for conducting
80
-------
community noise surveys. A detailed method, along with cost
estimates, has been described in a report. (76) The method
described therein allows for very complete sampling of a large
number of noise situations, so that the contribution of each
major source category can be identified (it is also rather
expensive). A noise consultant can adapt the DOT procedure to
the particular circumstances at hand, and can thereby save money
and effort at some expense in completeness and precision. There
are several examples of such limited but still useful survey tech-
niques. (77) In addition, EPA is presently developing a manual
to assist in conducting community noise surveys.
Whatever the source of the data, the resulting product should
consist of a) a set of area maps showing contours of L for
dn
each source category (aircraft, highways, etc.) by itself, and b)
a single subarea map showing contours of total L., for all source
on
categories taken together. If existing noise surveys are used, they , ,,
.In
may report their results in terms of an index other than L . In If
dn j;
that case, the rules given in equations (1) through (4) can be used '«
to transform the reported index into values of L, . To convert the "•
dn ui|
individual maps of L, for each source category into a single com- ,
dn !!„
posite map, the maps should be overlaid and the L values from each •'"
on |(|(
map should be added for each geographical location according to the ""
I
rules previously given. The resulting summed levels can be plotted
on a new map, and contours of total L, may be drawn through the ,
dn I'm
i i
points. li;l
(2) Project Future Noise Levels
Over a 20-year planning horizon, noise levels can be expected
to change whether a particular development project is undertaken
or not. To obtain proposed development impact, noise levels both
in the absence of and in the presence of the proposed project
must be projected. The projection techniques are the same in
both cases; only the data differ. To make a projection assuming
no development it is necessary to use the composite map of the
subarea (developed in Chapter 2) as it will look at the proper
future date, showing all public works (highways, airports, etc.),
81
-------
and the population distribution which will occur under normal
development pressures (e.g., without construction of the sewer
project). The composite map with the project will show the in-
duced effects of the project on the distribution of economic acti-
vities and population. Note that if a particular source category
has already been determined in the First-Level Approach to have
negligible projected growth, its noise impact need not be projected
here. The current noise impact map for that category, as deter-
mined in Step 1 above, can be used in place of a projection.
We now present suggested projection techniques for each noise
source category. In each case, the object of the procedure is
to develop a map of projected L, contours for the service area.
dn
Aircraft
Projections of noise levels for many commercial airports are
available from the FAA and other sources. (78) For those airports
not so covered, an EPA publication provides a simplified set of
procedures for constructing the required contours. (69) Of course,
it is necessary to have information regarding the probable level
of activity at the airport in question for the time period for
which one is projecting. If this is not available as far into
the future as is necessary, reasonable assumptions should be made
(and documented) based upon the best data available. Since most
projections are stated in terms of NEF, it will be necessary to
convert to L, units using Equation (1). A recent FAA report
dn
gives techniques for estimating L contours directly. (79)
Highways
For highways already in existence, the present noise levels
(as determined in Step 1 above) can be adjusted for future changes
in traffic flows using the procedures outlined in National Coopera-
tive Highway Research Program Report Number 117. (80) For highways
which exist only conceptually as part of a future development plan,
contours of L may be drawn by assuming that FHWA guidelines will
be observed. (See Figure 3.10) This will set the position of the
L = 70 dB (A) contour relative to residential areas. The other
contours can then be constructed using the procedures in NCHRP
82
-------
Report 117. (80) Contours of L, can be converted to L using
10 on
Equations (2) and (3). An alternative procedure which will soon
be published by EPA gives results directly in tenns of L . (81)
dn
Railroads
There are few, if any, site-specific projections of railroad
noise available; nor are there any officially endorsed techniques
for generating them. The most accurate method to date is that
of EPA. (70) The simplest is that of Swing. (71)
Urban Activity
There are no standard procedures for estimating the change in
noise level from urban activity. To attempt to project the noise
from each individual street, lawnmower, industrial fan, etc. is
not recommended except in cases where impact might be unusually
severe. (Such a severe use might include increased population—
i1 n
never an existing or proposed industrial site. Such cases should be -,<>
'a
iii
analyzed separately by specialists in noise control.) A general -I,
I'1
estimate of future levels can be obtained, however, by using the ,!j
i ii
following empirical relationship: (82) "j
' li
ALdn = 10 log1Q (p/po) lin
where AL is the change in L, due to urban activity as measured i!ii
dn dn ,
in Step 1 above; p is the present population density at a given !
O ,il
point; and p is the projected population density at the same point. !''
I;.i
The practical effect of this relationship is that, for every factor- |J
of-two increase (or decrease) in population density, L from this
source goes up (or down) by 3 dB. By using this technique for a
representative sample of points in the site, an array of point-
estimates of L will be obtained through which contours can be
dn
drawn.
Total Projected Noise Impact
Once the subarea maps showning L, contours for the individual
dn
source category have been generated, they should be combined,
using the procedure outlined at the end of Step 1 above, to
obtain a map of total projected L, from all sources. This
entire projection procedure will be repeated for the "with-" and
"without-development" cases.
83
-------
(3) Determine Population Distribution vs. Impact Level
Take the map of L, contours for the "without-project" case,
on
as generated in Step 2 and overlay it on the map of projected
"without-project" population density as generated in Chapter 2. Use
this combined plot to obtain a graph showing, on its horizontal
axis, L, and, on its vertical axis, the number of people exposed to
dn
a given level of L, or greater (see Figure 3.17 for an example).
on
Repeat this procedure using the contour maps of total L, and popu-
on
lation density for the "with-development" projection. The two
curves of population vs. L, for the two projections should be
on
plotted on the same graph. Visual comparison of the two curves
gives the change in noise impact due to the development. If a
single-number index of impact is desired, the best measure is the
change in the number of people exposed to L, = 55 or higher;
dn
this may be read directly from the graph.*
Figure 3.17
Day-Night Equivalent Noise Level (L )
dn
No. of
People
Total Subarea
Population
Change in number of people
exposed to a given L, or greater
With development
Without development
Jdn
Maximum Noise Level in Subarea
An alternative index of noise impact is the Fractional Impact Method (FIM)
presently being developed by the EPA and other noise research organizations.
The FIM is a way of weighting the population-vs.-L^ curve to give the equi-
valent number of people who are exposed to L^ = 75. The method is curren.tly
undergoing revision; users of this manual should consult the EPA as to when
a final version will be available.
84
-------
Another acceptable procedure would be to draw histograms or
distributions of the people exposed within five decibel increments
of L . Two histograms should be drawn, corresponding to the with-
and without-development cases.
3.3.5 Third-Level Approach
The Second-Level Approach can be substantially improved by the use
of computerized noise projection techniques. The role of these computer
programs is to automate the "projection" portion (Steo 2) of the Second-
Level Approach. The output will consist of maps of noise level contours
for individual source categories. The planner or his consultant will still
have to construct composite maps of total L with and without the project,
as was described in Steps 2 and 3 of the Second-Level Approach.
Computerized projection models are available for two of the source
categories: aircraft and highways.
Aircraft
The U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of Noise Abatement
has sponsored the development of models which predict NEF contours
for airports. (83,84)
Highways
Development of models to predict highway noise has been spon-
sored by the FHWA and other agencies. Analysis techniques,
including those developed in NCHRP, have been assembled and
modeled. (85,86)
3.4 Solid Waste Impacts
Problems associated with increasing urban solid waste volume (87)
are exacerbated by the spreading out of population growth. Given adequate
management of the solid waste collection system (88), costs increase with
the extent of the area over which wastes have to be collected as well as
with increased volume. Conversely, as population per acre increases, col-
lection costs per acre are less because any factors which reduce labor time
per unit waste collected and per capita generation will reduce costs. (89)
This relationship between quantity, costs of collection, and spatial distri-
bution of population is shown in Figure 3,18, Figure 3.19, and Figure 3.20.
(90)
85
-------
Figure 3.18
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES COLLECTION RATES
pounds/capita/day
Population
r
0 - 4,999
5,000-19,999
20,000-99,999
100,000
Waste Collection by
Population Density Ranges
0-3,999/sq.mi.
3.3
3.6
4.1
4.6
4, 000-6 , 999/sq. mi .
-
5.0
4.1
5.1
7,000+/sq.mi.
-
4.6
4.6
5.6
Sources: Land Use, Urban Form and Environmental Quality (90)
Figure 3.19
SOLID WASTE GENERATION BY DWELLING TYPE
Pounds/capita/week
Gallons/capita/week
Pounds/cubic yard
Single Family
12.54
14.07
179.97
Multi family
9.83
11.00
180.50
Apartment
House
6.91
5.61
248.87
Sources; Land Use, Urban Form and Environmental Quality (90)
86
-------
Figure 3.20
SOLID WASTE GENERATION RATES BY DWELLING TYPE
Single family
a
a
11 < I 10 I!
PEOPLE PEH DWELLING
Multiple family
Z «
o
< It
at
Ul
Z
Ul
o
HI
o
c*
• \*
\
•V*-« *
•••*-•*»•. * ..
• *
) 10 1) 10 1) 10
PEOPLE PEP. DWELLING
Apartments
:i 10 10 10 100 no
PtOPll ?tB DWIUIIIG
Figure 3.21 shows the total wastes generated by households and
other municipal sources on a yearly basis. (90) National data is pre-
sented for familiarization but can be used if no better data are available.
Figure 3.21
ESTIMATES OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
H«*t« Sourc*
Multipliers
Hou*«hotd G«rb*q« And Rubbish
SlnqU r«»Uy Unit
Multipl* P«ally Unit
CttV Stc««c.s: t^*v*«, Citt«r. Sw««pinqt.
«nd Tr«* Tri,mninqm
JUfus* Coll«ct*d Along Hi9hv«y Right-of-way
Fr««w*y R«fu««
County Ro*dt R«fus«
S«w«9« Tr««tAt«nc H«ildu«
Loc*l P*rk» «nd Pl«ygroundi
0.6275S ton*/unit/y*«r
42.» lb/c«pit«/V«*r
8.0 tom/nite/yttr
3.] ton*/nil«/y*«r
•1.1 ld/eaoit/capit«/yt»r
TOTAL WASTE
SOURCE: Land Use, Urban Form and Environmental Quality (90)
87
-------
Recent estimates and projections of solid waste generation, resource
recovery, and disposal, for the period 1971 to 1990, are shown in Figure 3.22.
(91)
Figure 3.22
Baseline Estimates and Projection of Solid Waste
Generation, Resource Recovery and Disposal, 1971 to 1990
Total gross discards :
•Million tons per year
Pounds per person per day
Less: resources recovered:
Million tons per year
Pounds per person per day
Equals net waste disposed of:
Million tons per year
Pounds per person per day
Estimated
1971
133
3.52
8
0.21
125
3.31
1973
144
3.75
9
0.23
135
3.52
Projected
1980
175
4.28
19
0.46
156
3.81
1985
201
4.67
35
0.81
166
3.86
1990
225
5.00
58
1.29
167
3.71
For post consumer municipal solid wastes, which are defined as those dis-
carded by the final consumer, not by raw-material producers and manufac-
turers .
Source; Resource Recovery and Waste Reduction, Third Report to
Congress (91)
Waste generated by manufacturing concerns varies according to the
materials utilized in the concerns' production processes. Figure 3.23
provides a method of estimating these wastes, given estimates of industrial
employment.
88
-------
Figure 3.23
ESTIMATES OF MANUFACTURING WASTES
Industry
Multipliers
tons/employee/year
Seasonal Foods
Other Foods
Paper, Printing, and Publishing
Chemicals
Textiles and Apparel
Rubber and Plastics
Leather
Stone, Clay, Glass, and Concrete
Primary and Fabricated Metals
Electrical and Nonelectrical Machinery
Lumber and Wood Products
Furniture and Fixtures
Transportation Equipment
Instruments
5.56570
4.81655
12.87060
8.21075
.52575
1.54810
2.49365
18.11425
6.7300
3.58040
21.68805
20.15545
3.39330
2.51700
Source; Land Use, Urban Form and Environmental Quality (90)
Historically, landfill is the most common and cheapest method of
solid waste disposal. The municipal open dump, where unprocessed refuse
often proceeds severe problems of ground water pollution through leaching,
loss of land value, fire dangers, and rodent infestation, is rapidly being
phased out. The more acceptable sanitary landfill method reduces these
threats but is often restricted because acceptable sites, when available,
are usually located far from the urban center, making transportation costs
high. The alternatives for extending the life of present landfills can
also be expensive; they include: (92)
• to withdraw newsprint or other recyclable materials by a separ-
ate collection service or mechanical separation, thus
reducing the volume 10 to 50%;
• to pile the refuse above the normal adjacent elevations, when
design parameters allow, thus creating small hills which
later can be landscaped;
89
-------
• to compact the refuse into bales, thus increasing the density
up to 1,800 pounds per cubic yard, approximately twice the
density of conventional landfill;
• to shred, grind, pulverize or mill the refuse, often accompanied
by ferrous extraction or energy recovery, extending the
landfill life by 35 to 50%;
• to incinerate the waste before land filling, thus reducing the
volume from 80 to 90%, but increasing costs due to air pollution
standards which mean extremely costly stack gas cleaning systems;
use as a fuel can reduce this cost.
Significant reuseable resources are contained in solid wastes. Solid
waste can be also used as a source of energy. Even though demonstration pro-
grams have been beneficial in improving technology to a limited extent, not
enough emphasis has been placed on developing methods of recovering natural
resources from the waste of reuse (recycling) or on new or improved methods
Of disposal. (93) The recovery of valuable resources from waste has the poten-
tial of reducing the waste where it is generated, reducing cost and other
problems associated with increasing energy consumption and natural resource
depletion, and, most importantly, alleviating the problem of solid waste
disposal. The recovery process is a complex technological one which will not
be discussed here; the feasibility of the different methods are presently being
tested through certain EPA-funded demonstration projects. (94) In summary,
the solid waste impact of future growth in a subarea will depend upon the
volumes being generated, waste characteristics, refuse disposal, and the plans
made for its disposal.
3.4.1 First/Second-Level Approach
1. The first step is to determine the total volume of municipal
solid wastes which will be generated in the project service area, by year,
for the next 20 years. Separate estimates of the volume should be made
with and without the proposed waste water treatment facilities. Local data
should be used if available. If not, the analyst should first consult, the
above figures to determine the rate of overall municipal solid waste genera-
tion appropriate to the population size and density of the project service
area. Waste generation rates should be adjusted upward for each successive
year by a. growth factor of approximately 3%, which reflects an increase in
the rate of solid wastes per person. (91) Total municipal volumes for each
90
-------
future year, with and without the project, can be calculated using the popu-
lation projections done previously in Chapter 2 and data from the above
figures.
This time series of estimated total municipal volumes can then be
cross-checked by a separate set of calculations using the estimates of
annual solid wastes generated by different types of dwelling units and
urban activities displayed. Reference should be made to the composite land
use maps developed in Chapter 2 for information in each case regarding the
projected quantities of each land use type, with and without the waste water
facility. Any major discrepancy between these two estimates of total pro-
jected municipal volumes (with and without the project) should be noted and
reconciled.
2. A separate series of annual estimates, with and without the
project, can be made for generation of industrial solid wastes in the
service area, using the annual multipliers provided by type of industrial
activity in Figure 3.26. Again, the projections of the levels of industrial
activity in the service area with and without the project made in Chapter 2
can serve as the basis for making the annual calculations.
3. Adding the municipal and industrial totals together, the next
step is to determine how this total amount of solid wastes will be disposed
of over the next 20 years.
Although it is likely the method will be by landfill, alternative
methods which are under investigation by local, regional and state
authorities should be explored and a judgment made of their probable imple-
mentation. Where disposal will depend upon incineration, air pollution
impact should be reevaluated by determining the probable discharge (this
data is usually obtainable from the manufacturer of the equipment).
Evaluation of the disposal of waste by landfill will necessitate
determining: (1) whether the landfill will be able to receive this volume,
along with any other possible sources which utilize the same site; and
(2) determining the environmental impact of the landfill on the environment.
The volume of waste to be placed in the landfill can be calculated by divid-
ing the weight of waste disposed each year over the twenty years by the
density of the waste. The initial waste density can be estimated by assum-
ing one of the following, depending on the disposal method used at the
landfill:
91
-------
(a) 700-900 pounds per cubic yard in a dump,
(b) 1200 pounds per cubic yard in a compacted landfill,
(c) 1800 pounds per cubic yard if compacted into bales before
landfilling.
This calculation should be made in each case for the estimated quantities
with and without the proposed WWTF.
The evaluation of the impact of the landfill on the environment may
be done by comparing the existing operation of the site against accepted
standards for the design and operation of landfills (95) or by using a
specialized evaluation process. (96) An impact that should be carefully
examined is whether the volume, with and without the proposed WWTF, can be
handled at that site, and at what times the difference in projected volumes
necessitate closing out the site.
92
-------
4.0 SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS
Sensitive environmental areas are defined as natural areas which are
critical in the ecological cycle. In a comparatively small area, there is
usually a complex environment supporting unique or diverse biological species
which are bound by an ecological chain of interdependence.
The sensitive environmental areas examined in this section are
primarily water oriented. Availability of. water in wetlands, coastal
areas, flood plains, and wildlife habitats is important because it may pro-
vide the necessary setting for breeding, sanctuary from predatory animals,
and preservation of open space in its natural state. The growing scarcity
of land and the increasing ability of man to move and shape environments
further jeopardizes existing sensitive areas. Over 45 million areas of
primitive marshes, swamps, and seasonally flooded bottomland have already
succumbed to development pressures. (97) The necessity for controlling
development is well documented. (98)
This chapter provides the analysis procedures necessary to determine
what sensitive environmental arc-as will be impacted, the amount of impact,
and the type of impact resulting from the WWTF. In addition, the chapter
includes suggestions regarding ways to reduce these impacts through appli-
cation of various regulations governing the use of sensitive areas.
The following sections describe the four types of sensitive en-
vironmental areas (wetlands, coastal areas, flood plains, and wildlife
habitats) and suggest a single comprehensive approach for analysis of
impacts on each type of sensitive area. Application of analysis approaches
in a particular subarea will depend upon the number of sensitive environmental
areas there are in the subarea, the proximity of these areas to the WWTF, and
the size of the project. It is, therefore, likely that smaller WWTF pro-
jects will not require the same level of analysis of sensitive land impacts
as larger projects.
4.1 Wetlands
Wetlands are those land and water areas subject to regular inunda-
tion by tidal, riverine or lacustrine flows. Wetlands generally include all
inland and coastal shallows, marshes, mudflats, estuaries, swamps and similar
areas in coastal inland navigable waters. Perhaps the single physical feature
which best characterizes wetlands is the slow drainage of water from these areas.
93
-------
Wetlands serve important purposes in the ecological cycle. In
addition, they are places for recreation, and provide vistas of general
aesthetic interests. As such, wetlands are considered to perform func-
tions important to the public interest, including:
• support of biological functions, ranging from food chain pro-
duction to general habitat for nesting, spawning, rearing, and
resting sites for aquatic or land species;
• areas for study of the aquatic environment or as sanctuaries
or refuges;
• part of the ecological system which regulates or controls
natural drainage characteristics, sedimentation patterns,
salinity distribution, flushing characteristics, water current
patterns and other associated environmental characteristics;
• valuable storage areas for storm and flood waters;
• prime natural recharge areas, where surface and ground water are
directly interconnected.
One useful distinction which should be noted is the designation of
protected areas based on "wetlands" or "shoreline." Shoreline regulations and
resulting management programs do not depend upon the intrinsic value of
natural qualities (i.e., wetlands) to define an affected area; the area which
is protected under the regulation or act is defined by some absolute distance.
Shoreline regulations therefore become a zoning tool for protecting a larger
area, including that fragile part of the natural environment—the wetlands. (97)
The body of literature on wetlands (technical, political, theoretical,
or practical) is limited. However, specialists in agriculture and conservation
have studied wetlands for the basic role they serve as habitats for fish and
wildlife. Scientists and laymen have recently recognized that the wetlands
play a crucial role in the hydrologic cycle.
The largest gap in our knowledge of wetlands is the role they play
in the natural water cycle. Due to the long length of time during which water
is located over the wetland, there is a continuing opportunity for water to
infiltrate into the ground, whether this flows underground into aquifers, or.
remains to augment streams during low flows, depends upon local geology and
is still the subject of research. However, it is presently recognized that
wetlands, in conjunction with groundwater storage and aquifers, represent an
ecosystem of unique and major importance to the nation and, as a result,
merit extraordinary protection. (98)
94
-------
It is estimated that comparable developmental forces would be expected
to inflict more lasting damage to wetlands than to other ecosystems. There-
fore, EPA has created appropriate safeguards for the preservation and protection
of the wetland resources. In particular, it is EPA's policy to "minimize
alteration in the quantity or quality of the natural flow of water that nourishes
wetlands and to protect wetlands from adverse dredging or fill practices; solid
waste management practices; siltation or the addition of pesticides, salts or
toxic materials from nonpoint source wastes and construction activities; and
to prevent the violations of applicable water quality standards from such
environmental insults." (101)
One of the most destructive impacts on wetlands can occur through a
dredge and fill operation. The potential for this to occur increases with the
development potential of the wetland. Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act provides for the exclusive Federal regulation of discharges of
dredged or fill material in virtually all waters of the United States by the
Secretary of the Army, acting through the Corps of Engineers. (In addition,
the Corps of Engineers is responsible for a regulatory permit program for
structures or dredge or fill activities in navigable waters under Secion 10
of the River and Harbor Act of 1899. Guidelines for issuing permits in navi-
gable waters or oceans have been issued. (102,103) Permits which are issued
under Section 404 are subject to review by EPA, which is authorized to "pro-
hibit the specification of any defined area as a disposal site," and to "deny
or restrict the use of any defined area for specification as a disposal site,
whenever it is determined that the discharge of such materials into such area
will have an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish
beds and fishery areas, wildlife, or recreational areas." (104)
Even if local ordinances, state laws, or Federal laws prevent the
destruction of wetland areas, severe impact on wetlands can result from induced
urban development on adjacent land. For example, there may be a conflict be-
tween the mosquito population which inhabits a wetland and the comfort and
safety of individuals who are locating on adjacent property. Man's attempt to
control mosquitoes by aerial spraying, whether by DDT or malathion, may lead
to an ecological imbalance, destroying the beneficial insects while only
temporarily eliminating the mosquitoes in the wetlands. Draining or filling
a wetland is clearly the most effective means of controlling mosquitoes; how-
ever, this approach would, at the same time, irreversibly eliminate the unique
95
-------
ecological contribution of the wetland area to an ecological cycle. Other im-
pacts of man-made activities on wetland include storm water runoff which con-
tain pollutants, noise from adjacent uses which destroys the wide range of
wildlife inherent to that habitat, and wide fluctuations in water levels,
thereby changing the plant life.
EPA's policy on wetlands includes prohibition of granting funds for
the construction of municipal wastewater treatment facilities or other waste
treatment-associated appurtenances which may interfere with the existing wet-
land ecosystem, except where no other alternative of lesser environmental
dmaage is found to be feasible. Therefore, where there is any reason to be-
lieve that wetlands will be impacted, an assessment of secondary impact must
identify the various alternatives which have been investigated, including the
reasons for rejecting those alternatives not used. (101) The selection of the
most environmentally protective alternative should be made. (106)
4.1.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Wetlands
Sections 2.2.1 to 2.2.4 provide alternatives to identify subareas
which are likely to be subject to induced growth pressures. Comparison of
the distribution of these impacted subareas with a map overlay showing the
pattern of wetland location in these subareas will indicate the extent to
which induced development will affect the wetlands. The analyst should be
particularly sensitive to situations in which development pressures are
likely to change wetlands from their natural state to other uses. The ex-
tent of this type of impact due to induced growth should be expressed in
absolute terms (number of acres developed) and relative terms (percentage
of total wetland developed).
The impact on water supply from the development of wetland is diffi-
cult to ascertain, unless the geology of the subarea has been studied. (The
U.S. Geological Survey should be consulted to determine if this has been done.)
If a survey has not been done, an index of potential impact on water supply
may be constructed as follows. First, determine the number of wells in the
subarea. if there are wells, impact on these wells will depend on whether
water is replenished from wetlands. A rough estimate of well-water dependence
on wetland waters may be developed by examining the depth and location of wells
relative to wetlands. (Given the existence of USGS data, these water-bearing
strata can be identified.) If wells are relatively shallow and located near
96
-------
wetlands, it is more likely that well replenishment depends on abutting wet-
lands. On the other hand, a wetland may recharge an underground source. For
example, wells "A" and "B" in the following diagram would not be affected,
whereas "C" would, due to the underlying geological characteristics of the
area.
Sources of information on the number of wells, their depth, and their location
include the local health department, local well-drillers, and state and local
engineering societies where soil records are likely to be maintained on
drilled wells.
4.2
Coastal Areas
Ihe Coastal Zone is critical as an environmental area for a number of
reasons. As the interface between land and water, this area is important be-
cause it is a fish and wildlife habitat, an essential link in the food chain
and nutrient trap, and because it acts as buffers against storms and flooding.
Salt marshes are indispensable as natural life-support systems. Many species
of fin and shellfish and the birds that feed upon them are dependent during
at least part of their life cycle on tidal marshlands. Coastal marsh areas
are also highly productive sources of nutrients; animal populations can survive
there largely because of the marshes' ability to convert sunlight and nutrients
into organic material. Marsh production greatly exceeds that of most other
natural ecosystems because frequent tidal flooding continually fertilizes all
97
-------
marshlands and removes metabolic wastes of the benthic algae and phytoplanton.
Coastal areas contribute significantly to pollution abatement by assimilating
substances from tidal waters. Sloping barrier beaches, with their high soil
porosity, help to lessen wave impact on the coast by providing a gradually in-
creasing frictional dissipation of energy. Finally, coastal areas are ex-
tensively used for recreational boating, fishing, swimming and picnicking,
as well as for passive recreation activities and for scenic enjoyment.
In general, states may legislate processes which determine permissi-
ble uses of coastal areas or which establishes the limits of local authority
to use zoning ordinances in controlling the use of an area. (105) Hence,
assessment of induced coastal impact requires that the analyst examine local
and state ordinances which: (1) prohibit certain uses in areas to preserve
intrinsic values; (2) regulate through zoning ordinances land use within speci-
fied distances from water bodies; and (3) define a regulatory process which
must occur before any development can commence. The order of these conditions
reflects the relative power of each in controlling development which might
occur in the coastal area; that is, tinder the third type of regulation, it
is most probable that development will be permitted, with certain conditions.
The role of the Federal government in the protection of coastal areas
is clearly stated in the Estuarine Areas Act of 1968:
...to provide a means for considering the need to protect,
conserve, and restore these estuaries in a manner that
adequately and reasonably maintains a balance between
the national need for such protection in the interest
of conserving the natural resources and natural beauty of
the Nation and the need to develop these estuaries to
further the growth and development of the Nation.
The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 establishes a comprehensive
long-range and coordinated national program. The Act declares that it is
a national policy to: (109)
- preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, improve
coastal resources;
- help states manage their coastal responsibilities wisely
through the development of appropriate programs; and
- require Federal agencies engaged in coastal programs to
work closely with state, local, regional and Federal
agencies and other affected interests.
90
-------
Requirements of the Act apply to the thirty coastal states, the
states that border on the Great Lakes, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
The Act establishes a comparatively small Federal office (centered
in the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)
which issues designation and operational guidelines for state organizations,
consistent with the following legislative direction: (110)
The key to more effective protection and use of the land
and water resources of the coastal zone is to encourage
the states to exercise their full authority over the
lands and waters in the coastal zone.
Under the Act, the responsible jurisdiction must develop a management
program for land and water resources in the coastal zone. The program must
include: (111)
(1) identification of the boundaries of the
coastal zone subject to the management program;
(2) definition of what shall constitute permissi-
ble land and water uses within the coastal zone which
have a direct and significant impact on the coastal
waters;
(3) an inventory and designation of areas of
particular concern within the coastal zone;
(4) identification of the means by which the state
proposes to exert control over the land and water uses
referred to in paragraph (2) above, including a listing
of relevant constitutional provisions, legislative enact-
ments, regulations, and judicial decisions;
(5) broad guidelines on priority of uses in parti-
cular areas, including specifically those uses of lower
priority;
(6) a description of the organizational structure
proposed to implement the management program, including
the responsibilities and interrelationships of local,
areawide, state, regional, and interstate agencies in the
management process;
(7) a definition of the term "beach" and a planning
process for the protection of, and access to, public
beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental,
recreational, historical, aesthetic, ecological, or cul-
tural value;
(8) a planning process for energy facilities likely
to be located in, or which may significantly affect, the
coastal zone, including but not limited to, a process for
anticipating and managing the impacts from such facili-
ties;
99
-------
(9) a planning process for a) assessing the effects of
shoreline erosion (however caused), and (b) studying and
evaluating ways to control, or lessen the impact of, such
erosion, and to restore areas adversely affected by such
erosion.
The state or its delegate agency(ies), including regional or inter-
state institutions, must: (1) administer land and water use regulations,
control development in order to ensure compliance with the management pro-
gram, and resolve conflicts among competing uses; and (2) acquire fee simple
and less than fee simple interests in lands, waters, and other property through
condemnation of other means when necessary to achieve conformance with the
management program. (112)
Under Section 306, grants are provided for administering the state
management program. Before approving a program for funding, the Secretary
must find that the program, among other things:
• has been coordinated "with local, areawide, and interstate
plans applicable to areas within the coastal zone..."
• "provides for adequate consideration of the national interest
involved in the siting of facilities necessary to meet re-
quirements which are other than local in nature"
• "makes provision for procedures whereby specific areas may
be designated for the purpose of preserving or restoring
them for their conservation, recreational, ecological, or
esthetic values"
• will be managed by an authority empowered "to administer
land and water use regulations, control development...and...
resolve conflicts among competing uses"
Section 307 of the Act, which relates to interagency coordination and
cooperation, states that the requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol and Clean Air Acts, as amended, are to be incorporated in any program
developed pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act. Moreover, the
management program must adequately consider the views of Federal agencies
principally affected by the program. In particular, Section 307 also states
that any Federal agency which conducts or supports activities, or undertakes
any development project in a coastal zone, must insure that the project is,
to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with the approved state manage-
ment program. (113) In particular, EPA has developed a joint agreement on
the coordination of EPA Water Programs and Coastal Zone Management Programs
(CZMPs) with NOAA's Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) (114), a set of
100
-------
procedures for coordinating between EPA and the OCZM (115) , and a set of
guidelines for EPA participation in the development and review of CZMPs. (116)
The joint agreement between EPA and OCZM is based on the fact that both
programs are concerned with management of the nation's water resources; both
involve extensive planning and implementation efforts which are, of necessity,
interrelated in the area of land and water uses. The agreement acknowledges
that EPA regional offices must recognize that their planning, construction,
and management activities should be carried out in close cooperation with CZMPs,
and that they must be consistent with approved CZMPs, which are in turn con-
sistent with the requirements of P.L. 92-500. (117)
Guidelines for EPA participation at the regional level in the
development and review of CZMPs require EPA involvement early in the CZMP
development process in order to insure: that EPA programs and concerns are
consistent with the CZMPs; that the same data base and information are used
for both programs; and that EPA have the opportunity to review CZMPs and
associated environmental impact statements. The EPA-OCZM coordination agree-
ment places particular emphasis on CZMP projections of population growth and
distribution, reflecting the fact that air and water pollution requirements
should be overriding, that certain uses in the coastal zone are contingent on
the achievement of air and water standards, and that achievement of these
standards and desired water use are contingent on supporting land uses and
land use controls. (117) Therefore, the CZMP normally documents the state's
and the 208 Planning Agency's projected land use planning decisions,- these
decisions can, in turn, serve as guidance for determining the impact of in-
duced growth on the coastal zone. The CZMP normally describes: processes for
protection of wetlands from development projects; ocean outfalls and beach
uses; shellfish beds and marine sanitation devices; recreation areas; noise
effects from transportation; energy facilities siting; industrial development;
and dredged soil disposal. This information can assist in assessing the
secondary impact of growth induced by the WWTF. In particular, the State
CZMP Plan approved by EPA should be used to determine the constraints imposed
on land use, for EPA is bound to conform to these requirements within the
legal scope of CZMA authority. (118)
Given the above legislative and administrative actions, it is essen-
tial that the user of the manual contact state coastal zone management
personnel, if the state has been delegated management authority, and under-
stand the CZMP which applies to the area of induced growth. (119)
101
-------
4.2.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Coastal Area
The first analysis step is to determine if the subarea is in a
coastal management zone. If the subarea is partially or totally within
a coastal zone, the CZMP will identify: boundaries of the zone, permissible
land or water use in the zone; areas of particular concern within the zone;
and the means by which the state exerts control over land uses, including
guidelines setting priorities on use in particular areas.
If a state management program exists, EPA must be assured that the
proposed WWTF is consistent with requirements of the state's approved program.
Further, the state must be provided with a copy of the EPA certification; state
coastal management must subsequently notify EPA that the state concurs with
or objects to the applicant's certification. (120) Since state management
plans typically establish procedures for public notice and public hearings on
proposals for development in the coastal zone, it is likely that hearings will
also be required on the WWTF.
The basic thrust of the analysis of induced growth impact on coastal
zones is, thus, compliance with coastal zone management requirements where
the projected growth is expected to occur in a coastal zone. The sequence of
steps is: initial contact with a state agency to understand the applicable
management program; and determination of the implications of the distribution
of projected growth and economic activity resulting from the WWFT relative to
coastal zone management requirements. If the complete analysis described in
this manual is presented in draft form to the coastal zone management agency,
it should serve as an adequate basis for certification. The impact of the
WWTF on a coastal zone and the WWTF modifications which might be required are
defined by the extent to which growth and its spatial distribution are ex-
pected to be inconsistent with existing coastal zone management objectives
and procedures.
4.3 Flood Plans
A "flood plain" is an area which is periodically covered with water.
The term "flood," however, extends to a wider range of meanings (as prescribed
in regulations of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development) and may
include "inundation from rising waters or from the overflow of streams,
rivers, or other bodies of water, or from tidal surges, abnormally high tidal
water, tidal waves, tsunamis, hurricanes, or other severe storms or deluge;
102
-------
inundation from mudslides which are proximately caused by accumulations of
water on or under the ground; and the collapse or subsidence of land along the
shore of a lake or other body of water as a result of erosion or -undermining
caused by waves or currents of water exceeding anticipated cyclical levels." (121)
The rarity of large floods leads many persons in high-flood risk areas
to be seriously uninformed about the risks of flood damage which they face.
•Those who do know are often optimistic that their property will not be flooded
in the near future. Other expect public assistance when the inevitable flood
disaster strikes. The fact remains that flooding is a natural event (often
exaggerated by the process of urbanization) and that flooding frequency can
be probabilistically estimated, using historical data.
An understanding of the flood plain is important for two reasons: the
process of development can affect the extent of future runoff and thereby ex-
tend the flood plain for a given frequency of flooding; in addition, increased
development in an area capable of being flooded can increase the likely
amount of devastation, thereby increasing the severity and cost of flooding
at any given frequency. The following two sections examine the logic of flood
frequency and public flood insurance programs; they provide the necessary con-
text for consideration of induced growth impact on flood plains.
4.3.1 The Frequency of Flooding
River channel studies indicate that water flows create and maintain
channels with capacity to carry flows less than the average annual flood.
This means that overflow of a stream's banks will occur, on the average, about
every 1.5 to 2 years. (122) The volume of the overflow varies inversely with
frequency: a large number of small overflows occur frequently, with large
flood or catastrophic events being relatively rare.
If all recorded storms and their corresponding peak flow are arrayed
in order of magnitude (cubic feet per second), the "recurrence interval" for
different discharge volumes follows the following formula:
R = = where R is the recurrence interval in years,
m
n is the number of years of record, and
m is the rank of the individual event in
the array.
103
-------
A different formula results if, instead of using peak flow for each storm,
only the largest flow in each year is included in the array. Such a series
ignores any lower order events in the same year, even though they may have been
greater than the annual floods in other years. The use of recurrence interval
data based on maximum peak flow for each year is common, and most available
flood-frequency data bases reflect this. (122) (Reliability of the data on an
event varies with its frequency of occurrence; data on the infrequent event
are based on a single or only a few occurrences, while data on more freauent
events are based on a significant amount of data. Therefore, extrapolation
of a frequency-discharge curve for reliability based on infrequent events may
lead to questionable results. The analyst should, therefore, use these data
bases with caution.)
The "average annual flood" is the arithmetic mean of the peak flows
for each year. A flood with magnitude of an average annual flood is likely to
be equaled or exceeded on the average of once every 2.3 years, or 10 times
in 23 years. (122)
The 100-year flood, often used to determine flood elevation for
design of local land use controls, represents the flood level that, on the
average, will have a one percent chance of being equalled or exceeded in any
given year; it can be called the "minimum safety flood" or the "intermediate"
flood, for it is a compromise between minor floods and the Corps of Engineers'
"standard project flood," which is the greatest flood thought likely to occur
in a given area. Therefore, the 100-year flood is often not the greatest
flood of record, and the area at elevation greater than the 100-year flood
plan is subject to flooding at a frequenty less than once in 100 years; given
historical upstream conditions. Usually, the largest flood of record is vir-
tually meaningless except as a measure of what has happened, for it is possi-
ble that a much larger flood can happen.
4.3.2 Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973
The 1968 Housing and Urban Development Act established a national pro-
gram of federally subsidized flood insurance. Individual property owners
in participating communities may purchase insurance from private insurance
agents who are reinsured by a pool of large companies subsidized by the
Federal Insurance Administration (FIA). Disaster victims receive payments to
cover their losses to the extent of their coverage. In order to participate
104
-------
in the program, communities must adopt certain prescribed flood plain manage-
ment measures, consistent in design with minimum flood elevations of the 100-
year flood plain. The subsidy involved in the flood insurance program is quite
large; homeowners pay only about 10% of what the unsubsidized premium rate
would be, although new construction is charged at full actuarial rates. (123)
The National Flood Insurance Act, originally enacted in 1968, prohibited
flood insurance for a community until detailed hazard maps were completed and
actuarial rates established. The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1969
established an emergency program during which subsidized insurance could be
purchased prior to completion of a Flood Insurance Rate Map for the community.
(Upon completion of the rate map, the community becomes eligible for and must
comply with the regulations of the regular program.) (123)
The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) expands flood
insurance program coverage, and makes coverage compulsory for communities
designated as flood prone. This program has two objectives: (1) to provide
a smoother working mechanism for disaster relief; and (2) to eventually reduce
flood losses by encouraging flood plain management. Both Acts provide for low
cost flood insurance for projects in flood-prone areas through the means of
a subsidy and require, as a condition precedent, the enactment of local juris-
dictions of land use and control measures to guide the use of flood plains.
(124) (125) Under the Flood Disaster Protection Act, the insurance subsidy
ends for other than existing buildings after detailed insurance rates maps
have been prepared. With the high subsidy, the flood insurance program may not
directly save the Federal Government any money over grant and loan programs
but, because of unsubsidized rates for new construction and the land use con-
trol requirements, the intent is that eventual flood losses will be greatly
reduced by discouraging new construction in flood plains.
Two enforcement strategies are available. One strategy forces communi-
ties to participate in the program: by July 1, 1975, or one year after noti-
fication that they are flood prone, whichever is later, all flood prone communi-
ties must join the program. After July 1, 1975, no financial assistance
from Federal agencies for acquisition or construction or for real estate loans
by federally supervised lending institutions for buildings will be available to
nonparticipatory communities within the identified flood hazard area. Moreover,
EPA is prohibited by law from making any grant for acquisition or construction
purposes in a flood hazard area in these nonparticipating communities. (124)
105
-------
The list of communities to which this prohibition applies on July 1, 1975 has
been published by HUD and is regularly updated by notice in the Federal Register.
The second type of enforcement strategy requires individual flood plain
property owners in communities which have joined the program to purchase insur-
ance. Federal agencies will not provide assistance for acquisition or construc-
tion, nor will federally supervised instructions make loans for real estate to
individuals within identified flood hazard areas unless flood insurance is
purchased. Coverage is required up to the amount of the assistance or loan or
the maximum available under the program, whichever is less.
The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 also extended the emergency
program for two years, and delayed the charging of actuarial rates for new
construction until December 31, 1974, or until publication of a flood insurance
rate map for a community. The distinction between this emergency program and
the regular program is very important to the program's objective of discourag-
ing unwise development of flood plains.
The FIA uses "Flood Hazard Boundary Maps" to identify in a community
the areas of special flood hazard; these maps simply delineate the 100-year
flood plain and are the basis for the enforcement strategies. More detailed
flood insurance rate maps are required for a community to join the regular
program and to charge actuarial rates for new construction. Any flood plain
construction initiated prior to publication of the rate map may be purchased
at subsidized rates. In addition, the land use controls required of local
communities are relatively lenient until the rate map is published. To join
the regular program, a community must require that all new flood plain construc-
tion be elevated above or flood proofed to the 100-year flood level. Cnly a
small portion of these have published rate maps and are included in the regu-
lar program. Therefore, completion of flood insurance rate maps is critical
to the effect of the insurance program on flood plain development. (123)
Flood Hazard Boundary Maps, which are maintained on file within each
participating community in a repository designated by the mayor or chief
executive officer, can be used to identify the special flood hazard areas in
a community. The address of such repository is published in the Code of
Federal Regulations (127) and is amended regularly in the Federal Register.
The Flood Insurance Rate Maps, where available, delineate degrees of flood
hazard and include precise area identification. (126)
106
-------
Additional maps, literature, and policy application forms and manuals
are available from any National Federal Administration insurance servicing
company, which is also equipped to answer questions on eligibility of communi-
ties. Questions which can not be answered by individual agents or brokers
or by the appropriate servicing company may be referred to the National Flood
Insurance Association, 1755 Jefferson Davis Highway, Alexandria, VA, 22202
(telephone: 703-920-2070); to the flood insurance representative at the
nearest HUD regional office; or to the National Flood Insurance Program, HUD,
Washington, D.C. 20410 (toll-free telephone 800-424-8872). (126)
4.3.3 First/Second-Level Approach
The analyst should first determine whether any portion of the subarea
has been identified as a special flood hazard area, as shown in a "Flood
Hazard Boundary Map." (Sources of information include the appropriate Flood
Insurance Specialist in the nearest HUD regional office and the State Coor-
dinating Agency—the state agency designated by the Governor to coordinate
the activities of the flood insurance program and to assist communities in
that state.)
Second, the analyst should determine which, if any, portions of
the subarea have submitted an application to FIA. (HUD, or a designated
state agency, can provide this information.)
Third, the analyst should determine if the community has qualified
for the flood insurance program. Officials in the community are advised by
letter of the date that the sale of flood insurance will begin; press releases
announcing the community's eligibility are sent to the community for use by
local newspapers and radio and television stations; notice is also published
in the Federal Register.
Given the above information, the analyst should:
• locate property within the subarea which is subject to
flooding, as defined under the Act; and
• determine what land use control measures apply to the
flood prone areas.
From a review of land use and control measures included in the
applications for the flood insurance program, the analyst should be able
to determine the extent to which development is discouraged in the flood
plain as required by the regulation. (128)
107
-------
By mapping (preferably by overlay) the flood hazard area and by
comparing the location of this area with induced growth locations, identified
in Chapter 2, the analyst can judge the probable level of development in the
flood hazard area. If significant development is likely to occur in the flood
hazard area, and there is no flood insurance program for the community, one
can infer that this development can lead to increased potential for economic
and physical losses from flooding, and that there is, therefore, secondary
impact of the proposed WWTF. If there is induced development in the flood
insurance area, the community has applied to be in the flood insurance pro-
gram, and the rate map has not yet been published, it is likely that there
will initially be rapid development under comparatively lenient local controls,
because developers can purchase flood insurance at subsidized rates, while
not meeting the more stringent standards of the regular program.
If induced development in the flood hazard area is anticipated even
after it is recognized as a flood hazard area, and the community has been
found qualified for the flood insurance program, it is likely that: (1) some
of this projected development will locate elsewhere, due to sanctions inher-
ent in the program; and (2) the development that does occur will meet the
program's requirement for flood proofing. For development which will relocate
out of the flood hazard area, the analyst should consider the next most likely
location and correct any impact observations for these other areas.
4.4 Wildlife Habitats
Wildlife and its habitats are defined as "birds, fish, mammals, and
all other classes of wild animal and all types of aquatic and land vegetation
upon which wildlife is dependent." (129) Fish or wildlife are further
legally defined as "any wild mammal, fish, wild bird, amphibian, reptile,
mollusk, or crustacean, or any part, products, egg, or offspring, or the dead
body or parts thereof." (130)
Use of land in a subarea for agricultural purposes or for parking
lots and high-rise buildings can decrease the extent and types of wildlife
habitat available in the impacted subarea. Wildlife habitat encroachment
can also result from more intense human activity in areas near existing wild-
life habitats. For example, human disturbances can seriously interfere with
the successful pairing, feeding, and nesting of some birds (including the
California condor and the bald eagle), perhaps leading to extinction of
108
-------
these birds in their natural wildlife habitat. Further, the life cycle of
these species can be impacted through introduction of pesticides in urban
areas; these pesticides build up to higher concentrations through the biological
chain and may affect reproduction. Conflict between wildlife use and human
activity is also found where certain species become accepted as targets for
game hunting or for destruction when they infringe on the economic produce of
man's activities. The coyote, the bighorn sheep, and the wolf are examples of
wildlife whose ranges have been infringed upon and whose survival has necessi-
tated concerted preservation effort by persons concerned with the maintenance
of the full spectrum of wildlife species and subspecies. (131)
However, certain species of wildlife have flourished in urban and semi-
urban areas, under proper conditions. For example, deer populations have
increased where cutting of woodlands has permitted new growth for deer forage;
and wild ducks often winter in urban ponds. (132)
Among the various pieces of legislation protecting fish and wildlife is
the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The goal of the Act is to preserve, restore,
and enhance in their natural ecosystems all species of animals and plants that
are endangered with extinction or are so threatened. In addition to require-
ments for identifying and listing species of animals which are endangered and
to providing authority for establishing enforcement actions, the Act provides
for a state grant-in-aid program to carry out endangered and threatened
species protection and management programs.
In order to assess the impact of a proposed WWTF on wildlife habitats,
it is necessary to determine how the project affects the diversity and stabi-
lity of wildlife in the area impacted by the project. It is generally felt
by ecologists that species diversity and stability reflect the state of
health in the wildlife habitat. Actions by man which decrease the diversity
or stability are viewed unfavorably. When a particularly unique or rare
species is endangered by the proposed project, then its survival must be
viewed in a context larger than the immediate area's stability and diversity
(e.g., the species could have national significance).
Rigorous analysis of induced growth impacts on wildlife habitats re-
quires trained field ecologists who know local native species and how these
species fill their respective niches, spatially and temporally. Therefore,
less extensive approaches are usually suggested, unless it becomes clear
that unique or rare species may, indeed, be endangered. The most common
109
-------
approach is assessment, using existing listings (or mappings), of species
which are most likely to inhabit an area of concern. This is the approach
developed in the following section.
4.4.1 First/Second-level Approach—Wildlife Habitat
The analysis which follows is designed to identify wildlife species
and their habitats in the subarea in order to determine (1) existence of
any endangered species; and (2) the extent of possible impacts on all species
(including those endangered) due to induced growth.
Local conservation commissions, city or town departments of natural
resources, local public works departments, local zoological societies, and
Audubon Societies can assist in identifying species present in the area,
their habitats, and any wildlife refuges in and related to the subarea. If
information from these sources is not available or is incomplete, a. field
survey of potentially affected areas may be required (using qualifed agency
staff or consultants) to inventory species present and the resources necessary
to maintain their existing habitats. This inventory should identify the
following habitat characteristics:
• reproductive areas
• escape cover
• feeding areas and sources of food and water
• presence of wildlife refuges or preserves
This inventory should be checked against the List of Threatened or
Endangered Species, obtainable from the U.S. Department of the Interior (131),
state conservation agency, or the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
(Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior). The listing gives
the species name, distinguishing characteristics, present distribution, size
of population, estimated numbers, breeding rate in the wild, reasons for
decline, protective measures already taken, measures proposed, number in
captivity, and bibliograpic references.
A mapping of this information (by overlay) will permit the user to
relate the parcels of land which may be developed, with and without the WWTF,
to the location patterns of species which might be impacted by development.
If a threatened or endangered species will be affected by induced
development and/or population growth, the Department of the Interior, Office
of Endangered Species and Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Offices, should
110
-------
be consulted. The Department is charged by the Endangered Species Conserva-
tion Act of 1969 with the "conservation, protection, restoration, and propa-
gation of selected species of native fish and wildlife, including migratory
birds, that are threatened with extinction." In some cases, the Department
may acquire lands or waters (or interests in lands or waters) under the Land
and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. (134) Moreover, under Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, other Federal departments and agencies are
to coordinate and consult with the Department of the Interior to ensure that
in carrying out their programs, they "...do not jeopardize the continued exis-
tence of...endangered species...or (destroy or modify)...habitat of such
species which is determined by the Secretary (of the Department of Interior)
to be critical."
If negative impact on any species is judged to be potentially signi-
ficant, more detailed studies of inventoried species and habitats may be
necessary. Information should be gathered on food, nesting, cover requirements,
and their relationships to each other and the surrounding environment; plant
materials meeting this requirement; size requirements of habitats; degree of
wildlife tolerance to air, noise, water pollution, and changes in water or
air temperature and humidity, and to human proximity. This information may
have to be obtained from outside professionals in zoology, biology, or botany,
if in-house expertise is unavailable. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife (Division of Wildlife Services, U.S. Department of the Interior) can
do surveys of wildlife population and characteristics, and has done studies
which might be pertinent to the species and area under scrutiny. Field guides
and local checklists from local zoological or conservation societies will be
useful if data must be collected first-hand.
The types of species and impacts which are likely to occur and should
be included in this analysis include the following: amphibians and reptiles
which depend on a habitat very sensitive to environmental changes; frogs which
spawn in pools and need moist, shady woods with much cover; landfill projects
which endanger breeding pools. Bulldozing and dredging are also a threat,
particularly during hibernation, because they remove ground cover and under-
brush. Lowered water tables reduce spawning sites, and egg-eating among re-
maining species may result. Draining and filling removes marshes,- culverts
can enclose creeks. Channelization accelerates runoff and can thus remove
temporary breeding pools. The flow of streams may decrease, reducing food
111
-------
and aquatic habitats. Housing construction and paved roads adversely affect
stream area habitats by removing bank cover, increasing runoff, siltation,
and bank erosion, making some species more vulnerable to predators, and re-
moving burrowing and nesting areas. Urban development can lead to decreases
in dissolved oxygen levels and humidity and to increases in air and water
temperature. Roads can present barriers to seasonal movements of some species,
separate them from food sources, and thus heighten the likelihood of their
being injured or killed while trying to cross. Industrial pollution and septic
tank effluents can kill or decrease aquatic animal or plant life. Pesticides
and herbicides can cause direct destruction of wildlife and habitats, or can
cause detrimental changes in the organisms and increase susceptibility to
disease. Urbanization can endanger common wildlife such as robins. More in-
tensive human activity on the ground makes nesting in lower branches difficult.
However, tree squirrels may find new food sources and be able to adapt well
to developed areas, but may thereby become nuisances to human residences. (132)
Different types of development may have different degrees of impact.
For example, family-type residential development with higher bedroom counts
tends to have more impact on wildlife areas: single-family residential or
garden-type apartment construction characteristic of housing for younger,
larger households require more land area and are associated with children, dogs
and cats, which can cause considerable habitat damage. Housing for the elderly,
with smaller, more compact units and developments, might have less impact.
Outdoor recreation facilities for active sports are more likely to adversely
affect wildlife habitats than facilities for "passive" recreation, such as
nature study, hiking trails, and so on. It may be possible to locate low-
impact development or to avoid development near habitats most sensitive to
disturbance.
Wildlife interest groups in the impact area should be contacted during
the study. Not only may they be able to supply valuable habitat information,
but involving them in the impact study process may produce a better under-
standing and acceptance of the proposed project.
A final step, particularly if threatened or endangered species are
affected, would be the identification of nearby areas which could offer habi-
tats to replace those disturbed or altered or to which the species could be
expected to move. Such areas could be marked for special preservation or
protection; or use could be restricted, depending on present ownership, use,
112
-------
and future development potential. Such a study would, again, require the use
of wildlife management specialists and close coordination with state and
local bodies having jurisdiction over wildlife.
113
-------
5.0 UNIQUE AREAS
Induced development due to the proposed wastewater treatment facility
can affect parklands, wild and scenic rivers, and properties with historic,
architectural, archaeological, or cultural value.
The difficult task of defining values and potential secondary impacts
on these values requires: (1) definition of the importance of these resources
to man's present and future needs; (2) assessment of present and projected
uses of these resources, and the implications of these patterns of use for
inherent resource values; and (3) identification of the protective devices
which might insulate existing values from these secondary effects. Ihis
information is essential to answer the question: "Given projected levels and
patterns of induced growth, are potential impacts on parkland, wild and scenic
river, and historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural values in-
consistent with preservation objectives for these resources?"
The variations of unique area impact analysis described in the follow-
ing sections are all limited, mainly because the extent to which these values
are "preserved" is often a judgment which depends on the perspective of the
observer. For instance, parkland may be preserved in its natural state, thus
supporting a variety of plants and animals, but limiting its capacity for
human use. On the other hand, open spaces may be developed as parklands de-
signed to support relatively intensive human use, thus compromising its diverse
natural variety. Does one of these uses preserve parkland values and the
other destroy them? The answer is largely judgmental, and depends on one's
definition of parkland and appropriate parkland use. Further, in regard to
historic preservation, is proximate growth consistent with preservation of
the intrinsic historic value of an area or structure? Does an historic site
retain the original bucolic atmosphere which may have been part of its
historic value when it is constantly crowded with sightseers? Finally, at
what point does an additional canoe on a wild or scenic river destroy the
feeling of wilderness or scenic value to the users? Similarly, it is diffi-
cult to judge at what point the development of parkland for recreation com-
promises its value for preservation. Conclusions regarding the point of
compromise will depend on professional judgment.
114
-------
5.1 Parkland
Changes in population and economic growth may place pressures on
land, limiting the amount available for parkland use. Growth may lead to
fundamental conflicts regarding intensity of open space and parkland use
and may contribute to deterioration in values, increased costs of maintenance
and management, requirements for new regulation or user fee devices to effec-
tively control demand, and increased costs of acquiring land for parkland
purposes in order to satisfy the entire range of demands for parkland values.
This section examines the WWTF and induced growth impact on parkland
in the subarea in order to determine if the types of effects described above
will be significant.
5.1.1 First-Level Approach—Parklands
The first-level approach consists of definition of existing and pro-
posed local and nonlocal parkland, examination of growth implications for
existing and proposed parkland, and an assessment of the protective devices
which might lessen expected parkland impact. The approach is structured
around three analysis questions.
The first two parallel questions deal with local and nonlocal park-
land impact. The distinction between local and nonlocal parks hinges on
administrative control. Local parkland is defined as that land which is
controlled by individual municipalities in the subarea. Nonlocal parklands
are defined as land over which the community has no direct control; control
can be exercised by a county, region, state, or Federal institution. Usually
these parklands serve as an alternative to local parklands and often play
a role in recreational interests which complement opportunities provided by
local parks.
1. Will the intensity and type of use of local parkland
be increased? And, if so, can it be adequately handled?
Three types of data are required as inputs to address this question.
First, the analyst should refer to the results of analyses in
Chapter 2 (Sections 2.2 through 2.3). These analyses provide maps of portions
of the subarea which will be impacted by growth with and without the proposed
WWTF. A comparison of these two maps should identify those areas where
growth will be less due to the proposed facility and greater due to
construction of the WWTF.
115
-------
Second, for subareas where growth is projected, present parkland
use should be defined. Street and land use maps should identify parks and
their characteristics, including:
• size and use capacity,
• types of use,
• population served (users),
• ownership/control,
• maintenance (responsibility and annual costs),
• sensitive resources (wildlife, vegetation, and water), and
• the nature of past external infringement of other uses into
the parkland.
Third, parks under development should be identified. Local personnel
involved in the operation of public parks and property, including local
planning boards, should provide the following information on parkland being
considered:
• present ownership (including restrictions in deed or by
community),
• size,
• anticipated users (age, residence, how arrive at parkland),
• use (seasonal, diurnal),
• planned capacity,
• sensitive resources (wildlife, vegetation, water),
• expected maintenance (by whom, costs, problems),
• equipment and facilities (capital investment) required, and
• possibilities for expansion.
Based on these three types of information, and with the assistance
of information and services of local recreation planning studies and per-
sonnel, the analyst should:
• determine which future local parklands, fiscal resources, and
maintenance expenditures are to be allocated to those parts
of the community which will undergo growth and', in particular,
growth induced by the proposed WWTF;
• determine whether future intensity of local parkland use, by
type, will be significantly greater than present use;
• determine whether population growth and distribution with the
proposed facility, will cause deterioration of local parkland,
given the availability of existing and anticipated parkland.
116
-------
2. Will the intensity and type of use on nonlocal park-
lands in the future be significantly increased?
Nonlocal parklands may be defined as those over which the community
has no direct control; they may be county, regional, state or Federal park-
lands. Usually, these parklands serve as an alternative to local parklands
and often play a role in recreational interests which complements the uses
provided by local parks.
Recreational officers responsible for nonlocal parklands should
be contacted in order to obtain the same information (as noted above) for
local parklands and to conduct the same type of analysis.
Federal and state parks are most likely to have complete information
available. The National Park Service has the largest jurisdiction over federal
parklands, but the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (U.S. Department of the
Interior) has funds for recreational assistance and does extensive planning
in this area. (135) In addition, the following Bureaus of the Department of
the Interior have jurisdiction over various federally owned parklands:
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is responsible for
conservation of wildlife and natural habitats, with most
of its land found in rural areas;
Bureau of Land Management has jurisdiction over lands for
their consumptive products—minerals, timber, grazing,
etc.—but has authorization to manage the land as a
recreational resource also.
State Park and/or Recreation Departments should be contacted for
information on the extent to which state-owned parklands might be impacted.
Usually such state departments have information on number of visitors, pro-
jection of use, capacities, plans for expansion, etc.
Another possible source of information on parklands in general is the
National Recreation and Park Association.
It will be difficult to distinguish the impact on nonlocal parkland
due to induced growth, particularly as the distance to the nonlocal parkland
increases. Therefore, if the user of the manual can demonstrate that future
growth within the subarea will not be significant enough to increase the
intensity, type of use, and capacity of nonlocal parklands serving the area,
then one can assuredly conclude that there will be no impact on less proximate
parkland. If this is not the case, then the user will have to make a judgment
regarding significance, based on the information as suggested.
117
-------
3. Are legislation and/or interest groups in existence
which might assist in maintaining the existing pur-
poses of the parklands?
All existing and future local and nonlocal parkland should be charac-
terized in terms of ownership and the restrictions which have been placed
on it. For example, some public parkland may have been one given to a local
community in trust, thus assuring its use for a specific purpose. Very often,
parkland bought with assistance of Federal or State funds must be used for
purposes for which the funds were expended. Therefore, it is important to
ascertain how the parkland was acquired; this information is often available
from local and state officials.
Local or regional users of park facilities (ranging from Scout groups
to local environmental organizations) should also be contacted in order to
obtain information from them on the strength of public support for these
parkland values.
The answer to these three questions should be based on a thorough
examination of available information and on interviews with informed indivi-
duals. If analysis indicates that the carrying capacity of local parklands
will be exceeded, that the intensity and type of use on nonlocal parklands
will be significantly increased, or that there will not be sufficient protec-
tion to maintain the quality of existing parklands, then the user has to
clearly ascertain whether this impact is from induced growth or from normal
population growth, which could be expected in the absence of the WWTF. The
second-level approach assists in this regard.
5.1.2 Second-Level Approach—Parklands
The second-level approach should be used for facilities in areas
where there is potential for significant impact, or where existing data
is inadequate to make a conclusive evaluation of the impact using the first-
level approach. In order to assess impact on parklands, it is necessary to
determine parkland "carrying capacity" and assess the impact of increased
usage relative to this capacity. This second-level approach follows the same
analysis logic as the first-level approach, but produces analytical results
with which estimates of potential imbalance between projected use and availa-
ble parkland can be made much more rigorously.
118
-------
At this level, the analyst should develop additional information
on the types of users and demand on parkland under the induced-growth scenario.
Generally, demand for recreational activities can be determined using socio-
economic characteristics and prices willingly paid by the user. (135) Speci-
fically, current income distribution, car ownership, transportation use, and
other demographic data on parkland users in the area and potentially impacted
subareas can, in conjunction with land use and growth estimates with the WWTF,
indicate the types of demands which are likely to be placed on existing and
proposed parkland. (136) (137)
Determination of Carrying Capacity
The refined parkland demand data should be matched with refined park-
land supply information. Specifically, a more precise estimate of parkland
availability is developed through exploration of parkland "carrying capacity."
Carrying capacity is defined as the maximum amount of use that parkland
can sustain without experiencing a decline in user satisfaction of environmental
quality.
A variety of carrying capacity indicators have been developed, includ-
ing "standards" for parkland area per user, facility arrangements, and levels
of service. The user of the manual should review applicable standards, such
as those set by the state for its Outdoor Recreation Plan, those published
by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, as well as those suggested by the
National Recreation and Parks Association. (138) Some individual parks have
adopted standards, particularly larger ones serving regional needs (these
standards may be obtained from the park management). If a park is under
Federal jurisdiction, standards for its use must be established by the
managing agency, under the provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund
Act of 1965. (139) Many states have developed standards for use of state-
owned parks and also for parks under local management. Community leaders
and recreation officials can also be consulted for information on how much
parkland of various types is needed to accommodate a given population without
exceeding established capacity limits.
Environmental standards provide another measure of parkland carrying
capacity which might vary considerably depending on the location, type, and
use of the parkland. Once standards appropriate to the parkland under study
have been defined, they must be applied to the parkland to learn whether the
119
-------
park is presently being used at capacity, whether it is used at capacity only
in certain parts or at certain times of the day or year, and what capacity, if
any, exists for additional use. Current use data may have to be collected.
This might involve a user questionnaire to determine numbers and character-
istics of users, how the parkland is used, and attitudes towards the parkland
and other users. Residents of the neighborhood or wider area served by the
park might also be surveyed.
Comparison of Projected Parkland Demand and Availability
When use standards and estimated capacities of existing parklands
have been defined, projected population increases and patterns of parkland
use (with and without the project) can be used to determine whether existing
parklands will be adequate to accommodate future demand resulting from the
construction of a wastewater treatment facility or whether additional lands
will be needed. For example, if, in a given area, it is learned that a
standard of 8 acres of parkland is needed for each 1000 residents in a typical
urbanized area, and inventories reveal that 32 acres of parkland now serve
an area with 2000 residents, it is clear that this area can accommodate an
increase in population of some 2000 residents without experiencing a degrada-
tion of its parklands through overuse.
However, individual parklands may already experience overuse at
certain times of the day or year or for certain activities. Capacities for
individual parks should, thus, be compared to projected in increases in
particular user populations with an interest in the individual parks within the
subarea of projected growth.
The parklands or parts of the parklands which will be impacted by
population growth induced by the proposed project should be clearly identi-
fied on a map of parklands.
The estimated induced parkland impact will depend to a large extent
on the user's interpretation of the previously described information and data.
A difficulty which can perhaps be expected is distinguishing between a park-
land severely impacted by growth without the WWTF, and the marginal or addi-
tional impact which will result from the induced population growth. In a case
such as this, preservation measures to protect against any future impact would
probably be sufficient to protect the parkland against the induced growth;
120
-------
however, the user of the manual will have to judge whether such measures
are likely to be enacted with sufficient legal sanctions.
5.2 Wild and Scenic Rivers
Wild and scenic rivers are protected under the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act, passed initially in 1968 for the purpose of preserving Ln
a free-flowing condition those rivers or segments of rivers possessing
"outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wild-
life, historic, cultural, or other similar values." (140) Components of
the wild and scenic rivers system may be authorized by Congress or designated
by state legislatures. Criteria for inclusion in this system are found in
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation's Guidelines; (141)
(1) Wild River Areas — Those rivers or sections of
rivers that are free of inpoundments and generally
inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or
shorelines essentially primitive and waters
unpolluted. (142)
(2) Scenic River Areas — Those rivers or sections of
rivers that are free of impoundments with shorelines
or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines
largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by
roads. (143)
(3) Recreational Rivers Areas — Those rivers or sections
of rivers that are readily accessible by road or
railroad, that may have some development along their
shorelines, and that may have undergone some impound-
ment or diversion in the past. (144)
Administration of designated areas may be the responsibility of one
of several Federal agencies or state or local governments. Land or interests
in land within the boundaries of any component of the national wild and scenic
rivers system may be acquired by the Departments of the Interior and Agricul-
ture in order to assure its protection.
Land immediately adjacent to such rivers is also protected; only
activities which do not interfere with characteristics which qualified the
area for inclusion in the system are permitted.
Secondary effects of wastewater treatment facilities on a wild or
scenic river must be assessed, even though a plant may not discharge into a
river or be located near enough to it to be included under Section 1278 of
the Act, which states that: (145)
121
-------
...no department or agency of the United States shall
assist by loan, grant, license, or otherwise in the
construction of any water resources project that would
have a direct and adverse effect on the values for which
such river was established, as determined by the Secre-
tary charged with its administration. Nothing contained
in the foregoing sentence, however, shall preclude
licensing of, or assistance to, developments below or
above a wild, scenic or recreational river area or on
any stream tributary thereto which will not invade the
area or unreasonably diminishes the scenic, recreational,
and fish and wildlife values.
The secondary impacts of WWTF may be considered under the National
Environmental Policy Act, which requires that an environmental impact analysis
must document the environmental impact resulting from growth in the subarea;
in this case, impact can be measured by ascertaining effects on the values
for which such rivers were established. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has
generally been considered by EPA to be one of the environmental laws against
which the potential secondary environmental effects of a construction grants
project can be measured in accordance with the policy set forth in PGM #50. (3)
5.2.1 First-Level Approach—Wild and Scenic Rivers
1. Does the subarea include any wild, scenic, or
recreational river areas included, or proposed for
inclusion, in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers
System?
A listing of the rivers or portions of rivers included in the system
may be obtained from: the nearest office of the U.S. Department of the
Interior; the Department of Agriculture; state departments of agriculture,
public works, or natural resources, etc., and local conservation groups.
Notification of designation is also published in the Federal Register.
If there are rivers, or portions thereof, within the subarea
which are part of the proposed system, the analyst should determine under
which category—wild, scenic, or recreational—the area was designated and
what particular values were used in making the designation. This information
can be obtained from the sources listed above.
If there are rivers within the area which are not designated, but
appear to have wild-scenic attributes, the analyst should refer to the
U.S. Guidelines to determine if these rivers are likely prospects for
designation. The user should refer to the Guidelines with the understanding
that the standards for inclusion of rivers in the wild and scenic system are
122
-------
not absolute nor always binding; the criteria for designation are normally
applied with considerable judgment. The Guidelines also prescribe management
practices to preserve the character of the designated area; again, considerable
judgment is often used. The Guidelines do not prescribe the acceptable
attributes of projects outside the immediate area as they affect wild, scenic,
or recreational rivers; prohibitions relate only to structures or activities
within the designated river area.
2. Are any national forests, wilderness areas, or
wildlife refuges part of the wild and scenic
river area?
If such areas are found to exist, the National Park Service, Depart-
ment of Interior, National Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, Fish
and Wildlife Service, Department of Interior, or state or local agencies having
jurisdiction should be contacted for information regarding sensitive environ-
mental characteristics of the area, protective legislation, etc. (See also
Sections 4.4, 5.1).
3. Will the projected growth and distribution of
population resulting from the WWTF be in the
area designated under the Act?
The analyst should map the boundaries, both land and water, of the
areas designated under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. By matching this map
against the map of projected population growth and distribution (2.3.3),
the analyst can determine if the area will be impacted under the proposed WWTF.
If there will be impact, and if growth is significantly greater than would
have occurred without the WWTFs, then one should determine how it might alter
the character and value of the river. This analysis should consist of a
specific and detailed statement of development which is expected to occur.
The user of this manual should also determine if the proposed sewer
alignment induces growth away from the area designated under the Act. If so,
this positive (reduced growth) impact should also be noted.
4. Will growth be compatible with the purposes of the
designation, under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act?
If projected development reduces pressure on the designated river or
is judged to be compatible with the designated use of the river, this situa-
tion should be documented, and the analyst should turn to next type of impact.
If, however, a river area can be expected to abut areas of growth and change,
123
-------
or be subject to pressures which are incompatible with the purpose for
which it was designated (and this is due to the proposed WWTF), additional
analysis should be undertaken, using the second-level approach.
5.2.2 Second-Level Approach—Wild and Scenic Rivers
Ihe second-level approach should be used only after first-level
analysis is complete. To analyze the significance of the impact of popula-
tion growth and distribution on wild, scenic or recreational rivers, an
analysis of the characteristics of the river first should be undertaken.
All reports, maps, descriptions or other documentation prepared or submitted
to the Secretary of the Interior in connection with an application for includ-
ing the river in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System should be
obtained.
Copies may be available at the state level. The administering
agency should also be contacted for information pertaining to the river area.
It may also be necessary to perform a field inventory to identify features
of the river which qualified it for inclusion in the system. This survey
could be done in conjunction with .surveys or inventories of parklands, wild-
life habitats, wetlands, flood plains, for other sections of the study. Dis-
tinguishing features should be mapped. River characteristics to consider in
this inventory should include, but are not restricted to: access, existing
development, recreation resources (trails, swimming, fishing, hunting, etc.),
permitted and prohibited or regulated activities, presence of wildlife, types
of vegetation, vistas or other scenic features, and easements or rights-of-
way granted.
The analyst should next determine potential secondary impacts. Ways
in which anticipated growth and development might adversely affect the wild
and scenic river area include: development near the area that is visible
from the area and, thus, damages its wild and scenic qualities; runoff from
new access roads nearby adversely affecting soil and water quality; more
heavily travelled access roads which lead to noise and air pollution,
damaging the quality of the wild and scenic environment; more dense human
population which causes migration of some types of wildlife away from the
area (see also Chapter 4 for other impacts on wetlands, flood plains, and
wildlife habitats); increased population and economic activity which leads
to heavier recreational use of the area, raising possibilities of deteriorating
124
-------
water quality, stock of wildlife, and quality of recreational experience (see
also Section 5.1 Parklands). In some cases, evaluation of environmental
effects (such as noise pollution and water quality) should be undertaken by
planners with expertise in those areas if they appear to be potentially
damaging to the wild and scenic river area, thus leading to a violation of
the standards enumerated in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and expanded upon
in the Guidelines.
5.3 Areas of Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, or Cultural
Value
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (PL 89-665) establishes
a national policy for historic preservation, stating "that the historical and
cultural foundations of the nation should be preserved as a living part of
our community life and developed in order to give a sense of orientation to
the American People." The Act directs that the National Register of Historic
Places be expanded to include properties of state and local as well as national
significance, establishes the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and
requires that the Council be allowed a reasonable opportunity to comment on any
undertaking which involves the Federal government and might affect a National
Register property. Executive Order #11593 enlarges the role of the Council
in Federal decision-making by requiring that it be provided an opportunity
to comment on undertakings affecting properties eligible for nomination to
the National Register as well as to those already listed in the National
Register.
Justification for preservation of areas of historic, architectural,
archaeological or cultural values incorporates arguments based on historical,
social, psychological, educational and economic factors. Among these factors,
six rationale for preservation of manmade artifacts and districts are commonly
advanced: (144)
First, it is argued that an environment with cultural
and historical continuity is socially beneficial. A
community ought to preserve some parts of its past in
order to recognize what it is, how it became what it is,
and how it differs from others.
Second, daily life is enriched through preservation
of historic sites and buildings. This assumes that
temporal variety and architectural diversity in the
environment are more desirable than homogeneity and
monotony and that preservation of historic architecture
enriches the environment.
125
-------
Third, preserving the visual reminders of a community's
past allows people to relate to events, ideas, movements,
and persons believed to be important to understand and
honor. Also, the presence of the physical past helps to
fulfill society's expectations and anticipations for the
environment and promotes well-being.
Fourth, it is argued that notable architecture and
landscapes should be preserved on the basis of their in-
trinsic value as art.
Fifth, in some cases, preservation of historic areas
stabilizes or increases the economic base of their locales.
This is the prevailing justification for the approval of
historic district ordinances by State Supreme Courts.
Lastly, socially oriented preservation programs can
be important for maintaining socioeconomic characteris-
tics of neighborhoods. In the few cases where preserva-
tion programs are so directed, they may complement tradi-
tional urban renewal programs, with the advantage that
displacement of residents is not necessarily required.
Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), one stated environ-
mental policy goal is to "preserve important historic, cultural, and natural
aspects of our national heritage and maintain, wherever possible, an environ-
ment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice." (147) In
order to meet this objective and those set forth under other relevant Acts
and authorities (148), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has
defined "Procedures for Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties,"
commonly referred to as "Part 800." (149) In order to meet the objective of
NEPA and its other objectives, the Advisory Council has instructed Federal
agencies to coordinate NEPA compliance with its other responsibilities, thereby
assuring that proper consideration is given historic and cultural resources in
the preparation of environmental impact statements. Where both NEPA and the
National Historic Preservation Act or Executive Order #11593 are applicable,
the Council on Environmental Quality has directed that compliance with Section
102 (2)(C) of NEPA should, to the extent possible, be combined with other
statutory obligations to yield a single document which meets all applicable
requirements. (150) The obligations of a Federal agency pursuant to the
National Historic Preservation Act and Executive Order #11593 are independent
from NEPA and must be complied with even when an environmental impact state-
ment is not required. (149)
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's policy is that the proce-
dural requirements of the Advisory Council regulations apply solely to the
primary effects of a Federal project. (151) EPA's responsibility to analyze
secondary effects of properties arises under NEPA and is therefore governed
by NEPA procedures. (152)
126
-------
In particular, any action which may have an effect on a National
Register property or an historic place which appears eligible for listing
in the National Register must go through two integral but separate review
procedures. First, an environmental impact assessment identifies those re-
sources potentially affected by the proposed project. Second, where identi-
fication of these resources indicates that properties included in the National
Register may be affected, evidence of compliance with the review requirements
of 36 CFR Part 800 must be included in the environmental impact assessment and/
or EIS Comments by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. These re-
quirements are more fully described (in sequential steps) in the following
pages.
In addition to the review process established by the National
Preservation Act of 1966, up to fourteen departments of Federal agencies ad-
minister important programs affecting preservation (153) and which must,
therefore, be considered in the analysis of WWTF secondary impact. The most
significant programs are described below.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (under the Housing
Act of 1949) has operated several programs significant to preservation efforts
(chiefly the Open Space, Urban Beautification, and Section 709 Historic Pre-
servation Grant programs). Most of these programs were suspended by executive
order in January 1973, although some may not as yet have been closed out.
The Department of Transportation under Section 2(b)(2) and 4(f) of
the 1966 Transportation Act is required to make special efforts to preserve
historic sites and structures. No approval of any transportation project af-
fecting historic property of Federal, state, or local interest may be made if
possible alternative exist.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (Public Law 88-578, 1964) pro-
vides matching funds for outdoor recreation purposes, including archaeological
and historic sites.
Federal Executive Order #11593, February 1972, requires all Federal
agencies to survey all their lands and buildings and nominate appropriate ones
to the National Register. The agency is then required to make positive action
plans to protect all lands and buildings so listed.
While not aimed specifically at local preservation programs, general
revenue sharing funds may be used for these purposes and have been so used
in several cases.
127
-------
All fifty states now have federally approved statewide historic pre-
servation plans. In 1972, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
identified and analyzed state laws and prepared guidelines for state legisla-
tion in an attempt to achieve generally more comprehensive and consistent
programs. (154) These guidelines propose creation of state agencies which,
to some extent, replicate existing agencies at the federal level.
With this background in mind, the analyst should proceed with
secondary impact analysis through application of the following sequence
of tasks:
(a) locate, inventory, evaluate and describe all pro-
perties which fall within the guidelines and which
may be impacted by the WWTF;
(b) assess the extent and type of impact which may occur
on these properties, and any mitigating steps which
are available to reduce adverse impacts;
(c) coordinate, when applicable, plans, program, pro-
cedures and activities with the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation, the Secretary of Interior,
State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO), The
National Trust for Historic Preservation, the
Smithsonian Institution, and other Federal, State,
or local historic organizations.
5.3.1 First-Level Approach
Step 1. Identify Properties of Historic, Architectural,
Archaeological or Cultural Value Subject to
Secondary Impacts.
If a proposed wastewater treatment facility funded in part or whose by
Federal funds is likely to have secondary impacts on properties which are
listed in the National Register of Historic Places (published in the Federal
Register each February with supplements on the first Tuesday of each month)
or eligible to be listed there, these properties should be identified and
applicable statutes and regulations adhered to.
Identification of properties begins with consulting the State His-
torical Preservation Officer (SHPO), the National Register, and its supple-
ments. The Register lists, by state, places of national, state, or local
architectural, archaeological and cultural, as well as strictly "historic"
significance. The significant character of property which qualifies for
inclusion in the National Register is contained in the brief description
128
-------
of each property in the Register. (The Register may be available at larger
public libraries, or a listing of the state's register properties may be
obtained from the SHPO).
To identify properties eligible for inclusion in the National Register,
National Register criteria can be applied, in consultation with the SHPO,
to properties in the subarea where growth is expected to occur. Historic
resources in the subarea may be identified by a variety of means, including
a "windshield survey," researching the results of historical, archaeological
and architectural surveys of the subarea by public and private groups or
organizations, and direct examination of the subarea by historians, archi-
tects, and archaeologists. This inventory and analysis should focus on re-
sources which are most likely to be affected by the proposed project. If the
analyst finds an unlisted property within the subarea which might meet eli-
gibility criteria, this information should be recorded on a National Register
inventory/nomination form; this is necessary to determine eligibility and, thus,
whether the potential for impact under this section is likely. (149) If
properties included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register
are not identified in the area of possible impact, the analyst should so
document. If such properties are identified, however, the analyst can deter-
mine whether the proposed project will have an effect upon them, and, if so,
to what extent.
Step 2. Identify probable secondary impacts of the proposed
WWTF on these properties.
To identify possible secondary impacts of the project, the analyst
should consider all possible ways in which changes in population, economic
growth, and land use may have beneficial or adverse effects on the quality
of the historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural character that
quality the properties under the National Register criteria. (149) Probable
ways in which changes induced by the construction of wastewater treatment
facilities would affect properties of historic, architectural, archaeological,
or cultural significance include: changes in the surrounding environment;
changes of usage; intrusions which would be inconsistent with the properties
or which would alter their setting; or actions which would make the property
more "economically attractive" for new construction.
Further, induced impact depends on the nature and significance of
the property and its protection from development pressures. The National
Register description indicates whether the resource has national, state or
129
-------
local significance and also why it qualifies for listing. An inspection of
the property and its surroundings, and an examination of local and use and
zoning, should provide information sufficient to assess the likelihood of
changes in the environment, as based on land use projections, and adverse
effects on the property itself.
If, for example, an historic home of national significance is situa-
ted on a relatively small lot surrounded by acres of open space suitable for
residential development and the proposed project will provide sewer service
to that open land, it is highly likely that new development will occur. In
this situation, this development will probably conflict with the rural setting
and earlier architectural style of the historic property. If, on the other
hand, the property is a church of exceptional architectural significance to
the area, and is presently surrounded by single family dwellings, it is
unlikely that sewer service through the area would change the setting or
affect the usage of the church to any significant degree, given that the
neighborhood will remain at roughly the same density.
If there are no projected impacts, the analysis may stop at this step.
Step 3. Determine the severity of the impact.
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation procedures include the follow-
ing criteria of adverse effect: (149)
(a) Destruction or alteration of all or part of a property;
(b) Isolation from or alteration of its surrounding environ-
ment;
(c) Introduction of visual, audible, or atmospheric elements
that are out of character with the property or alter its
setting;
(d) Transfer of sale of a federally-owned property without
adequate conditions or restrictions regarding preservation,
maintenance, or use; and
(e) Neglect of a property resulting in its deterioration or
destruction.
All of these are potential effects that could result from secondary
impacts. Which impacts will actually occur at a specific property depend
upon projected land uses, the rate of change of these uses, and the adequacy
of protection given the site.
Projected land use changes, if expected in the area immediately sur-
rounding the listed site, must be considered as to whether they will detract
from the setting of the property itself. Increased economic activity in the
130
-------
project area might cause increases in traffic or access streets, making it
more difficult to reach or necessitating construction; increases in the numbers
and types of people who use the property could adversely affect it. Isolation
by changed land use or difficult access could cause a decline in use and sub-
sequent neglect of the property. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
requires that one apply its "criteria of adverse effect" in consultation with
the State Historic Preservation Officer. A list of names and addresses of
SHPO's, along with criteria and procedures for nomination of a property to
the National Register, is available in a booklet How to Complete National
Register Inventory-Nomination Forms. (155) Consultation with local historic
and/or archaeological societies in evaluating the significance of the cultural
property and of possible impacts to it would also be useful at this stage.
Local planners, university historians, archaeologists, and local architects can
provide feedback on the effects of projected population, economic, and land use
changes on the property so that the analyst can determine the degree of impact.
Step 4. Determine applicable state and local laws and ordinances.
In addition to compliance with Federal laws and regulations, state
and local laws and ordinances and legal devices protecting or affecting areas
of historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural value must also be
identified and followed. (Ordinances which permit historic zoning, transfer
of development rights, or preservation easements may mitigate potential
secondary impacts.)
Step 5. Make a map of the properties and areas of historic
architectural, archaeological, or cultural values.
Ihis map should be used to document and summarize the location and
characteristics of all historic properties and facilities. Used in conjunction
with growth projection maps (with and without the project) the analyst should
have documentation adequate to support the initial finding of projected induced
growth impact significance.
5.3.2 Second-Level Approach
The second-level approach is required only if significant adverse
impacts have been identified.
Step 1. Before the following steps of this second-level
approach are initiated, the analyst must proceed
through the five first-level steps.
131
-------
Step 2. Carry out consultation process - If it appears
that significant adverse impacts may result from
the project, primary data collection is essential
to characterize property values and actions
necessary to reduce or eliminate adverse effects.
This data collection may require special ex-
pertise and could be time-consuming and expensive,
depending upon the information needed. Other
agencies or outside consultants may be brought
in, particularly for such things as archaeo-
logical site and historic preservation data
collection and analysis.
The consultation process required by and described in the Advisory
Council procedures is quite extensive and involves on-site inspections by
the SHPO, staff members, the Advisory Council, and other representatives of
concerned national, state, and local governments and public and private organi-
zations; public information meetings; and consideration of any "prudent
and feasible" alternatives available to avoid and/or lessen adverse effects.
Most of the burden for conducting these meetings and considering alternatives
and ways to avoid or mitigate adverse effects rests with the SHPO and the
Executive Director of the Advisory Council; thus, only in rare instances of
extreme adverse effect would agency collection of primary source data on the
property and impacts actually be required. When such information must be
obtained by the user of this manual, qualified professionals should summarize
data on the following characteristics:
• The setting of the property having historic, archi-
tectural, archaeological or cultural value. What types
of land use about the property? What is the view of
and view from the property? Are there surrounding or
nearby land uses or activities related to or parti-
cularly compatible with the property? Are there
particularly incompatible uses?
• Use of the property. For what purpose(s) is the pro-
perty used? How often is it used? Is it open to
the public? If so, when and is there a change? If
not, who does use it? What kinds of people use it? —
family groups, tourists, students, professional re-
searchers or scientists, artists?
• Accessibility of the property. How do users get to
it? Are existing streets and parking facilities (if
any) adequate? Is accessibility now a problem?
• Sensitivity of the property to environmental changes.
Are materials sensitive to changes in temperature,
humidity, or level of air pollution? Are there
structures or instruments which are sensitive to
noise or vibrations?
132
-------
• State and local laws or ordinances. Is the property
protected by any other statutes? (e.g., historic zone)
The above information may be obtained from on-site inspections
of the property; contact with local historic and archaeological societies,
curators or custodians of the property, other government agencies having
jurisdiction (e.g.. National Park Service); land-use maps, highway maps,
USGS maps. Local historic or cultural societies should be consulted for
any documents or material relating to the resource's history and use and
relationship to the culture of the area, region, or country. If the re-
source is used by local or regional professionals, they should be con-
sulted regarding the research potential of the property. If the resource
is heavily used by the general public, questionnaires or on-the-spot inter-
views might be administered to gain an understanding not only of how the
resource is used and perceived, but how users view potential changes in the
property's surroudings, setting, or use.
State, local, or university historians, architects, or archaeologists
provide consultation. State historical and archaeological societies or other
larger historic preservation agencies sometimes can provide professional
services. Regional offices of the National Park Service can recommend archaeo-
logists and others who are engaged in such work. Regional offices of the
NPS, under recent legislation, will be able to conduct services for other
agencies in the identification, protection, and enhancement of historic and
cultural properties. Until procedures are developed, agencies needing help
should direct inquiries to the Director, Office of Archaeological and His-
toric Preservation, National Park Service, Department of the Interior, 18th
and C Sts. NW, Washington, D.C. 20240; private assistance is also available.
Even though a property may be identified as being of historic, archi-
tectural, archaeological or cultural significance, it may still be subject to
physical desecration or destruction. That is, a property may be placed on
the National Register List through application of the required process; if,
subsequently, the owner can demonstrate that only by new construction is there
an economically feasible use for the property, it may be taken off the Register
List. This usually happens as a result of a court suit. In this situation,
impact may be minimized to some extent if a thorough documentation is made
(measurements, pictures, etc.) of the property value in historic or cultural
terms.
133
-------
Based on information gathered by the analyst, a judgment is required
on the extent to which significant properties are protected, given projected
adverse developmental impacts.
134
-------
6.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURAL ENTERPRISE, ENERGY PRODUCTION AND
CONSUMPTION, AND LAND VALUES
The provision of sewers to an agricultural area may be the factor
which is sufficient to initiate development for nonagricultural uses, although
sewer location decisions alone are typically not the only factor contributing
to development. Potential changes in agricultural land use are, incidentally,
addressed in environmental impact statement requirements where assessment of
the impact of treatment works or plans must include estimates of adverse impact
on agricultural production. (156)
A different pattern of urbanization following sewer facility develop-
ment can also affect energy production and consumption. Major impact on energy
consumption is due to changes in transportation and housing patterns, since
these two activities typically account for over one-half of urban energy use.
Housing pattern changes can affect energy consumption in a number of ways.
For instance, shifts from detached single-family housing to high rise resid-
dential apartment units can significantly affect consumption, since high-rise
apartments consume approximately 45% less energy per dwelling unit. (157)
Better planning, clustering, and higher density development can reduce trans-
portation-related energy use through reductions in per-trip energy use and
shifts to more efficient forms of transportation. (157)
Sewer facility location, as one factor influencing patterns of
development and urbanization, can also affect land values. The potential
of higher density as an alternative use to current patterns of land use can
significantly increase land values; to the extent that these alternative
uses are motivated or enabled by the existence of sewer facilities, land value
impact must be included as a secondary economic impact type.
Section 6.1 describes the approach to analysis of agricultural land
use impacts, while Sections 6.2 and 6.3 similarly examine the secondary energy
use and property value impacts from sewer facility development and location
decisions.
6.1 Impact on Agriculture
An analysis of land use trends for agricultural and nonagricultural
activities shows that, from a national perspective, total agricultural uses
by category (cropland, grassland pasture and range, forest land, etc.) have
not changed significantly in the last twenty years. However, irrigation,
135
-------
drainage and clearing have added three times as much land annually to the
cropland as urbanization absorbs. (157) While cropland has not contracted,
harvested acreage has apparently dropped significantly. (158) Nevertheless,
farm mechanization, fertilization, and other gains in farm production effi-
ciency have boosted yield per-acre and per farm employee enough that total
output has kept pace with demand.
Given these national land use and agriculture productivity trends,
one might initially conclude that pressures place upon agricultural land
and farm operations by proposed WWTF construction won't influence the supply/
demand situation in agricultural product markets. However, if one's analytical
perspective is shifted to regional commodity markets and to developmental
impacts on individual farm units, three entirely different developmental impli-
cations emerge.
First, farm produce is typically consumed, with seasonal variations,
within a few hundred miles of the place of production in rural areas surround-
ing metropolitan consuming areas. Therefore, even if local markets are
augmented by produce imported from other parts of the U.S., loss of local
agricultural land to nonagricultural uses may contribute to price rises, due
to added cost of transportation and refrigeration.
Second, increases in the value of agricultural land for alternative
(nonagriculture) uses may be the result of a combination of technological
developments in farm operations and development pressures. Although the
application of newer, more efficient farming technology results in greater
production per acre, it often requires a minimal farm size which is larger
than many existing farm units. Therefore, farms must either expand or become
less competitive than other, larger farm units which can effectively apply
new technology. At the same time, land values may rise to the point where
capital costs of expansion become prohibitive.
A survey of farms transferred during a five-year period (ending March 1,
1974) showed that, of these farms, (159)
70 percent of the transfers and 78 percent of the acreage trans-
ferred will probably continue in agricultural use. Eighteen
percent of the acreage transferred was expected to become rural
residences, six percent was expected to go into subdivisions,
and about one percent into commercial or industrial development
in the next five years.
136
-------
However, it is important to note that in Pennsylvania about 25% or the
farm real estate transfers were additions to existing farm operations. This
is consistent with longer term trends in Pennsylvania, for in the period
from 1950 to 1969, the number of farms declined by more than half, but the
remaining farms increased by about 45% in average size. (159) However, on
Long Island, an area undergoing tremendous urban pressures, farmland acreage
in Suffolk County decreased from 123,000 acres in 1950 to 68,000 acres in 1972.
This is typical of the increasing losses of agricultural land due to urban
expansion and appreciation of land values. (160)
The third trend in agricultural land use follows from a set of
economic factors which encourage concentration and/or taking land out of
agricultural use. Specifically, where property taxes are based on "highest
and best use," and not on existing (agricultural) use, taxes as a percentage
of income may increase dramatically when the area becomes "ripe" for develop-
ment. Also, increases in energy costs (which are significant farm costs)
have multiple effects; not only have fuel (for machinery) and fertilizer
costs increased, but their usage has become more important as farm operations
have become more mechanized.
Thus, to the extent that wastewater treatment facilities encourage
development (i.e., increase the value of farm land for alternative uses by
permitting higher density development) and add to increasing farm operating
costs, a number of important regional and local trends in agricultural land
use and agricultural production may be accelerated. However, local land use
policy could provide significant protection to discourage conversion of agri-
cultural land to nonagricultural uses.
We can examine these agricultural impacts on the following three
dimensions:
1. Operation Changes — Local population pressures resulting from
development in areas adjacent to farm property may have the
following types of effects:
— fertilizer, other supplies, machinery and equipment may be
more readily available at less cost due to increased demand
and reduced transportation costs per unit;
— local supplies of capital and labor could be directed to
competing opportunities in nearby developing areas, thereby
increasing farm operating costs,-
— the market for farm products may become less centralized,
thus increasing distribution costs;
137
-------
— the problem of operating any commercial enterprise—crime,
pilferage, damage—may increase because of urbanization and
the proximity of population growth.
2. Intensification — Productivity gains may increase at a faster
rate than inflation, costs of operation, and replacement costs.
Nevertheless, it is likely that a combination of taxes, land
valuation and various other costs of doing business will lead
to more intensive use of the land, either by conversion of
unused acreage to production, shifts to products with higher
unit values, or both.
3. Conversion — Finally, as noted above, individual farm units,
under a combination of pressures, may eventually have higher
present values to their owners in nonagricultural uses. That
is, combined with shortages of sources of capital and increased
risks due to reliance on special or single crops, owners may
receive a greater return from some other form of land use,
or as part of larger farms which can be more competitive.
6.1.1 First-Level Approach—Agriculture
1. Is farming a significant activity in the subarea and are
agricultural products significant?
Utilizing maps of land use patterns in the subarea (Sections 2.2.1
through 2.3) the analyst should tabulate and summarize acreage in different
land uses and the percentage of total acreage in the area found in each
use. This display and tabular summary should provide the following detail
(in acreage and percent of total) regarding agricultural land use:
• cropland and available grassland pasture and range
• cropland by subcategory; harvested, crop failure, cultivated
summer fallow, and soil improvement and idle cropland
• harvest cropland by major types of crops produced
• agricultural land by soil classification type
• employment in the area in agricultural activity versus other
job classifications
Data on land use by category are found in the following sources:
• The 1974 Census of Agriculture provides state-level data on:
- number of farms
- use of land
- types and value of product
138
-------
• The Soil Conservation Service publishes soil classification
data for soil conservation districts in all states (same as
used in sedimentation analysis).
• County and multicounty development plans may already include
analysis of other secondary source information in convenient
form and at sufficient depth for this analysis.
• The U.S. Census of Employment provides data at the county level
on. employment in agricultural and other industrial categories.
• The Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
publishes reports on current situations in various commodity
markets.
• Many State Departments of Agriculture and county agents can
provide detailed information.
The analyst should examine these data on existing agricultural
land use patterns and determine if there is significant farming activity
in the area. The definition of "significant" must, of necessity, be
judgmental. In terms of actual land use allocated to cropland, the user
can use as a benchmark the average for all land in crop use as a percentage
of all U.S. property. Thus, if 21% or more of the land in the area is crop-
land, agriculture could be considered "significant."
A second measure of significance uses the market characteristics
for locally produced crops. That is, if the crops are consumed locally,
one can conclude that, regardless of the amount of land in agricultural use,
agricultural activity is important in terms of availability and cost of
staple food products in this local farm commodity market.
Finally, soil classification of harvested lands should be examined
in order to determine potential productivity. If soil quality is known to
be high, and therefore highly productive in farm uses, this attribute should
be considered in assessing the significance of agricultural activity.
If, based on the above information, the use of the manual concludes
that farming is not a significant activity in the subarea and that the
agricultural products.grown in the subarea are not significant then it is
likely that there will be no significant impact on agricultural land use if
the proposed WWTF is constructed. If, on the other hand, agricultural
activity is judged to be significant, then the second-level approach to assess-
ment of agricultural impacts should be applied.
139
-------
6.1.2 Second-Level Approach—Agriculture
The first step of this approach is to determine whether there actually
is a significant level of farming activity in the subarea, and whether there
are significant agricultural products grown in the subarea. The first-level
approach outlines how this can be done. If one can conclude that (1) farming
activity is not significant and (2) no significant agricultural products are
grown in the subarea/ then this should be sufficient to conclude that there
will be no significant secondary impact on agricultural land use.
If either or both conditions for significance exist, the second-level
analysis is applied to determine:
• historical stability of agricultural use of land
• stability of farm units
• insulation of farm units from development pressures
The first two attributes can be arranged to generate a typology of
relative stability of agriculture land use as follows:
Historical Stability of
Agricultural Land Use in
the Subarea
Unstable Stable
Stability of Farm Units
in the Subarea
Unstable
Stable
B
The extent of legal and other devices in existence which insulate
agricultural property from external pressures can alter these historically
stable or unstable trends in land use in the future.
It is uncertain whether, given the conditions stated in Box A,
any insulation from development pressures could protect agricultural land from
development pressures. If there are no effective protective devices, it is
virtually certain that impact will be significant; the extent of this impact
due to the proposed project would then depend upon the amount of development
directed to farmland which would not otherwise have occurred there. This
judgment may be determined from the set of maps developed in Chapter 2 (Sections
2.21 through 2.3).
140
-------
At the other extreme (Box D) are conditions under which there would
probably be little impact on agricultural lands and farms, especially if
currently stable conditions are reinforced by strong legislation which protects
farm use from development pressures.
Probably the next most stable situation is Box B, where pressures for
concentration lead to transfers of farmland to create larger farms, thereby
decreasing the number of farms but maintaining the total amount of land in
agricultural use. In this context, legislative protection of agricultural
lands could effectively protect against future long-run development pressures.
Instability in land usage for agricultural purposes coupled with stabi-
lity of individual farm units (as represented by Box C) could be affected by
the implementation of measures to insulate agricultural use of the land; the
effectiveness of such measures would depend upon the type of development
pressures. For example, it is common to find the sale of several small housing
lots by a farmer who is maintaining back acreage for agricultural purposes.
In this situation, availability of sewers could induce development of the
agricultural land; such development could be discouraged entirely or at least
delayed through effective legislation which insulated agricultural use of
the farm land.
Given these situations, we turn to methods for determining the stabi-
lity of agricultural land in the subarea, the stability of the farm units
in the subarea, the measures available to protect agricultural lands and
farms from developmental pressures, and the extent to which WWTFs would
encourage development of agricultural lands.
In order to determine the stability of agricultural land use in
the subarea, it is necessary to assess the economic pressures that may have
produced significant shifts from agricultural to nonagricultural use. Data
from the Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the
U.S. Census of Agriculture/ state agriculture agencies, local farm interest
groups, and multicounty or regional planning bodies can usually provide
information to help answer this question.
The information should be examined from two perspectives:
• Trends in agriculture concentration: what is the pattern of
land transfers between farm units?
• Trends in loss of agricultural land: what is the pattern of
transfers to nonagricultural use?
141
-------
•Hie analyst should examine these trends (rates of changes) and
determine whether agriculture use in the subarea has been stable, declining,
or growing.
To determine whether farm units are stable, the analyst must examine
historical trend data on the number of farm units operating in the subarea.
A significant historical trend of shifts out of agricultural land use could
indicate that the farm industry is not stable, although this trend could
result from other factors, Therefore, an independent examination of farm
operations should assist in formulating an initial impact judgment. That is,
if local farm units tend to show signs of health (survival) in terms of reven-
ues, profitability, and capitalization, then the proposed WWTF may have little
if any immediate impact on agricultural land use; conversely, in a declining
agricultural area, secondary impacts could be more immediate and significant.
The Economic Research Service publishes analyses of farm operations
which provide national industry benchmark data. (161) (162) Local data on
the agricultural industry may be available from State and County Agricultural
Agencies; State Agricultural Schools should also be of assistance -in deter-
mining historical trends.
The extent to which farm land may be affected can be determined by
comparing the maps of probable development, with and without the proposed
WWTF. Since sewers tend to concentrate the population at higher densities,
it is possible, given a sewer alignment not in an agricultural area, that
there will be less potential agricultural impact with the proposed facilities.
Finally, it is necessary to determine what measures exist to protect
agricultural lands from development pressures. Public policy considerations
in some locales have culminated in local tax, zoning, or other actions which
serve to protect or "insulate" farms from some of the pressures for intensi-
fication and conversion associated with local development. The analysis
should, therefore, include an investigation of applicable statutes or
ordinances, a determination of their application, and a finding as to their
effectiveness relative to the development pressures identified.
The Economic Research Service publishes surveys which should assist
in this regard. (163) (164) Data from these surveys should be updated and
checked through discussion with personnel in state departments of agriculture
or local offices of Federal agencies. These discussions should focus on
recent changes in state zoning or differential assessment laws. Moreover,
142
-------
the user of the manual should determine if statutes (other than zoning/
assessment) intended to protect farms from development pressures might have
been recently enacted or are presently under consideration.
A particular type of technique that should be identified and
analyzed, if appropriate, is generally titled "less-than-fee-simple." The
technique may be implemented in a variety of forms, but basically combines
the "assessed tax values under farm use" features of differential assessment
laws with sale of title to development rights to government. These combined
features are intended to reduce short-term pressures, such as heavy taxation,
and minimize long-term incentives to sell agricultural land for nonagricultural
use. The underlying principal is that, by providing immediate opportunity
to sell nonagricultural development rights to the government at a higher value
while still maintaining the land in farm use, the farmer should receive non-
agricultural value for his land while maintaining it in its present use.
Examples of this and other techniques have been described in various publi-
cations. (163,164,165,166,167,168,169)
In summary, this second-level analysis requires that the analyst collect
data and conduct analyses which will determine the stability of agricultural
land use, stability of farm units, development pressures focused on the
agricultural lands by proposed projects, and effectiveness of available
legislation which could insulate agricultural land from development for non-
agricultural purposes. On the basis of these analyses, the user should
develop a reasoned judgment regarding potential agricultural impact of
induced development.
6.2 Impact on Demand for Energy
Interest in existing patterns of land use and land use planning issues
has increased among Federal, state, and local officials because of recognition
that land use patterns, housing location and density, and transportation
system configurations directly affect levels of energy consumption. Conversely,
changes in costs and availability of energy can affect consumption of energy
and thereby affect land use patterns and transportation systems.
The analysis approach developed in the following subsections is
designed to assist the analyst in identifying WWTF-induced land use implica-
tions for energy demand. First, an examination of historic patterns of energy
use focuses on the implications of these historic patterns for future energy
143
-------
demand. Next, the identification of the major sewer-induced effects which
could alter these historic energy use patterns is made. Third, a specific
series of data collection and analysis steps is suggested to identify the
magnitude of these sewer-induced shifts in energy demand.
6.2.1 National Patterns of Energy Availability and Use
Future demand or consumption of energy depends largely on historic
use patterns and availability by type of energy source, the form of use,
the sectors of energy consumption, and price. This section examines national
energy data in order to provide some context for consideration of land use
change impacts on energy use in Section 6.2.2.
Figure 6.1 summarizes the approximate flow of energy through the
economy in 1971. (170) The figure identifies, for one period of time, the
pattern of demand by type of energy resource, broken down as follows:
• nuclear power
• hydropowe r
• natural gas
• petroleum and natural gas liquids
• coal
Moreover, the figure shows the relative importance of energy resources
by form of energy use: generation of electricity versus consumed in end uses.
Regardless of intended productive use (electricity generation or other end-use
consumption), significant waste occurs. Overall, the table shows that 40.4%
of total energy production is wasted, with the greatest "inefficiency"
occuring in generation and transmission of electricity.
Energy source-use information is given an historical perspective when
one analyzes consumption by energy source and consumption by form of use. In
the period from 1920-1970, a significant trend emerges from the analysis of
longitudinal data. Coal drops tremendously in significance relative to other
types of energy sources: from supplying over 78% of total energy sources
(1920) to only 20% (1970), with petroleum and natural gas increasing from
13.5% and 4.2%, respectively, to 43% and 32.8% (1970), respectively, of total
energy consumed. (171)
The three types of end-use sectors identified in Figure 6.1 (household
and commercial, transportation, and industrial) may be grouped as follows,
in terms of specific types of energy users:
144
-------
Figure 6.1
APPROXIMATE FLOW OF ENERGY THROUGH
THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY, 1971
PPO> DUCT/OH
CROSS
CONSUMPTION
ENERGY USED POP
ELECTRICITY
PETROLEUM AND
NATURAL GAS
v LIQUIDS
196
FUEL CONSUMED
IN END USES
476
250
ENERGY LOST IN GENERATION
AND TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY
101
END-use CONSUMPTION
HOUSEHOLD AND
COMMERCIAL
163
TRANSPORTATION
172
INDUSTRIAL
19.6
.EXPORTS 1.6
E. COOK. I97S
Source: "Statement of Earl Cook," The Impact of Growth on the
Environment. (170)
145
-------
Household and Commercial space heating
air conditioning
cooking
lighting
water heating
machines & appliances
Transportation automobiles, trucks & buses
railroads
aviation, etc.
Industrial blast furnaces, smelters
oil refining
mining
chemicals
stone, clay, glass
food, paper and other
Data on historical trends in energy use by these end-use sectors over
a twenty-year period have been tabulated. Probably the most significant varia-
tion in use patterns occurs with electricity. Electric utilities, treated as
a consuming sector of energy, have increased their proportion of total energy
consumption from 15.1% in 1950, to 24.7% in 1970 (a large portion of this
increase was at the expense of the industrial sector). Examination of electric
utility energy production by ultimate consumer of electricity indicates that
the largest increase is in households and commercial, which increased from
29.5% of electric utility energy consumption in 1950 to 34.3% in 1970. (171)
6.2.2 Sewer-Induced Land Use Change and Energy Use Patterns
The analysis of energy implications of land use change is focused
on shifts in transportation patterns, housing location and population density
for two reasons. Changes in transportation and residential energy use have
potentially the greatest impact on efficiency of energy usage; residential
units are a major consumer of electricity which has roughly an efficiency of
31% (or a 69% wastage), and on fuels for transportation, which have an
efficiency of 25% (or 75% inefficiency). (Efficiency of these end uses
compare with roughly 75% efficiency of fuel use for other applications. (172)
Second, as shown in Figure 6.2 (173) transportation and space heating uses for
energy are the largest components of total energy use.
A review of relevant literature indicates that both transportation
and residential energy uses are affected by housing types and locations.
High-rise apartments, for instance, are estimated to consume 45% less energy
146
-------
Figure 6.2
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Transportation (fuel; excludes lubes
and greases)
Space heating (residential, commercial)
*
Process steam (industrial)
*
Direct heat (industrial)
Electric drive (industrial)
Feedstocks, raw materials (commercial,
industrial, transportation)
Water heating (residential, commercial)
Air conditioning (residential, commercial)
Refrigeration (residential, commercial)
Lighting (residential, com»ercial)
Cooking (residential, commercial)
Electrolytic processes (industrial)
TOTAL
Percent
of
Total
24.9%
17.9
16.7
11.5
7.9
5.5
4.0
2.5
2.2
1.5
1.3
1.2
97.1%
Source: Patterns of Energy Consumption in the United States. (173)
147
-------
per unit for all residential purposes than detached single-family houses. (4)
These savings stem mainly from energy use for residential heating and cooling;
the smaller the units, the greater the insulation, and the greater number of
"common walls," the less energy per unit used. Further, high-rise apartments
also "concentrate" a. large number of persons nearer their places of employment,
making it possible to have less vehicle miles traveled per day and to shift
to higher density fcrms of mass transportation made feasible by higher density.
(174)
6.2.3 First/Second-Level Assessment of Energy Impact
Energy impact assessment begins with definition of current energy
use in end-use sectors in the subarea. Data for this purpose may be obtained
from a variety of sources, including:
• county government, or multicounty planning bodies,
• private trade associations, including retailers and
wholesalers of gasoline, natural gas, and other
petroleum products,
• state departments of business, industrial, or economic
development, and
• energy user trade associations, such as Chambers of Commerce
and industrial trade associations.
If local data are not available, aggregate energy use data, includ-
ing that presented in Section 6.2.1, may be used.
Next, one of two approaches should be used to compare the energy use
implications with and without existence of the waste water treatment facility.
Alternate Development Patterns - This approach consists of comparing
the previously determined patterns of development, with and without existence
of the WWTF (Section 2.2.1 through 2.3), to one of five settlement patterns,
with which energy consumption can be associated. (175) This allows the analyst
to determine the differences in energy consumption from the sewer-induced
land use changes. This approach should be used when the scale of the proposed
WWTF is large enough to affect such patterns of development.
The five distinct patterns of development which should be considered
are:
A. Dense center
B. Transit-oriented
C. Wedges and corridors
148
-------
D. Beltway-oriented
E. Sprawl
The housing locations, density patterns, and transportation configura-
tions which characterize each of these patterns are as follows:
A. Dense Center
This type of development assumes that all added households and
employment will be concentrated in the urban center and that most new resi-
dential construction will be high-rise, with some garden-type apartments. It
assumes that the major mode of transportation for daily commuting will be some
form of rapid transportation.
B. Transit-Oriented
The emphasis in this development pattern is on a mass transporta-
tion system which goes beyond the urban core. Most new households and employ-
ment will be located in areas convenient to a mass transportation system.
Housing will consist of a mix of high-rise, and garden-type apartments, with
a limited number of duplex or row-house units.
C. Wedges and Corridors
The emphasis in this urban pattern of development is on radial
transportation routes from an urban center and development along these corri-
dors. In between these corridors will be wedges of open land without future
development. The type of housing will be a mix of all types, with high den-
sity units toward the urban center.
D. Beltway-Oriented
The shape of this development pattern is dictated by a beltway;
e.g., a circumferential expressway that rings the urban area. New households
and employment are concentrated in vacant areas adjacent to the beltway. New
housing units constructed in this development pattern will be a mix, with
high-rise and garden-type apartments at points of high accessibility, and
row-houses and single-family units on land further from the urban center and
the beltway.
149
-------
E. Sprawl
The addition of households is assumed to develop in low density,
largely single-family units, with employment concentrated in the urban center
(office use), but also around crossroads or circumferential routes and in
smaller shopping areas. High accessibility via the use of the automobile is
characteristic of this development pattern.
The population distribution projections with and without the proposed
WWTF are unlikely to be the same. For instance, the provision of sewers may
provide a density which makes rapid transportation feasible. Thus, a present
dense center may develop toward pattern "B" with the WWTF, instead of pattern
"E,", without the WWTF. Relative energy use implications of these alternative
patterns of development can be derived using data from Figure 6.3. (175)
Population Growth and Housing Density - The second method for deter-
mining energy consumption uses data generated in Chapter 2, where an estimate
was made of the number of different types of dwelling units with and without
WWTF. If more local and reliable data is not available, the following BTU
values associated with different types of units shown in Figure 6.4 may be
used to determine total energy usage. (175) For example, assume that the
data generated for number of units by type is as follows:
Type of Dwelling Unit
Without WWTF
High-Rise
Garden Apartment
Town Houses
Single-Family
With WWTF
High-Rise
Garden Apartment
Town Houses
Single-Family
No. of Units
by Type
3,950
3,975
1,650
555
Average BTU/Yr/
Unit (xlO6)
10,125
5,375
3,150
1,600
10,125
487
501
511
528
487
401
511
528
Total BTU/Yr
for Type of
Unit (xlO12)
1.92
1.99
.84
.29
5.04
2.62
1.58
.82
5.02
The difference in energy consumption for the different type of
9
housing development due to the WWTF is 20 x 10 BTU/Yr.
150
-------
Figure 6.3
Average Per Capita Energy Consumption by Alternative Development Patterns (In 10 Btu/Yr.)
Pattern of Development Base
Consumption by Sector
Residential 53
Increment
Total, Forecast Year
Commercial/Industrial/ 35
Increment
Total, Forecast Year
Transportation
Automobile 26
Increment
Total, Forecast Year
Mass Transportation, 1
Increment
Total, Forecast Year
Total 115
Increment
Total, Forecast Year
A
"Dense
Center"
18
71
16
51
7
33
2
3
43
158
B
"Transit-
Oriented"
19
72
16
51
7
33
2
3
44
159
C
"Wedges and
Corridors"
22
75
16
51
12
38
2
3
52
167
D
"Beltway-
Oriented"
22
75.
16
51
10
36
2
3
50
165
E
"Sprawl"
24
77
16
51
14
40
2
3
56
171
Source: Adapted from data of Real Estate Research Corporation, as presented in "Energy and Land Use:
Analysis of Alternative Development Patterns," Environmental Comments. (175)
The per capita energy consumption for each alternative development pattern assumes a transportation modal
split between automobile transportation and mass transportation. If no mass transportation is to be
provided, one must increase the energy used for transportation by the most likely alternative, the
automobile, by adding 11 x 106 Btu/Yr. to the total. (This actually adds 14 x 10^ and subtracts 3 x 10^,
the mass transportation's use.) For example, if in "C" there will be no transportation, the total is
167 + 11 = 178 (x 10& Btu) per person per year.
-------
Figure 6.4
6
Average Energy Consumption By Alternative Development (In 10 Btu/Yr.)
Type of Housing Unit
Consumption by Sector
Residential
Increment
Total
Commercial/Industrial/
Institutional
Increment
Total
Transportation ,
Automobi le
Increment
Total
Mass Transportation
Increment
Total
Total
Increment
Total
Base High-Rise
165
58
223
110
49 .
159
74
21
95
21
8
10
351
136
487
Garden
64
229
49
159
29
103
8
10
150
501
Row
70
235
49
159
33
107
8
10
160
511
Single
76
241
49
159
44
118
8
10
177
578
en
NJ
Source: Adapted from data of Real Estate Research Corporation, as presented in "Energy and Land Use:
Analysis of Alternative Development Patterns," Environmental Comments (175)
The per capita energy consumption for each alternative development patterns assumes a transportation model
split between automobile transportation and mass transportation. If no mass transportation is to be pro-
vided, one must increase the energy used for transportation by the most likely alternative.
-------
For purposes of comparison, on a daily basis:
10 Btu/yr is equal to: 470 barrels/day of oil
2,660,000 cubic feet/day of gas
130 tons/day of coal
6.3 Impacts on Property Values
The value of property is determined to a great extent by the uses
which can be made of the property. These uses, in turn, are often limited
by the physical characteristics of the property, its location, and/or imposed
restrictions (e.g., zoning). The provision of public sewer service to property
obviates not only the need to have certain soil conditions present to "handle"
septic seepage but also the common legal "health and welfare" basis for large
minimum lot zoning. The result is an increased potential use of the property,
which is reflected in a higher potential income flow from the property.
Capitalization of this income stream is shown in increased property values.
The only study which has thoroughly examined this interrelationship
over an extended time period (176) concludes that: (1) sewered land values
averaged four times the value of unsewered property; and (2) the average
annual percentage increase in the value of land in an area which is not yet
accessible to sewers is twice the annual percentage value increase of already-
sewered property. Values are apparently not only correlated with sewer
location, but changes (increases) in value also occur faster prior to actual
sewer service, in anticipation of increased value that will result from sewer
accessibility. This anticipation of increased land values based on potential
availability of sewers, and not just on potential development, is probably
a more realistic assessment of circumstances which often occur in subareas
undergoing development.
The importance of sewer facility location to various land use decisions
depends, of course, upon the type of proposed use local factors such as
vacant land availability, accessability, and previous sewering in the immediate
vicinity.
The growth projections developed in Chapter 2.0 include estimates of
the spatial allocation and level of residential, commercial, and industrial
demand for land in the study area. The main question for analysis here is:
"Who gains and how much is gained from induced incremental changes in land
value resulting from sewer investments?"
153
-------
The analysis requires, in general, that the induced growth patterns
be translated into land value changes and that the beneficiaries of these
changes in value be identified. (Note that Section 6.1 examines the potential
negative impacts of land value changes on farm operations; here we include an
analysis of farmland value changes among many other classifications of land
use as part of the assessment of positive—e.g., value to the owner—secondary
impacts of induced growth.)
6.3.1 First/Second-Level Approach—Land Value Changes
The same analysis approach is used for both first and second levels,
the only difference being the depth of second-level analysis required because
of the size of the proposed WWTF.
Analysis of land value changes requires that the following be known
about the impact area:
• location of treatment facilities, trunk sewers, and patterns
of induced residential, commercial, and industrial growth re-
sulting therefrom;
• limitations on trunk capacity which may affect adjacent land
use ;
• local land use and zoning restrictions which may affect adjacent
land use;
• ownership patterns of property adjacent to new trunk sewer
service area;
• the current market value of sewered land in adjacent areas being
utilized for residential, commercial, and industrial purposes.
The basic approach is to determine the most likely permissible uses
of individual parcels in newly sewered areas and, given the pattern of owner-
ship transfers since sewer planning commenced, to determine who will share
in the incremental value attributed to these parcels (the difference between
value in use prior to the start of sewer planning and the value in ultimate,
permissible use as measured by current market value of nearby sewered property
in similar uses).
Projections of residential, commercial, and industrial development
patterns in Chapter 2.0 include a map of facility and trunk sewer locations,
as well as project land uses for the study area. These uses are consistent
with limitations on trunk capacities and local land use and zoning restrictions.
The analyst should prepare separate map overlays which, for the same
study area, identify ownership patterns of vacant land at two points in time:
1) one year prior to initiation of planning for the treatment facility being
154
-------
examined; and 2) presently. These two overlays should be used to identify
patterns of ownership change over the period of study. Where ownership has
changed, the analyst should determine the patterns of change. That is,
have transfers been made among individuals or from long-time owners to
development interests? Are a few buyers particularly active? Does ownership
transfer activity occur mainly along proposed sewer trunkline routes, or is
it more general throughout the area? Is ownership of contiguous parcels
becoming more concentrated?
The analyst should identify interests (real estate, brokers and
bankers) which have been active in the prospective WWTF service area and soli-
cit their views on the patterns of land transfer and appreciation occurring
throughout the area to buttress the comparative analysis above.
The results of these analyses should enable the analyst to character-
ize the pattern of land value changes which anticipate trunk sewer installa-
tion and to determine if beneficiaries tend to be original land owners or
development interests with perspective insight and capital necessary to anti-
cipate and capture land use value increases due to sewer installations.
In order to determine the increment to value from sewer investment,
(regardless of owernship patterns and/or changes) in the long term, the analyst
should identify portions of the study area which are presently sewered, but
have adjacent vacant land. A number of sewer-adjacent areas should be selec-
ted so that, given zoning and other constraints, the areas are analogous to
the area of study in terms of eligible residential, commercial, and industrial
uses. Discussions with brokers and bankers and reference to secondary sources
of data on land transfers should establish values in these areas. Finally,
the analyst should compare values along the proposed trunk routes with these
other values to define expected percentage increases in value which might be
expected for the soon-to-be sewered property. Comparison of the "analogous
area" land values to values one year prior to the start of planning and pre-
sent values in the nonsewered area should be made.
In many communities which do not have existing sewer service, it will
not be possible to determine an "analogous area," and the following questions
must be answered using best available data. The comparison of these three
(two) values provides the basis for answering the following two questions
(which can be applied, respectively, to residential and industrial uses):
155
-------
• If the proposed treatment facility/sewer project were in
existence today/ what would have been the likely percentage
increase in value to "original owners?"
• If the proposed facility were in existence today, what would
have been the likely percentage increase in value to "anti-
cipatory owners?"
The key underlying assumption of this analysis is that unsewered
land values will consistently lag sewered values and that, over some period
of time, starting prior to actual construction, a rapid appreciation of pro-
perty values will occur, reflecting the savings from alternative means of
waste disposal and potential increases in the use of the property. Therefore,
a comparison of specific parcels of land at two points in time, compared to
a third value (current sewered land), can indicate expected percentage value
increases expected to accrue to newly sewered property.
The impact estimate is derived in terms of percentage increase
rather than absolute (dollar) increment to nonsewered value largely for
reasons of practicality. That is, it would require a major assessment task
to attach values to all property (nonsewered and sewered) prior to and after
construction. The percentage increase, in contrast, uses a representative
sample of properties to develop a range of representative percentage increases
for different types of property in different uses.
156
-------
REFERENCES
Chapter 1
1. P.L. 91-190, 42 USC 4321-4347, January 1, 1970.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Preparation of Environmental
Impact Statements," 40 CFR 6.304(C)(3)
3. "Consideration of Secondary Environmental Effects on the Construction
Grants Process," Program Guidance Memo #50. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, June, 1975.
4. Environmental Quality, The Fifth Annual Report of the Council on En-
vironmental Quality, December, 1974.
5. Environmental Quality, The Sixth Annual Report of the Council on
Environmental Quality, December, 1975.
6. Sink ley, Clark ^t.al_. , jnterceptor Sewers and Urban Sprawl, Lexington
Books, 1975.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Secondary Impacts of Transpor-
tation and Wastewater Investments: Review and Bibliography,
EPA-600/5-75-002, January, 1975.
8. See Milgram, Grace, The City Expands, A Study of the Conversion of
Land From Rural to Urban Use, University of Pennsylvania, 1967;
Jeffrey Stansbury, "Suburban Growth—A Case Study," Population
Bulletin, Population Reference Bureau, April 1972; and Metro-
politan Washington, D.C. Council of Governments, Analysis of the
Joint Interactions of Water Supply, Public Policy, and Land
Development Patterns in an Expanding Metropolitan Area, Office
of Water Resources Research, U.S. Department of Interior,
September, 1973.
9. U.S. Water Resource Council, 1972 OBERS Projections, Regional
Economic Activity in the U.S. Series E Population, Washington,
D.C., 1974.
10. See for example, Chapin F. Stuart, Urban Land Use Planning, University
of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1965, pp. 15-21 for a discussion of various
space organization concepts such as "sectors."
11. Page, Alfred N., and Warren R. Seyfried, ed., Urban Analysis:
Readings in Housing and Urban Development, Scott, Foresman and
Company, Glenview, 21, 1970.
12. Peter A. Morrison, Demographic Information for Cities: A Manual^
for Estimating and Projecting Local Population Characteristics,
RAND~Corporation, R-618-HUD, June, 1971.
157
-------
13. David J. Bjornstad ejt.aJU , "State Population Projections: A Compara-
tive Review of National Series and their Practical Usefulness," Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, February, 1975.
14. Population Estimates and Projections, Series II, Series P-25, No.
601, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, October, 1975.
15. Employment and Training Report of the President, U.S. Department of
Labor, 1976.
16. As an example of a. similar approach see Heightchew, Robert E. ,
"Countywide Land Use Forecasts," Journal of the Urban Planning
and Development Division, ASCE, Vol. 101, NO. UP2, November, 1975.
17. Stone, Ralph, and Smallwood, Herbert, Intermedia Aspects of Air and
Water Pollution Control, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Report 600/5-73-003, August, 1973.
18. Bower, Blair T., and Basta, Daniel J., Residual-Environmental Quality
Management; Applying the Concept, Johns Hopkins University Center
for Metropolitan Planning and Research, Baltimore, Maryland,
October, 1973.
19. Paik, Inja K., Harrington, John Jr., and McElrow, F.W., The Integrated
Multi-Media Pollution Model, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Report 600/5-74-020, February 1974.
20. Reiquam, Howard; Dee, Norbert, and Choi, Paul, Development of Cross-
Media Evaluation Methodology, Vols. I and II, Battelle, Columbus,
Ohio, January 1974.
21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Preparation of Environmental
Impact Statements," 40 CFR 6.
22. Residential Stormwater Management, joint publication at Urban Land
Institute, American Society of Civil Engineers and NANB, 1975.
23. Linsley, Ray K., Jr.; Kohler, Max A.; and Paulhus, Joseph L.H.,
Hydrology for Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1958.
24. Design and Construction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers, ASCE Manual
No. 37, ASCE, New York, 1970.
25. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States for Durations from 30
Minutes to 24 Hours and Return Periods from 1 to 100 Years,
Technical Paper No. 40, U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather
Bureau, 1961.
26. Areawide Assessment Procedures Manual, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Report 600/9-76-014, July 1976.
27. Lager, John A., ejt.al^, Development and Application of a Simplified
Stormwater Management Model, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Report 600/2-76-218, August 1976.
158
-------
28. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, Technical Release No. 55,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
January 1975.
29. Thurow, Charles; Toner, William; and Erley, Duncan, "Controlling Erosion,"
Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Report 600/5-75-005, March 1975.
30. Bhutani, Jognider, ejt.a^. , "History of Sediment-Loss Equations,"
Impact of Hydrologic Modifications on Water Quality, U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency Report 600/2-75-007, April 1975.
31. Sedimentation, SCS National Engineering Handbook, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, March 1968.
32. Michigan's Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Guidebook, Michigan
Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, Michigan, February 1975.
33. Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors, Fairfax Co., Virginia, 1974.
34. Standards and Specifications for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control
in Developing Areas, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service, College Park, Maryland, July 1975.
35. Colston, Newton V., Characterization and Treatment of Urban Land
Runoff, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report 670/2-74-096,
December 1974.
36. Interrelationships of Land Use Planning and Control to Water Quality
Management Planning, Alan M. Voorhees & Associates, EPA Contract
No. 68-01-0750, Washington, D.C., April 1973.
37. A Multi-Phasic Component Study to Predict Storm Water Pollution from
Urban Areas, U.S. Department of Interior, Office of Water Resources
Research, 1970.
38. Murray, Richard C. and Reeves, E. Bodette, Estimated Use of Water
in the United States in 1970, Geological Survey Circular 676,
U.S. Department of Interior, 1972.
39. Miller, David W.; Dluca, Frank A.; and Tessier, Thomas L., Ground Water
Contamination in the Northeast States, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Report 660/2-72-056, June 1974.
40. Our Land and Water Resources: Current and Prospective Supplies and
Uses, Miscellaneous Publication No. 1290, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service, May 1974.
41. Ridker, Ronald G. , "Future Water Needs and Supplies, With a Note on
Land Use," Population, Resources and the Environment, Vol. Ill,
Ridker, Ronald G., ed., Commission on Population Growth and the
American Future, 1972.
159
-------
42. McBride, Lawrence, "Arizona's Coming Dilemma: Water Supply and Popula-
tion Growth," Ecology Law Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 2, Spring 1972.
43. Hirshleifer, Jack; deHaven, James C., and Milliman, Jerome W., "Over-
draft and Salt-Water Intrusion," Water Supply, University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, 1960.
44. Kneese, Allen V. and Bower, Blair T., Managing Water Quality; Economics,
Technology ^Institutions, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1968.
45. "Houston Subsidence: Rain Brings Action," Engineering News Record,
July 17, 1975.
46. Eschman, Donald F., and Marcus, Melvin G., "The Geologic and Topo-
graphic Setting of Cities," Urbanization and Environment, Detwyler,
Thomas R. , et_.al_., Duxbury Press, Belmont, California, 1972.
47. Library of Congress, "Safe Drinking Water," Environmental Protection
Affairs of the Ninety-Third Congress, U.S. Congress, 94th, 1st,
Senate, Committee on Public Works, February 1975.
48. Clear Air Amendments of 1970, PL 91-604.
49. 40 CFR 50, National Planning and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards.
50. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Air Quality Mainten-
ance Planning and Analysis (13 volumes), Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, 1974.
51. 40 CFR 52, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans.
52. 40 CFR 51, Requirements for Preparation, Adoption and Submittal of
Implementation Plans.
53. 40 CFR 51.12,Control Strategy General.
54. Argonne National Laboratory, Air Quality Analysis Workshop Manual, EPA
450/3-075-080A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, 1975.
55. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, 2nd edition, third printing with supplements 1-5,
AP-42, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711.
56. Larsen, Ralph I., "An Air Quality Data Analysis System for Interrelating
Effects, Standards, and Needed Source Reductions - Part 2," journal
of Air Pollution Control Association, 24:551, June 1974.
57. Schultz, T.J., and McMahon, N.M., Noise Assessment Guidelines, U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, August 1971.
58. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, First Report on Status and Progress
of Noise Research and Control Programs in the Federal Government,
EPA 550/9-75-023, June 1975.
160
-------
59. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Public Health and Welfare Criteria
for Noise, EPA 550/9-73-002, July 1973.
60. "Tiber Island Condominium, e_t.al_, v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority," D.D.C. Civil Action No. 74-947.
61. Federal Highway Administration, Federal Highway Progress Manual, V. 7,
Ch. 1, Sec. 3, "Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise
and Construction Noise, May 14, 1976.
62. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Abatement and
Control: Standards for New Construction, Department Circular 1390.2.
63. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environ-
mental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare With ari
Adequate Margin of Safety, EPA 550/9-74-004, March 1974.
64. , First Report on Status and Progress of Noise and Control
Programs in the Federal Government, June 1975.
65. , State and Municipal Control Ordinances, 1973-1974, EPA
Report 550/9-76-006, January 1976.
66. Peterson, A.P.G., and Gross, Ervin, Jr., Handbook of Noise Measurement
General Radio Company, West Concord, Massachusetts, 1967.
67. Federal Highway Administration, Federal Highway Program Manual, V. 7,
Chapter 7, Sec. 3, "Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic
Noise and Construction Noise," May 14, 1976.
68. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Aircraft Noise Impact-
Planning Guidelines for Local Agencies, Report No. TE/NA-472,
November 1972.
69. Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc., "Calculation of Day-Night Levels (Ldn)
Resulting from Civil Aircraft Operations," Report NO. 3157, prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1976.
70. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Background Document/Environmental
Explanation for Proposed Interstate Rail Carrier Noise Emission
Regulations, EPA 550/9-74-005a, June 1974.
71. Swing, Jack W., "Simplified Procedure for Developing Railroad Noise
Exposure Contours," Sound and Vibration, February 1975.
72. , Information on Levels_gf Environmental Noise Requisite to
Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety,
EPA 550/9-74-004, March 1974.
73. Federal Aviation Administration, "Developing Noise Exposure Controus for
General Aviation Airports," December 1975.
74. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environ-
mental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an
Adequate Margin of Safety, EPA 550/9-74-004, March 1974.
161
-------
75. Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc., "Design Guide for Highway Noise Prediction
and Control, Report No. 2739, November 1974.
76. Bishop, D., Program for the Measurement of Environmental Noise, DOT-TST-
74-4, U.S. Department of Transportation, September 1973.
77. Schwartz, J.M.; Yost, W.A.; and Green, A.E.S., "Community Noise Effort
in Gainesville, Florida," Sound and Vibration, Vol. 8, No. 12,
December 1974.
78. Bartel, C.; Sutherland, L.C.; and Simpson, L., Airport Noise Reduction
Forecast - Vol. I: Summary Forecast for 23 Airports, DOT-TST-75-3,
U.S. Department of Transportation, October 1974.
79. Federal Aviation Administration, "Developing Noise Exposure Contours
for General Aviation Airports," December, 1975.
80. Gordon, C.G.; Galloway, W.J.; Kugler, B.A.; and Nelson, D.L., Highway
Noise - A Design for Highway Engineers, National Cooperative Highway
Research Program Report 117, 1971.
81. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and
Control, Highway Noise Impact Assessment Manual, (forthcoming).
82. Galloway, W.J.; Eldred, K. and Simpson, M., Population Distribution of
the United States as a Function of Outdoor Noise Level, EPA, 550/9-
74-009, June 1974.
83. Safeer, H.B., Airport Noise Exposure Noise Prediction, DOT-TSC-FHWA-
72-1, U.S. Department of Transportation, August 1972.
84. Bartel, C.; Coughlin, C.; Moran, J. and Watkins, L., Airport Noise Reduc-
tion Forecast - Vol. II; NEF Computer Program Description and User's
Manual, DOT-TST-75-4, U.S. Department of Transportation, August 1974.
85. Nelson, K.E., and Wolsko, T.D., Transportation Noise - Impacts and
Analysis Techniques, ANL/ES-27, Argonne National Laboratory,
October 1973.
86. Wesler, J.E., Manual for Highway Noise Prediction, DOT-TSC-FHWA-72-1,
U.S. Department of Transportation, March 1972.
87. MacDonald, Joseph A., "Will Solid Waste Bury Us?" The Need for a
National Materials Policy, Part 2, U.S. Congress, 93rd, 2nd,
Senate, Committee on Public Works, Hearings, July 17 and 18, 1974.
88. The management of solid wastes, as regulated by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, applies to: beverage containers; materials
recovery source separation; the storage and collection of resi-
dential, commercial and institutional solid wastes; solid waste
disposal programs, in terms of thermal processing; and accep-
tance of certain substances and recommended storage procedures
for pesticides and containers, as found in 40 CFR 240-247.
162
-------
89. Sanitary Engineering Research Laboratory, Comprehensive Studies of
Solid Wastes Management, University of California, Berkeley,
California, May 1972.
90. Berry, Brian J.L., et_.al_. , Land Use, Urban Form and Environmental Quality,
Department of Geography Research Paper No. 155, University of
Chicago, 1974.
91. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Resource Recovery and Waste
Reduction, Third Report to Congress, 1975.
92. Bartolotta, Robert J., "Local Government Solid Waste Programs,"
Yearbook - 1975, International City Management Association,
Washington, D.C., 1975.
93. Comptroller General of the U.S., "Demonstration Grant Program Has Limited
Impact on National Solid Waste Disposal Problem," The Need for a
National Materials Policy, U.S. Congress, 93rd, 2nd, Senate, Committee
on Public Works, Hearings, July 17 and 18, 1974.
94. Comptroller General of the United States, "Using Solid Waste to Conserve
Resources and to Create Energy, Report to the Congress," Waste
Control Act of 1975, U.S. Congress, 94th, 1st, House, Subcommittee
on Transportation and Commerce of the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, Hearings, 1975.
95. Recommended Standards for Sanitary Landfall Design., Construction, and
Evaluation & Model Sanitary Landfall Operation Agreement, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1971.
96. Caffrey, Patrick; David, Martin; and Ham, Robert K., "Evaluation of
Environmental Impact of Landfills," Journal of the Environmental
Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 101, No. EEI, Proceedings Paper
11119, February 1975.
97. Darnell, Rezneat, Impacts of Construction Activities in Wetlands of the
United States, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report 600/3-76-
045, April 1976.
98. Thurow, Charles; Toner, William; and Erley, Duncan, "Wetlands," Perfor-
mance Controls for Sensitive Lands; A Practical Guide for Local
Administrators, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report 600/5-
75-005, March 1975.
99. Lee, Thomas M.. "Wisconsin's Shoreland Management Program," Journal
of the Urban Planning and Development Division, ASCE, Vol. 98,
No. UPI, Proceeding Paper 9054, July 1972.
100. Proceedings: Wetland Conference^ Report No. 21, Institute of Water
Resources, University of Connecticut, December 1973.
101. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Protection of Nation's Wetlands:
Policy Statement," 84 FR 10834, May 2, 1973.
163
-------
102. 33 CFR 209.
103. Corps of Engineers, "Permits for Activities in Navigable Waters or
Ocean Waters," 40 CFR 230.
104. Section 404, PL 92-500.
105. Crowley, David A., ejt.aj^. , Wetlands, Related Legislation in the United
States, University of Miami Sea Grant Institute Program Report,
University of Miami, Miami, Florida, 1974.
106. The reader who desired further information on the specific impacts of
wetland development as borne by flora, fauna and the general ecology
should refer to: Freshwater Biology and Pollution Ecology, EPA 430/
1-75-005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water
Program Operations, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1975; Ketchum, Bostwick, ed.,
The Water's Edge, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1972; and
Ma thews et^.a^. , Man's Impact on Terrestrial and Oceanic Ecosystems,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1972.
107. For example, Maines' Wetlands Act, Chapter 348 PL 1967, protects the
ecology of areas bordering coastal waters; Massachusetts' G.L. c. 130
regulates the removal, filling, and dredging of areas bordering on
coastal waters; Delaware's Coastal Zone Act (Title 7, Chapter 70)
seeks to prohibit entirely the construction of new heavy industry in
its coastal areas,- Wisconsin's Shore land Management Program enables
counties to control the use of shoreland, defined as a specific
distance from the edge of the water.
108. Estuarine Areas Act of 1968, 16 U.S.C. 1221.
109. Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1451-1464.
110. Section 302(h) of Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
111. Section 305 of Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
112. Section 306(d) of Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
113. Section 307 of Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
114. Knecht, R.W., and Agee, J.L., "OCZM/EPA Water Programs Coordination
Principles," signed August 26, 1975, Washington, D.C.
115. Pisano, Mark, "Coordination of EPA Water Programs and Coastal Zone
Management Programs," Program Guidance Memorandum "AM-11, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., September 29,
1975.
116. Meyers, Sheldon, "Guidance for EPA Participation in the Development and
Review of State Coastal Zone Management Programs (CZMP's)," U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, June 24, 1975.
164
-------
117. Cahill, Harold P., Pisano, Mark A., "Coordination of EPA Water Programs
and Coastal Zone Management Programs," U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, September 15, 1975.
118. Office of General Counsel, "EPA Protection in State Coastal Zone
Management Plan Development and Implementation," U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, November 25, 1975.
119. Ludwigson, John 0., "Coastal Zone Management, A Whole New Ball Game,"
Monograph No. 18, Environment Reporter, BNA, Washington, D.C.,
March 8, 1974.
120. Section 307(c)(3) of Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
121. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, PL 93-234, 87 Stat. 975, Sec. 1370.
122. Leopold, Luna B., Hydrology for Urban Land Planning - A Guidebook on the
Hydrologic Effects of Urban Land Use, U.S. Geological Survey Circular
554, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, D.C., 1968.
123. Congressional Research Service, "National Hazards," Congress and the
Nation's Environment, U.S. Congress, 94th, 1st, Senate, Committee
on Interior and Insular Affairs, April 1975.
124. Cahill, Harold P., and Greene, Alexander J., "Flood Disaster Protection
Act of 1973," Program Guidance Memorandum No. PG.-25, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
125. Cahill, Harold P., "Supplement to PG No. 25; Flood Disaster Protection
Act of 1973 (PL 93-234)," Program Guidance Memorandum PG-25A, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, November 4, 1974.
126. Aim, Alvin, "Flood Insurance Requirements Effective July 1, 1975," Program
Guidance Memorandum PG-54, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
July 8, 1975.
127. 24 CFR 1914.
128. Federal Insurance Administration, " National Flood Insurance Program,"
Title 24, Chapter X, Subchapter B, Section 1909-1915, U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development.
129. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, PL 85-624.
130. The Endangered Species Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 668aa to 668cc-6.
131. Allen, Durward L., "The Preservation of Endangered Habitats and Verte-
brates of North America," Future Environments of North America,
edited by Darling, F. Fraser, and Milton, John P., Natural History
Press, Garden City, New York, 1966.
132. Wildlife in an Urbanizing Environment, Cooperative Extension Service,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts, 1974.
165
-------
133. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, "Threatened Wildlife of the U.S.,"
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Washington, D.C.
134. Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, 16 U.S.C. 460-4 to 460-11.
135. Adams, Robert L.j Lewis, Robert C. ; and Drake, Bruce H., Outdoor Recrea-
tion, A Legacy for America, Appendix A, An Economic Analysis, U.S.
Department of Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, December 1975.
136. Clawson, Marion, "Methods of Measuring the Demand for and Value of
Outdoor Recreation," Reprint Number 10, Resources for the Future, Inc.,
Washington, D.C., 1972.
137. Wilkinson, Paul F., "The Use of Models in Predicting the Consumption of
Outdoor Recreation," Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 5, No. 3,
Summer 1973.
138. Hammon, Gordon A., et^.al^. , Capacity of Water Based Recreation Systems,
Part I; The State of the Art—A Literature Review, Report No. 90,
Water Resources Research Institute, University of North Carolina,
Raleigh, North Carolina, April 1974.
139. Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, 16 U.S.C. 4601-4 to 4601-11.
140. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271-1287.
141. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and National Park Service, Guidelines for
Evaluating Wild, Scenic, and Recreational River Areas Proposed for
Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Under
Section 2, PL 90-542 Document No. 888-490, U.S. Department of
Interior and U.S. Department of Agriculture, February 1970.
142. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1273 (b)(1).
143. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1273 (b)(2).
144. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1273 (b)(3).
145. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1278.
146. Kaiser, Edward J., et_.al^., Promoting Environmental Quality Through Urban
Planning and Controls, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report
600/5-73-015, February 1974.
147. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, PL 91-190, Sec. 101(b)(4).
148. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, PL 89-655; the Archaeo-
logical and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, PL 93-291; "Protection
and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment," Executive Order 11593,
May 13, 1971; Additional Acts pertaining to the subject area are
The Antiquities Act of 1906, PL 59-209, and the Historic Sites Act of
1935, PL 74-292.
166
-------
149. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, "Procedures for Protection
of Historic and Cultural Properties," 36 CFR Part 800.
150. Council on Environmental Quality, "Guidelines for the Preparation of
Environmental Impact Statements," 40 CFR 1500.
151. Rhett, John T. and Meyers, Sheldon, "Field Surveys to Identify Cultural
Resources Affected by EPA Construction Grants Projects," Program
Guidance Memo #52, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 2, 1975.
152. Opinion of Allen Olson, EPA Legal Assistant.
153. Gutheim, Frederick, "Preface," Continuity and Change, Papageorgiou,
Alexander, Praeger Publishers, New York.
154. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, "Suggested Guidelines for
State Historic Preservation Legislation," Historic Preservation
Workshop, National Symposium on State Environmental Legislation,
Washington, D.C., March 1972.
155. Office of Archaeological and Historic Preservation, National Register of
Historic Places, U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service,
Washington, D.C.
156. Guidelines for Compliance with NEPA in the Title II Wastewater Treatment
Works Construction Grants Program and the Areawide Waste Treatment
Management Planning Program, 40 CFR 6.510, Criteria for Preparation
of Environmental Impact Statements.
157. Anderson, William D., Gustafson, Gregory C., and Boxley, Robert F.,
"Perspectives on Agricultural Land Policy," Journal of Soil and
Water Conservation, 31:1, January-February, 1975.
158. Frey, H. Thomas, Major Uses of Land in the United States: Summary for
1969, Agricultural Economic Report No. 247, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1973.
159. Holt, James S., "Problems of Increasing Farm Real Estate Values," Farm
Economics, Cooperative Extension Service, The Pennsylvania State
University, July 1975.
160. Roup, Philip M., "Urban Threats to Rural Lands: Background and
Beginnings," AIP Journal, November 1975.
161. Farm Corporations — A Financial Analysis, Agricultural Economic Report
No. 241, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,
July 1973.
162. 1973 Handbook of Agricultural Charts, Agricultural Handbook No. 455,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economics Research Service,
October 1973.
163. Rural Zoning in the United States; Analysis of Enabling Legislation,
Miscellaneous Publication No. 1232, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Economic Research Service, July 1972.
167
-------
164. State Programs for the Differential Assessment of Farm Space and
Open Land, Agricultural Economic Report No. 256., U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, April 1974.
165. Gustafson, Gregory C., and Wallace, L.T., "Differential Assessment as
Land Use Policy: The California Case," AIP Journal, 41:6,
November 1975.
166. Gryant, William R., and Conklin, Howard E., "New Farmland Preservation
Programs in New York," AIP Journal, 41:6, November 1975.
167. McBride, George, and Clawson, Marion, "Negotiation and Land Conversion,"
AIP Journal, January 1970.
168. Costonis, John J., "Development Rights Transfer: Description and
Perspective for a Critique," Management & Control of Growth,
Vol. Ill, Scott, Randall, W., ed., The Urban Land Institute,
Washington, D.C., 1975.
169. Smith, Clyn, "Easements to Preserve Open Space Land," Ecology Law
Quarterly, 1:4, Fall 1971.
170. Cook, Earl, "Statement of Earl Cook," The Impact of Growth on the
Environment, U.S. Congress, 93rd, 1st, Senate, Subcommittee on
Air and Water Pollution, Committee on Public Works, Hearings,
April 2 and 3, 1973.
171. Darmstadter, Joel, "Energy Consumption: Trends and Patterns,"
Economic Growth and the Environment," Schurr, Sam H., ed., Re-
sources for the Future, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1972.
172. Cook, Earl, "The Flow of Energy in an Industrial Society," Scientific
American, 24:3, September 1971.
173. Patterns of Energy Consumption in the United States, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, California, 1971.
174. Real Estate Research Corporation, The Costs of Sprawl, prepared for CEQ,
HUD, and EPA, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
April 1974.
175. Roberts, James S., "Energy and Land Use: Analysis of Alternative
Development Patterns," Environmental Comments, September 1975.
176. Milgram, Grace, The City Expands, A Study of the Conversion of Land
From Rural to Urban Use, University of Pennsylania, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, March 1967.
168
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF NONCITED SOURCES
Chapter 1 - General
1. Abt Associates, The Social Impact of Having Clean Water, prepared
for National Commission on Water Quality, June 9, 1975.
2. Environmental Quality - 1975, Council on Environmental Quality, December
1975.
3. Summary Analysis - Public Response to the Proposed Principles & Standards,
U.S. Water Resources Council, July 1972.
4. U.S. Water Resources Council, "Water and Related Land Resources - Estab-
lishment of Principles and Standards for Planning," 38 FR 24778, September
10, 1973.
Chapter 2 - Growth and Secondary Impact Assessment
1. A Guide to Models in Governmental Planning and Operations, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency Report 600/5-74-008, August 1974.
2. Appelbaum, Richard P., et^.al_., The Effects of Urban Growth, A Population
Impact Analysis, Praeger Press, New York, New York, 1976.
3. Beale, Calvin L., "The 'Revival of Population Growth in Nonmetropolitan
America," ERS-605, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, June 1975.
4. Cockfield, Richard W., and Handa, Virginia K., "Design Concept for
Assigning Urban Space, Journal of the Urban Planning and Development
Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. UP2, Proc. Paper 8582, December 1971.
5. Feldt, Allan G., CLUG: Community Land Use Game, the Free Press, New
York, 1972.
6. Greenberg, Michael R.; Krueckeberg, Donald A.; and Mautner, Richard,
Long-Range Projections for Minor Civil Divisions: Computer Programs^
and User's Manual, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, May
1973.
7. Greenwood, Michael J., "Research on Internal Migration in the United
States: A Survey," The Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 13, No. 2,
June 1975.
8. Hansen, Kristin A., e_t.a_l., "Mobility of the Population of the United
States, March 1970 to March 1975," Current Population Reports, U.S.
Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 285, 1975.
9. Industrial Location Policy, 3 parts, U.S. Congress, 91st, 2nd, House
Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Urban Growth, Committee on Banking and Currency,
Hearings, July through December 1970.
169
-------
10. "Influx of Population Down in Urban Areas," New York Times, June 16, 1975.
11. Kaiser, Edward J., e_t.al_., Promoting Environmental Quality Ihrough Urban
Planning and Controls, U.S. 'Environmental Protection Agency Report
600/5-73-015, February 1974.
12. McPherson, M.B., Prospects for Metropolitan Water Management, ASCE,
December 1970.
13. McPherson, M.B., Regional Earth Science Information in Local Water
Management, ASCE, July 1975.
14. Manual on Urban Planning, ASCE, New York, 1967.
15. Marks, David H., ReVelle, Charles S., and Liebman, Jon C., "Mathematical
Models of Location: A Review," Journal of the Urban Planning and Devel-
opment Division, ASCE Vol. 96, No. UP1, Proc. Paper 7164, March, 1970.
16. Moore, Will Terry; Ridel, Fredric J.; and Rodriquez, Carlos G., An Intro-
duction to Urban Development Models and Guidelines for Their Use, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, January 1975.
17. Morrison, Peter A., "The Current Demographic Context of National Growth
and Development," The Rand Paper Series, Santa Monica, California, September
1975.
18. National Academy of Sciences, Land Use and Transportation Planning, Highway
Research Board, No. 422, 1973.
19. National Growth and Development, Second Biennial Report to Congress,
prepared under direction of The Committee on Community Development,
The Domestic Council, December 1974.
20. Readings on Land Use Policy, U.S. Congress, 94th, 1st, Senate, Committee
on Interior and Insular Affairs, June 1975.
21. Riley, Russell H., "Basic Data - Sources and Utilization," Handbook on
Urban Planning^ Claire, William H., ed., Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,
1973.
22. Seidman, David R., The Construction of An Urban Growth Model, Delaware
Valley Regional Planning Commission, Philadelphia, (no date).
23. Task Force of Science Advisory Panel of the House Public Works Committee,
A National Public Works Investment Policy, Committee Print 93-53, U.S.
Congress, House, Committee on Public Works, December 1974.
24. "Significant Change Seen in Urban Growth Patterns," Engineering News
Record, May 29, 1975.
25. Sweet, David C. , ed., Models of Urban Structure, Lexington Books, Lex-
ington, Massachusetts, 1972.
170
-------
26. "The Exodus," The Wall Street Journal, June 5, 1975.
27. Urban Systems Research and Engineering, The Growth Shapers - Land Use
Impacts of Infrastructure Investments, report prepared for Council on
Environmental Quality, 1976.
28. U.S. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, Population
Distribution and Policy, Mazie, Sara Mills, ed., Vol. V of Commission
research reports, 1972.
Chapter 3 - Media Impacts
1. Amy, Gary, et.al.. Water Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report 440/9-75-004, December 1974.
2. Briggs, T.M.; Overstreet, M.; Kothari, A.; and Devitt, T.W., Air Pollu-
tion Considerations in Residential Planning, Volume I; Manual, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Report 450/3-74-046a, July 1974.
3. Committee on Ecological Research, The Role of Ecology in the Federal
Government, Council on Environmental Quality, December 1974.
4. Commission on Natural Resources, et^.al^ , Air Quality and Stationary Source
Emission Control, U.S. Congress, 94th, 1st, Senate, Committee on Public
Works, March 1975.
5. Congressional Research Service, A Legislative History of the Noise Control
Act of 1972, U.S. Congress, 93rd, 2nd, Senate, Committee on Public Works,
July 1974.
6. Decision-Makers Guide in Solid Waste Management, Guide SW-500, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1976.
7. Epstein, A.H., e^.a^. , A Guide for Considering Air Quality in Urban
Planning, U.S. Environmental Protection Report 450/3-74-020, March 1974.
8. Hagevik, George, ed., The Relationship of Land Use and Transportation
Planning to Air Quality Management, Rutgers University, New Brunswick,
New Jersey, May 1972.
9. Hydrology Committee, Essentials of Ground-Water Hydrology Pertinent to
Water-Resource Planning, U.S. Water Resources Council, August 1973.
10. Implementation of the Clean Air Act - 1975, U.S. Congress, 94th, 1st,
Senate, Subcommittee on Environmental Pollution, Committee on Public
Works, Hearings, March 19,20, and April 21, 22, 23, 1975.
11. Implementation of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, U.S. Congress,
93rd, 2nd, House, Subcommittee on Investigations and Review, Committee
on Public Works, Hearings, February, April, June, and July, 1974.
171
-------
12. Institute of Public Administration, et^.al^, Evaluating Transportation
Controls to Reduce Motor Vehicle Emissions in Major Metropolitan
Areas, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report APTD - 1365,
November 1972.
13. Nondegradation Policy of the Clean Air Act, U.S. Congress, 93rd,
1st, Senate, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, Committee on
Public Works, Hearings, July 24, 1973.
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Non-Point Source Control, U.S.
Congress, 93rd, 1st, Senate, Committee on Public Works, Hearings,
March 1973.
15. , Stormwater Management Model, Vols. I-IV, 1971.
16. "Water and Related Land Resources Planning," U.S. Water Resources
Council, June 22, 1970.
Chapter 4 - Sensitive Environmental Areas
1. Baker, John A., Wetland and Water Supply, Geological Survey Circular 431,
U.S. Department of Interior, 1960.
2. Burton, Ian, Types of Agricultural Occupance of Flood Plains in the
United States, Department of Geography, Research Paper No. 75,
University of Chicago, 1962.
3. "Flood Plains: No Longer Up For Grabs?" Conservation Foundation Letter,
May, 1975.
4. Gannon, Joseph W., "Constitutional Implications of Wetland Legislation,"
Environmental Affairs, Vol. 1, No. 3, November, 1971.
5. guidelines for Determining Flood Flow Frequency, U.S. Water Resources
Council, 1976.
6. Institute of Rural Environmental Health, A Study of Mosquito Prevention
and Control Problems Associated with Stream Modification Projects, U.S.
Water Resources Council, 1974.
7. Lewis, Sylvia, ."Coastal Plan Runs Aground," Planning, ASPO, November,
1975.
8. O'Toole, Denis, "Analysis of the National Flood Insurance Program,"
Environmental Comment, November, 1974.
9. Pope, R.M., and Gosselink, James G., "A Tool for Use in Making Land
Management Decisions Involving Tidal Marshland," Coastal Zone Management
Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1, Fall 1973.
10. Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas to Reduce Flood Losses, (2 Vols.), U.S.
Water Resources Council, 1972.
172
-------
11. Restrictions: Conservation Inland Wetlands, Coastal Wetlands,
Massachusetts Audubon Society, 1973.
12. Spencer, James, Review of Dredge and Spoil Disposal Practices in
Massachusetts, Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Office, December,
1975.
Chapter 5 - Unique Areas
1. Bishop, A.B., e_t-£l_-/ Carrying Capacity in Regional Environmental Manage-
ment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Report 600/5-74-021,
February, 1974.
2. Corps of Engineers, "Cultural Resources: Identification and Adminis-
tration; Policies and Procedures," U.S. Department of Defense, 40 FR
4136, September 8, 1975.
3. "Guideline. Review and Comment of the Water Resources Council on Wild
and Scenic Rivers Proposals of the Department of Agriculture and the
Department of Interior," U.S. Water Resources Council, 1971.
4. "Historic Preservation," Urban Land, July/August, 1975.
5. "Recycling Buildings to New Uses Brings Revenue from Recession,"
Engineering News Record, July 31, 1975.
6. Mann, Lawrence D., "Open Space Accessibility for Recreation," Journal of
the Urban Planning and Development Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. UP2,
Proc. Paper 8607, December, 1971.
7. Rutledge, Albert J., Anatomy of a Park, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971.
8. Stankey, George, and Lime, David, Recreational Carrying Capacity: An
Annotated Bibliography, General Technical Report INT-3, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, March, 1973.
9. Stam, Jerome, M. and Courtney, Eleanor L., Farm Real Estate Taxes, Recent
Trends and Developments, RET-14, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service, March, 1975.
10. Stankey, George, and Lime, David, Recreational Carrying Capacity: An
Annotated Bibliography, General Technical Report INT-3, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, March, 1973.
11. Wright, Russell, Techniques for Incorporating Historic Preservation
Objectives into the Highway Planning Process, prepared for the U.S.
Department of Transportation, April, 1974.
Chapter 6 - Economic Impacts
1. "Agricultural Price Standards," U.S. Water Resources Council, October,
1974.
173
-------
2. Berkowitz, David A., and Squires, Arthur M,, ed., Power Generation and
Environmental Change, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1971.
3. Growth and Its Implications for the Future, (4 parts), 93rd Congress,
House Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation and the
Environment, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Hearings,
May, 1973, June and November, 1974.
4. Hayes, Denis, Energy; The Case for Conservation, WorldWatch Paper 4,
Washington, D.C., January, 1976.
5. OBERS Projections (Series E), Incremental Projections and Ratios of
Future (1985 and 2000) to Current (1975) Population, Personal Income
and Earnings Aggregated Subareas, U.S. Water Resources Council, June,
1975.
6. Soil Conservation Service, Perspectives on Prime Lands, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1975.
7. Pimentel, David, et_.aJL., "Energy and Land Constraints in Food Protein
Production," Science, November 21, 1975.
8. Water for Energy Self-Sufficiency, U.S. Water Resources Council,
October, 1974; Water Resources Center, Proceedings of the Workshop on
Research Needs Related to Water for Energy, Research Report No. 93,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, November, 1974.
a U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1978 720-335/6054
174
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/5-78-003
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Manual for Evaluating Secondary Impacts of
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
5. REPORT DATE
April 1977
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Malcolm S. FitzPatrick, Dean R. Ericson, John S.
Willson, Dianne T. Wood, Gene Fax
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Abt Associates Inc.
55 Wheeler Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1HA095
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-3268
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Aqency
Office of Air, Land and Water Use
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORtNG AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/16
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This manual describes procedures for assessing secondary impacts of waste-
water treatment facilities. The manual guides the user through this impact assess-
ment process by describing EPA policy and regulations governing analysis of these im-
pacts; approaches to refine and improve existing projections of amount, type and
location of projected growth in a service area; and the range of potential secondary
impacts and alternative approaches for impact assessment. Application of projection
and impact assessment approaches are provided for various levels of sophistication,
consistent with analysis capabilities and available resources.
The manual also provides EPA Regional Reviewers with a convenient frame-
work for evaluating quality of local analyses of secondary impacts and an analytic
basis for imposing any needed special conditions.
This manual is a tool for planners and engineers preparing impact assess-
ments/ it does not supplant regulations which govern impact assessment processes.
The manual considers only secondary impact assessment. Measures to mitigate these
impacts have not been considered in the manual but should, of course, be imple-
mented where the impact warrants.
Fourteen areas of secondary impacts are covered in the manual, categorized
into four groups: Media Impacts (e.g., ambient noise levels); Sensitive Environmental
Area Impacts (e.g., floodplains); Unique Area Impacts (e.g., parklands); and Secondary
Economic Impacts (e.g. , impacts on property values)..
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Analytical Techniques
Environmental Surveys
Environment
Land Use
Urban Areas Assessments
Water Resources Planning
Secondary Impact
Assessment, Areawide
Wastewater Planning,
Analytical Techniques
14/A
Methods and
Equipment/ Cost
Effectiveness
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
UNLIMITED
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
175
2O. SECURITY CLASS (This page f
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
175
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Research Information Center
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. S3OO
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
Special Fourth-Class Rate
I
[ ^777 $
\
If your address is incorrect, please change on the above label
tear off; and return to the above address.
If you do not desire to continue receiving these technical
reports, CHECK HERE CD; tear off label, and return it to the
above address.
EPA-600/5-78-003
------- |