FINAL DRAFT
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
MAY 16,1977
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
I CHAPTER I - GENERAL PROJECT BACKGROUND
I A IDENTIFICATION OF MAJOR FEDERAL ACTION
I B OBJECTIVES
I C PROJECT SCOPE
I D PROJECT HISTORY
II CHAPTER II - THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
II A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
II AT Atmosphere
II Ala Climate
II Alb Air Quality
II Ale Noise
II Aid Odor
II A2 Land
II A2a Physical and Chemical
II A2al Topography
II A2a2 Geology
II A2a3 Soils
II A2b Biotic Communities
II A2bl Urban or Built-up Land
II A2b2 Agricultural Land
II A2b3 Forest Land
II A2b4 Barren Land
II A3 Wetlands and Water-Land Interface
II A3a Physical and Chemical
II A3b Biotic Coimmities
II A4 Water
II A4a Physical and Chemical
II A4al Ground water
II A4a2 Surface Water
II A4b Biotic Communities
II A4bl Streams and Canals
II A4b2 Lakes and Reservoirs
II A5 Sensitive Natural Areas
II B MAN MADE ENVIRONMENT
II B1 Demography and Economics
II Bla Current Population Data
II Bib Current Ecomonic Conditions
II Blc Projected Population
II Bid Projected Economic Conditions
II B2 Land Use Resources
II B2a Present General Land Use
II B2b Future General Land Use
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
II
II
II
II
B3
B3a
B3b
B3c
Archaeological, Cultural, Historical and Recreational Resources
Historical and Cultural Sites
Archaeological Sites
Recreational Facilities
II
B4
Transportation
II
B5
Resource Use
II
B6
Water Programs
II
B7
Other Community Services and Facilities
II
B8
Taxes and Capital Budqeting
II
BIO
Sensitive Man-Made Areas
II
C
DOCUMENTATION
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TABLE TITLE
1 Meterological data
2 State and Federal ambient air quality standards
3 Ambient concentration limits
4 Priority classifications of air pollutants
5 Area source emission estimates for air pollutants
6 Sound levels and human response
7 Survey of odor-producing facilities
8 Feet per mile fall for each designated stream segment
9 Upper Ocmulgee River Basin area surface mine operations
10 Mineral resources
11 Key to soil association by category
12 Soil association by county and category
13 Suitabilities of Yellow River Sub-basin soils
14 Farms, land use changes of agricultural enterprise, value of
products, and source distribution
15 Endangered or threatened plants
16 Endangered or status-undetermined fauna
17 Index to flood-prone areas shown on Figure 9
18 Chemical analysis of groundwater from 100 to 300 foot-deep
wells in Rockdale County
19, Discharge data for rivers in Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
20 Stream classifications within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
21 Population estimates 1960/1970-75
22 Upper Ocmulgee River Basin population characteristics, 1970
23 Yellow River Sub-basin population characteristics, 1970
24 Total population and density by urban and rural areas, 1960-
1970
25 Comparision of Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's share of Georgia
employment, Atlanta SMSA's share of Georgia employments, and
Goergia's share of U.S. employments
26 Components of change in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's
employment in major industrial sectors, 1960-1970
27 Upper Ocmulgee River Basin county employment by sector
28 Total personal income by major sources
29 Population projections by water quality management units
30 Population projections by census tract and water quality
management units
-------
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
39
40
41
42
43
44!
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
TABLE TITLE
Projected earnings by industrial sectors
Projected average annual rates of growth by industrial sectors
Current land-use In Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Funding history of 701 funds
Regulatory systems in Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Projected Future Land Use by WQMU and Sub-basin - 1980,
1990,2000
Future general aldn use in Yellow River Sub-basin
Historic and archaeological sites in Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin
Commuting patterns in Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Proposed highway improvements for the Yellow River Sub-basin
Estimated average daily travel/daily vehicle miles traveled
Existing water sources
Potential new water supply reservoirs
Present and projected potable water use
Major river basin water transfers in the.Atlanta region
Gallons per day consumption by precentages in the Atlanta
regions and average U.S. city
Water conservations/Wastewater conservation
Non-industrial and industrial water use
Treatment facilities data
Status of 201 facilities plans in the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin NPDES permits issued
Number of governments in the U.S.
Cumulative distribution of U.S. counties
Cumulative distribution of U.S. municipalities
Per capita finances in local governments, 1973-1974
Per capita expenditures for selected function in thirty
suburban counties
Growth in hovernmental finances between fiscal years 1970-72
and 1973-74
Yellow River Basin local government entities, 1976
Population and employment by counties for Yellow River
Sub-basin
Aggregate expenditures by activity, counties and cities
General Georgia statutes granting powers on selected local
services
-------
TABLE NO.
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
LIST OF TABLES (concluded )
TABLE TITLE
Actual delivery of various services by various governments
to the Yellow River Sub-basin
Revenues by gerneral sources
1976 ad valorem or property tax mi 11 age rate, assissed
valuation of property (net) and total revenues from this
source
Local taxes other than for property
DeKalb County sewer rates and service charges
DeKalb County water and sewerage system fund operation fund-
statement of income, year ending December 31, 1975
Gwinnett County sewer rates and charges
Lawrenceville water and sewer funds, 1976
Covington sewer system rate, charges, revenues and
bonds, 1976
Relationship of wastewater agencies in the Yellow River
Basin
-------
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Figure 12.
Figure 13.
Figure 14.
Figure 15.
Figure 16.
Figure 17.
Figure 18.
Figure 19.
Figure 20.
Figure 21.
Figure 22.
Figure 23.
Figure 24.
Figure 25.
Figure 26.
Figure 27.
Figure 28.
Figure 29.
Figure 30.
Figure 31.
Figure 32.
Figure 33.
Figure 34.
LIST OF FIGURES
Wind Rose, Atlanta, Georgia
Major Air Pollution Sources
Limited Access Highways And Airports
Location of Odor-Producing Facilities
Stream Profile, Alcovy River
Stream Profile, Yellow River
Stream Profile, South River
Slopes Averaging 25% or Greater & Soil Associations By Category For
Yellow River Sub-Basin
Stream Reaches In Yellow River Sub-Basin
Geologic Map Of Rockdale County
Quarries In Yellow River Sub-Basin
Soil Associations In Yellow River Sub-Basin
Flood Prone Areas, Yellow River Sub-Basin
Major Sub-Basins, Rivers & Tributaries
Sensitive Natural Areas & Inventory Sites
Age Disbursements In Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Water Quality Management Units
1970 Population densities by Census Tract In Yellow River Sub-Basin
Atlanta SMSA Economic Base Multiplier
Forecast Population Densities By Census Tract, 1980/1990/2000,
Yellow River Sub-Basin
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Existing Land Use
Georgia Area Planning & Development Commissions Map
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin 201 Facilities Plan
Yellow River Sub-Basin Growth Inducers & Restraints
Future Land Use Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Future Land Use Yellow River Sub-Basin
Historical, Cultural, Archaeological and Recreational Sites
Existing Annual Average 24-hour Traffic In Yellow River Sub-Basin
Existing Water Supply
Population, Water Demand, And Wastewater Generation In The Atlanta
Region, 1970-2000.
Programed Facilities At Phasing Periods In The Yellow River Sub-Basin
201 Facilities Plans For Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Counties & Principle Cities In Yellow River Sub-Basin
Major Waste Water Treatment Facilities
-------
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROJECT BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION
The First Edition, Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Water Quality Management
Plan was prepared by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environ-
mental Protection Division (EPD) in accordance with Public Law 92-500
(Section 303 (e) ). The Upper Ocmulgee Basin, which is one of 15 basins
designated by the State of Georgia for current study, contains approxi-
mately 1400 square miles. The Basin is located in the Piedmont region
of Georgia and lies in the eastern portions of the Atlanta area.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin includes the drainage areas of the South,
Yellow and Alcovy Rivers as well as minor tributaries flowing into Lake
Jackson. Lake Jackson is a man-made impoundment resulting from the Lloyd
Shoals Dam built by the Georgia Power Company in 1911. The Ocmulgee Riv-
er joins with the Oconee River in southcentral Georgia to form the Alta-
maha River, which flows to the Atlantic Ocean north of Brunswick, Georgia.
The water quality of the Basin varies according to the river system and
generally parallels the degree of urbanization in each of the major sub-
basins. The headwaters of the South River, which include portions of
the downtown area of the City of Atlanta, demonstrate the highest degree
of urbanization and consequently the worst water quality condition. Con-
versely, the Alcovy River drains a rural area and has the best water qual-
ity. The Yellow River geographically located between the South and Alcovy
Rivers is currently experiencing suburban development, and the maintenance
of its presently good water quality is a prime concern of the management
plan.
The purpose of this impact statement, therefore, is to (1) predict water
quality conditions in the Yellow River Sub-basin in the year 2000, (2) to
formulate and evaluate various management system alternatives, (3) to
meet future water quality standards, and (4) to recommend implementation
of a feasible water quality management strategy.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The basic objective of the Environmental Impact Statement is to review
the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Water Quality Management Plan in light of
the requirements of Section 303 (e) of Public Law 92-500, giving particular
attention to non-point source loading and management alternatives to evolve
a management strategy which will assure the maintenance of water quality
standards. In pursuance of this basic objective a variety of other objec-
tives are identified:
... Define a water quality management program which will assure
the attainment of Georgia water quality standards and where...
... Evaluate state and local policies and programs including
those for the management of land and other natural resources
which may have a beneficial effect on the maintenance of
water qua!ity...
-------
... Identify institutional arrangements and programs to im-
plement coordinated decisions designed to achieve water
quality goals and standards...
... Devise, evaluate and test applicable point and non-point
source controls, both structural and non-structural, toward
the achievement of water quality standards...
... Determine the effects of point and non-point sources re-
sulting from projected population increases for the Yellow
River Sub-basin...
... Determine the effects of projected loadings from each of
the sub-basins to Lake Jackson...
... Develop an implementable and practical management strategy
for the regulation and control of point and non-point
sources of pollution, and where possible enhance water
qua!ity...
... In pursuing the above objectives, provide for a broad based
geographically comprehensive public participation process
aimed at informing and involving the public in the water
quality management program.
PROJECT SCOPE
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin contains approximately 1490 square miles
including major portions of Gwinnett, Walton, DeKalb, Rockdale, Newton
and Henry Counties. Smaller portions of Butts, Jasper, Clayton and Ful-
ton Counties are also contained within the Basin. The Basin extends
approximately 40 miles in an east-west direction and 50 miles in a north-
south direction. The Basin Figure 13 identifies the Upper Ocmulgee Basin
with its major sub-basins, major municipalities, and other physical features.
WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS
The pollution of the South River has been documented since 1890. Periodic
re-evaluation since that date has occurred. Beginning in 1970, the Georgia
Environmental Protection Division has conducted investigations of water
quality on each of the major streams of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
Stream surveys conducted by Georgia Environmental Protection Division
since 1970 assessed the South River and many of its tributaries as either
"polluted" or "grossly polluted." The water quality of the Yellow River
during this time of surveying activitity was shown to be relatively high.
Chemical and biological samples demonstrate healthy conditions on the
main stem of the Yellow River and on several of its tributaries. Silt,
however, presents problems due to past mining activities and runoff
from construction activities at several locations in the upper reaches.
The same surveys for the Alcovy River determine that the water quality is
excellent chemically, bacterially, and from algae and micro-invertebrate
analysis.
-------
During 1969, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division, in cooperation
with the U. S. EPA, prepared a Water Quality Study of Jackson Lake Upper
Reservoir. This study preceded the National Eutrophication Survey con-
ducted in 1975. Both studies indicate that Lake Jackson is in the process
of accelerated eutrophication resulting from nutrient loads from the
South River and Yellow River (the South Rivar being the primary cause).
Algae blooms were reported during the summer and fall months of 1970 and
1975. Concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus in the South River embay-
ment provide readings four to 25 times greater than theoretical limits
of the Bowman-Wilder index. The potential for major fish-kills exists
due to the respiration of algae blooms in the lake.
Beginning in March of 1968, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division,
in cooperation with the City of Atlanta Water Pollution Control Division,
initiated a cooperative water quality monitoring program. Monthly water
quality samples are collected at nine locations along the South River with
results of these analyses being published annually. During 1973, Georgia
EPD began an intensive field investigation of the Yellow River Basin. The
results of these monitoring and intensive survey efforts portray the fol-
lowing picture for the South and Yellow River respectively. South River
is characterized by low dissolved oxygen concentrations, high concentra-
tions of nutrients and oxygen demanding materials, and extremely high
bacterial levels. A dissolved oxygen sag occurs in the vicinity of
Flakes Mill Road in DeKalb County with average dissolved oxygen concentra-
tions of 3.1 to 3.3 milligram per liter experienced. During the summer
dry months these conditions exist along the main stem of the South River
for a distance of 10 to 15 miles.
Conversely, water quality monitoring data on the Yellow and Alcovy Rivers
shows high water quality throughout the year. The onlv reported instances
contrary to this finding occur on tributaries to the Yellow River, Brumbe-
low and Sweetwater Creeks. On these tributaries relatively high BODs have
been found. However, generally speaking, water quality of the Yellow and
Alcovy Rivers has been found to be excellent with high dissolved oxygen
concentrations.
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
The water quality standards of the State of Georgia are incorporated in
the Rules of the Georgia Water Quality Control Board, Chapter 730-3 as
amended. While these rules do not specifically identify a non-degreda-
tion policy, they do speak to the enhancement of water quality in the State
of Georgia by stating..."the purposes and intent of this State in estab-
lishing water quality standards are to provide enhancement of water qual-
ity and the prevention of pollution^.. ."
These rules also provide water use classifications and standards for
each of the classified water uses. The criteria for each of the water
classifications vary, with the Drinking Water classification having the most
stringent quality criteria and Urban Systems having the least severe criteria
-------
On the basis of the Water Quality Management Plan, segments of the
three major rivers of the Upper Ocmulgee Basin have been classified
in accordance with the rules of the Georgia Water Quality Control Board.
Stream segments and their classifications are as follows:
L o c a t i o n Classification
South River —
Yellow River —
Jackson Lake —
Alcovy River —
Intrenchment
Creek —
Shoal Creek —
Conley Creek —
Doolittle
Creek —
Snapfinger
Creek
headwaters to Ga. Highway 81
Ga. Highway 124 to Porterdale
Water Intake
South River at Highway 36, Yellow
River at Highway 36, Alcovy River
at Newton Factory Bridge to Lloyd
Shoals Dam
Ga. Highway 138 to Covington
Water Intake
headwaters in Atlanta to conflu-
ence with South River
headwaters in DeKalb County to
confluence with South River
headwaters near Atlanta Army De-
pot to confluence with South River
headwaters in DeKalb County to
confluence with South River
headwaters in DeKalb County to
confluence with South River
Urban
Drinking Water
Recreation
Drinking Water
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Stream segments in each of the major sub-basins have been classified by
Georgia Environmental Protection Division as "limited" to insure that
stream quality standards are maintained. Segments which are presently
meeting water quality standards or which will with the application of se-
condary treatment are classified as "effluent limited." Segments that
will meet applicable water quality standards with the application of se-
condary treatment and with effluent dissolved oxygen concentrations of
5.0 mg/1 are classified as "effluent limited D.O. exception." Segments
which will not meet standards with the application of secondary treatment
are classified as "water quality limited." The maximum waste load from
point wastewater sources which will allow stream water quality standards
to be met is determined. In each instance, these determinations are based
largely on point sources without quantification of non-point sources due
to the lack of existing data.
-------
The existing condition of the Basin in terms of water supply withdrawals
and wastewater treatment facilities demonstrates that 80 percent of the
water supply currently used in the Basin occurs as a result of inter-
basin transfer, the source, of this water supply being the Chattahoochee
River including Lake Lanier. There are also five small surface water
intakes existing within the Basin, which are identified in the following
table:
Surface Water Intakes
County
Owner
Stream Source
Henry
Clayton County Water Authority
Little Cotton
Indian Creek
Henry
City of McDonough
Walnut Creek
Rockdale
Conyers Water System
Yellow River
Newton
City of Covington
Alcovy River
Newton
City of Porterdale
Yellow River
Source: Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Water Quality Management Plan,
Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Division, 1974.
WASTEWATER TREAMENT FACILITIES
The Upper Ocmulgee Basin is replete with a variety of wastewater treatment
facilities. These facilities range from antiquated Imhoff tanks, provid-
ing primary treatment, to more sophisticated biological treatment facilities
offering secondary level treatment.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin has a total of 102 wastewater treatment
facilities that treat domestic sewage. Fifty-two of the facilities are
institutionally or privately owned and have a total design capacity of
2.8 MGD. Facility sizes range from 0.006 to 20.0 million gallons per
day (MGD).
Thirty-nine of the 50 municipal discharges in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
have received NPDES permits. In terms of design flow capacity, 65.1 MGD
of the Basin total 68.3 MGD are under permit. Six of the 52 privately
and institutionally owned facilities are under NPDES permit.
There are less than six direct industrial discharges in the Basin. This
is primarily due to the existence of readily available municipal sewage
systems to receive industrial wastewater. Industrial discharges that do
exist are gravel-crushing operations in the Stone Mountain area which
-------
collect, settle and/or reuse their crushed stonewash water to the maxi-
mum extent possible. There are no major (EPA definition) industrial
discharges in the Basin. Twenty-five percent of the industrial dis-
charges have received NPDES permits.
In the 1974 municipal needs survey conducted by the State of Georgia it
was revealed that $209,449,000.00 was needed in the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin alone to install or upgrade treatment facilities, to construct or
upgrade collection systems, and to correct combined sewer situations.
The same survey reported the need of $236,970,000.00 to treat or control
stormwaters in urban areas. Future wastewater treatment expenditures
by existing dischargers will comply with the receiving stream water
quality standards.
The recently completed AWRS wastewater plan identified a variety of pro-1
jects which affect the Basin. These projects include land disposal in
south Clayton County and Basin transfer of either treated effluent or
raw sewage to regional treatment facilities. In addition, an effluent
disposal or "re-diversion" project is currently underway which will pro-
vide for treated effluent from Atlanta^ Intrenchment Creek, South River,
and Flint River plants to be pumped over the sub-basin divide for ulti-
mate discharge to the Chattahoochee River. The following identifies
the major public wastewater treatment facilities and their flows in million
gallons per day as of 1975.
-------
NON-STRUCTURAL PROGRAMS
A variety of non-structural programs are currently in operation or
hold promise for a significant improvement in water quality, particu-
larly in the area of pollutants resulting from non-point sources. The
AWRS investigated some of these non-structural alternatives concluding
that rate structures and building codes which require water-saving de-
vices hold the greatest promise for reducing water consumption.
The study, however, only briefly identifies areas for further investi-
gation regarding non-point sources. Such typical control devices as
stormwater retention requirements, erosion and sedimentation control
ordinances, flood plain ordinances, and watershed preservation techniques
all hold promise for reducing pollutant loads from non-point sources.
Some of these techniques are currently being employed by some jurisdic-
tions, but the pattern is not consistent throughout the Basin. Other
techniques at this stage are merely concepts without supporting author-
izing legislation or practical implementation techniques. One of the
major objectives of this EIS is to identify non-structural solutions
to reduce pollutant loads from non-point sources and to identify the
techniques required to implement them within the framework of a total
management system.
PROJECT HISTORY
The First Edition, Upper Ocmulqee River Basin Plan, prepared by the
Georgia EPD (DNR), was undertaken in compliance With Section 303 (e)
of the Federal Water Pollution Contract Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-
500). The First Edition Plan was so captioned in that it dealt with
existing data and did not involve extensive investigations in all sub-
ject areas to develop empirical data. The plan was subjected to public
hearing January 31, 1975, following a public notice issued December 27,
1974. The Basin Plan was officially transmitted to Region IV, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency on June 26, 1975.
Review comments of Region IV, U. S. EPA were transmitted to the Water
Quality Control Section, EPD, January 29, 1975. The letter identified
major points requiring further clarification as follows:
A. Phosphorus limitations to protect Lake Jackson are placed
on some plants even when advanced treatment is required.
The same limitations on phosphorus should be applied to all
plants or the rationale given for allowing exceptions.
B. Recommendations should be given on updating streams classi-
. fied as "urban" since the models show that all can meet
fishing criteria for dissolved oxygen.
C. The NPDES permits should be referenced with effluent limita-
tions and compliance schedules included.
-------
D. A segment priority list is needed and system for ranking
segments and facilities should be consistent to that in
the State program plan.
E. Municipal waste treatment needs and estimated cost should
be included in the plan.
F. A more complete compliance schedule is needed to provide
dates for all milestones. Also, the implementation tables
should include other effluent objectives in addition to
BOD, such as ammonia and phosphorus.
G. Reference should be made to facility planning and other
planning in the area.
In July of 1975, EPD (DNR) transmitted the first addendum to the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin Water Quality Management Plan, answering comments
received at the public hearing and also those of the Region IV EPA.
A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was circulated on December 18, 1975
by Mr. Jack E. Ravan, Regional Administrator, Region IV, EPA. This Notice
of Intent specifically identified the Yellow River Sub-basin as a focus of
alternative wastewater treatment management systems and also indicated the
importance of investigating the secondary effects of development. This
decision calling for an EIS was further explained to EPD in a letter from
Mr. Ravan dated February 24, 1976. This letter indicated that one of the
major considerations of his decision was the request of several parties
concerned with the total impact of development upon water quality in the
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
While undoubtedly many groups and agencies were concerned with the Basin
plan, the record indicates that the dominant group was the DeKalb Chapter
of the Georgia Conservancy, Incorporated. This group, through their
attorney, formally placed their request in the form of a letter petition-
ing for an EIS on the Yellow River Basin before the Regional Administrator
on July 6, 1973. The- response of Mr. Ravan, dated August 14, 1973, informed
the Conservancy of the ongoing Upper Ocmulgee Basin Water Quality Manage-
ment Plan and deferred action until the completion of that plan.
The record continues with a subsequent request by the Georgia Conservancy,
DeKalb Chapter, dated April 11, 1975 calling for an EIS on the Upper Oc-
mulgee River Basin, specifically in light of the request for a Step II
Grant Application on the South River Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility.
The response to this letter by Mr. Ravan in May of 1975 informed the DeKalb
Chapter of the Georgia Conservancy that no decision had yet been reached
to perform an EIS, and that the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Water Quality
Management Plan had been returned for additional work. The DeKalb Chapter
had officially petitioned for an Environmental Impact Statement on the
Yellow River Basin in July of 1973. Subsequently, during April 1975, the
Citizens Task Force of the Metropolitan Water Resources Study formally
-------
requested an EIS on the entire Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. During this
same time period, algae blooms were experienced during the spring and
fall seasons on Lake Jackson. The National Eutrophication Survey report
of Lake Jackson (July 1975) attributed these blooms to high concentra-
tion of nitrogen and phosphorus flowing into the lake, particularly from
the South River but to a lesser degree from the Yellow River.
During this time period, the Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study
was concluding its wastewater management plan which stated..."the pri-
mary non-point source problem in the region is urban runoff from heavily
developed areas. Estimated on an annual basis, the urban runoff load-
ing equals the loads from point sources, at current treatment levels."
The Water Supply Plan of the Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study
also suggested that the Conyers-Rockdale County Water System anticipate
abandoning its water intake on the Yellow River and pursue intergovern-
mental agreements with Gwinnett and DeKalb Counties for future supplies.
The reason given for this recommendation was that ..."future development
..will result in unsuitable water quality unless the watersheds and
streams are protected from excessive pollution from wastewater discharges
and urban runoff."
The chain of events occurring within a three-year period led to the call
for an EIS. The common thread running throughout these historical events
is that non-point pollutant loads resulting from increased urbanization,
particularly in the Yellow River Sub-basin, poses significant problems
for the maintenance of water quality standards.
The action of the Regional Administrator is a forceful acknowledgement
that non-point sources and the identification of means to control them
are critical to the maintenance of water quality standards. The EIS,
therefore, requires a thorough evaluation and analysis of management alter-
natives to control such sources and to evaluate their consequences to
Lake Jackson.
-------
II. THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
A. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
1. Atmosphere
a. CIimate « The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin has a temperate climate and lies
within the humid subtropics climatic zone where for most of the year the dominant
air masses are moist, warm, and unstable. In summer the area is particularly
affected by the Bermuda High pressure system which brings maritime tropical air
inland from its anticyclonic circulation. During the winter the basin is
affected by the mid-latitude belt of low pressure systems so that polar continen-
tal and maritime tropical air masses dominate (Critchfield 1966). The humid
subtropical climatic regime is altered somewhat by the presence of the Appala-
chian mountains to the north of the basin. Elevations in the basin average 700
to 1000 feet (ft) and are not a major climatic factor.
Within the basin, the Atlanta Station of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) at Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport is the only
recording station for detailed climatological data (Table 1). Limited information
is recorded at Covington and Norcross NOAA stations.
Summer temperatures in the basin are warm with daytime highs averaging 80-90°
Fahrenheit (°F) for the months of June, July, August, and September. Covington
records a mean daily temperature of 76.8, 79.0, 78.4, and 73.0°F for these
months, respectively (U. S. Department of Commerce 1973). The highest tempera-
ture ever recorded at the Atlanta Station is 98°F; afternoon high temperatures
equal or exceed 90°F less than one day in five (U. S. Department of Commerce 1975).
Winters are mild and cold spells are not prolonged. For the winter months, the
Covington station lists these mean temperatures: December 44.9°F, January 44.1°F,
and February 46.6°F; Atlanta mean temperatures are between one and two degrees
cooler (U. S. Department of Commerce 1973). Freezing temperatures, 32°F and
below, occur about 60 times per year (U. S. Department of Commerce 1975).
Annual precipitation for the basin is approximately 50 inches (in.), almost all
of which falls as rain. The driest month is usually October with a mean of 2.5 in.
-------
a
Table 1. Meteorological data: normals, means and extremes for Atlanta, Georgia.
Temperatures F
Precipitation in inches
Normal
Extremes
Daily Daily Record Record
Month maximum minimum Monthly highest lowest
Water equivalent
Snow,
ice
pellets
Maximum Minimum Maximum Maximum
Normal monthly monthly in 24 hrs. monthly
c
15
15
41.
41
41
41
Jan
51.4
33.4
42.4
77
-3
4.34
10.82
1.42
3.91
8.3
Feb
54.5
35.5
45.0
79
8
4.41
12.77
0.99
5.67
3.9
Mar
61.1
41.1
51.1
85
20
5.84
11.51
2.44
5.08
4.8
Apr
71.4
50.7
61.1
88
26
4.61
9.86
1.45
4.26
Td
May
79.0
59.2
69.1
93
37
3.71
7.83
0.32
5.13
0.0
Jun
84.6
66.6
75.6
98
48
3.67
7.52
0.74
3.41
0.0
Jul
86.5
69.4
78.0
98
53
4.90
11.26
1.20
5.44
0.0
Aug
86.4
68.6
77.5
98
56
3.54
8.69
0.88
5.05
0.0
Sep
81.2
63.4
72.3
96
36
3.15
7.32
0.26
5.46
0.0
Oct
72.5
52.3
62.4
88
29
2.50
7.53
T
3.27
0.0
Nov
61.9
40.8
51.4
84
14
3.43
15.72
0.41
4.11
1.0
Dec
52.7
34.3
43.5
77
1
4.24
9.92
1.08
3.85
2.5
Year
70.3
51.3
60.8
98
-3
48.34
15.72
T
5.67
8.3
Table 1. Continued
-------
Table 1. (continued)
Relative humidity %
Wind
Mean number of days
Month
Hour
01
Hour
07
(Local
Hour
13
time)
Hour
19
Mean
speed
mph
Prevailing
direction6
Fastest mile
Speed
mph1" Direction
Thunder-
storms
Heavy fog, visi
bility — 1/4 mi
15
15
15
15
37
14
33
33
41
41
Jan
77
80
61
66
10.5
NU
54
NW
1
5
Feb
70
76
55
58
11.0
NU
59
W
1
3
Mar
70
79
52
55
11.0
NW
69
SE
4
3
Apr
72
80
52
53
10.1
NW
68
SW
4
2
May
79
83
55
59
8.6
NW
65
SW
6
1
Jun
84
86
39
65
7.9
NW
70
NE
9
1
Jul
88
90
64
71
7.4
SW
56
SE
11
2
Aug
87
91
62
70
7.1
NW
49
NW
8
2
Sep
84
89
61
69
8.0
ENE
49
N
3
2
Oct
78
84
53
65
8.3
NW
47
NW
1
2
Nov
76
82
54
63
9.1
NW
46
NE
1
3
Dec
76
80
60
67
9.8
NW
63
W
1
5
Year
78
83
57
63
9.1
NW
70
NE
50
31
Table 1. Continued
-------
Table 1. (concluded)
aSource: U. S. Department of Commerce. 1975. Local climatological data, annual summary
with comparative data, 1975, Atlanta, Georgia. Natl. Clim. Cent., Asheville, N. C. n.p.
^Normals are based on record for the 1941-1970 period.
cLength of record, in years, through the current year.
= Trace amount.
Prevailing wind direction -- record through 1963.
^Fastest mile wind-speed is fastest observed 1-minute value when the direction is in tens of
degrees.
-------
of rain; the wettest month is usually March with a mean of 5.3 to 6.0 in. of rain.
Among the three stations in the basin, Norcross, Covington, and Atlanta, similar
precipitation normals are recorded and the difference from one station to the
next is less than 0.85 in. of rain per month (U. S. Department of Commerce 1973).
Average annual snowfall is about 1.5 in. However, a snow of 4 in. or more occurs
about once every five years (U. S. Department of Commerce 1975).
Storms entering the basin are usually fully developed systems, especially in the
winter, involving tens of thousands of square miles. These storms, which commonly
dominate the basin's weather for several days at a time, are often accompanied by
heavy rains. The maximum recorded rainfall in a 24-hour (hr) period at the Atlanta
Station during 1975 was 2.25 in. (in April); the maximum 24-hr rainfall recorded
in Atlanta in 41 years of observations occurred in February 1961 and equalled 5.7 in,
(U. S. Department of Commerce 1975). One type of large storm, the hurricane,
reaches the basin only in remnants, since a hurricane loses its tropical characteri-
zation as it crosses land /the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is located approximately
250 miles (mi) from both the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico/. High winds
associated with these storms are not as much of a concern as are heavy rains and
subsequent flooding. Smaller, localized storms occur throughout the year but
are especially frequent during spring and early summer months. The Atlanta Station
records approximately ten thundershowers a month during May, June, and July, with
a yearly total of about 50 such storms (U. S. Department of Commerce 1975).
Winds are from the northwest for all but two months of the year, July and Septem-
ber, when they prevail from the southwest and east-northeast respectively (Figure 1).
Winds average only about 9 miles per hour (mph) during the year (U. S. Department
of Commerce 1975).
Tornadoes, with winds up to 200 mph, are most likely to occur in March, April, or
May. The counties in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin list these occurrences for
approximately the last 25 years:
Rockdale 1
Clayton 3
Newton 3
Henry 4
Gwinnett 4
DeKalb 5
Walton 6
Fulton 6
-------
NW
NNE
SW
Figure 1-. Wind rose diagram for Atlanta, Georgia
Source: U.S. Department of Coimierce, NOAA. 1975. Local climatological data,
annual summary with comparative dats, 1975, Atlanta, Georgia. Natl. Clim
Center, Asheville, N.C. n.p.
-------
The average path of Georgia tornadoes is about 10 mi long and about 250 yards
wide. Typically, tornadoes last only a few minutes, but there is wide variation
in size and duration (Carter 1970).
The relative humidity recorded at the Atlanta Station averages 70 percent annually
with a typical high of 90 percent for the summer months.
Heavy fog, with visibility 1/4 mi or less occurs throughout the year, but more
commonly in the winter, for a yearly average of 31 days (U. S. Department of
Commerce 1975).
Stable atmospheric conditions, such as those created by a temperature inversion,
occur only occasionally in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. Such conditions, which
retard the dispersion of airborne contaminants and thus trap pollutants in the
lower atmosphere, are generally evidenced by the formation of smog. Based on
advisories issued by the Atlanta Weather Service Office, major stagnations occur
only once or twice a year, usually during fall or summer months (personal communi-
cation, National Weather Service Office, Atlanta, Georgia, 3 December 1976).
b. Air Quality — Air quality in a specified locality or region describes the
state of cleanliness of the ambient air. Air pollutants in the form of gases,
liquid droplets, or solid particles are emitted into the ambient air by both
natural and man-made sources. Natural sources include vegetation, wind-transported
dust, and lightning. Man-made sources include internal combustion engines,
industrial processes, heating systems, and waste disposal methods. Although
natural sources emit a greater quantity of pollutants on a worldwide basis,
man-made sources centered around urban areas emit large concentrations of contam-
inants that create local and regional pollution problems. Air pollutants reduce
visibility, produce obnoxious odors, damage personal property and crops, and create
a public health hazard. It has been estimated that the national cost of air
pollution damage in 1968 totaled $16.1 billion--$5.2 billion for residential
property, $4.7 billion for materials, $6.1 billion for health, and $0.1 billion
for vegetation (Barrett and Waddell 1973).
Factors which affect air quality (or conversely air pollution potential) include'.
1) the magnitude and distribution of emission sources within a region and 2) the
dispersion of these emissions as controlled by wind speed, wind direction, and
-------
atmospheric stability which is characterized by rates of diffusion and by the
height in the atmosphere where mixing occurs. High wind speeds and high heights
of mixing represent conditions of low air pollution potential, while low wind
speeds and low heights of mixing represent conditions of high air pollution
potential.
Stable atmospheric conditions that retard the dispersion of airborne contami-
nants and thus trap pollutants in the lower atmosphere are relatively infrequent
in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. Air stagnation advisories, which indicate
occurrence of stable atmospheric conditions (i.e., high air pollution potential),
generally are issued only once or twice a year by the Atlanta Weather Service
Office, usually during the summer or fall. Prevailing northwesterly winds
averaging 9 mph help disperse air pollutants released from facilities in the
study area.
The Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GDNR 1975a) has adopted ambient air
quality standards which state that "No person shall cause, suffer, permit, or allow
emission from any source the quantities of compounds listed below which would cause
the ambient air concentrations listed to be exceeded." The aforementioned com-
pounds and ambient air concentrations, as given by the State, are shown in Table 2.
National ambient air quality standards, as set forth by the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), are also listed in Table 2. These federal standards
are divided into two levels of protection: primary ambient air quality
standards are defined as levels of air quality necessary to protect the public
health, while secondary ambient air quality standards are defined as levels of
air quality necessary to protect the public welfare (primarily property) from
any known or anticipated adverse effects of an air pollutant. In addition to
establishing these standards, EPA also established a regional classification
system based upon measured ambient air quality, where known, or where unknown,
upon estimated air quality in the area of maximum pollutant concentration.
Each region was classified separately with respect to sulfur oxides, particulate
matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and photochemical oxidants. Priority
classifications of these pollutants are defined in Table 3. Classifications of
the Air Quality Control Regions (AQCR) represented in the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin with respect to each of these pollutants are shown in Table 4.
-------
Table 2. State arid Federal ambient air quality standards
Pollutant Units
Time interval
Georgia
Suspended ug/nT
particulates
maximum 24-hour con-
centration
ug/m annual geometric mean
150
60
Sulfur
dioxide
(so2)
ug/m
ppm
ug/m3
ppm
ug/m3
PPm
maximum 24-hour con-
centration
annual arithmetic mean
715(1 hr)
0.28
229
0.09
43
0.015
Nitrogen
dioxide
(no2)
ug/nr
ppm
ug/nf
ppm
maximum 24-hour con-
centration
annual arithmetic mean
300
0.15
100
0.05
3
Carbon mg/m maximum 1-hour con- 40
monoxide ppm centration 35
(00)
mg/m maximum 8-hour con- 10
ppm centration 9
EPA^ Reference measurement
Primary Secondary method
260 150 High volume
75 60 High volume
1300(3 hr) West-Gaeke
0.50
365 260 West-Gaeke
0.14
80 60 West-Gaeke
0.03 0.02
100 100 Cond. Method-Arsenite
0.05 0.05 Chemiluminescense
40 40 Non-dispersive infrared
35 35 spectrometry
10 10 Non-dispersive infrared
9 9 spectrometry
Table 2. Continued
-------
Table 2. (concluded)
Pollutant Units'
Time interval
Georgia
EPA
Primary Secondary
Reference measurement
method
Total non- ug/m"
methane ppm
hydrocarbons
(HC)
maximum 3-hour con-
centration
98
0.15
160
0.24
160
0.24
Flame ionization detector
Total
oxidants
(ozone)
ug/m maximum 1-hour con-
ppm centration
98
0.15
160
0.08
160
0.08
Chemiluminescense
Standard conditions.for determinations: SO2 at 0 C, 1 atmosphere; N02» CO, HC, and ozone at 25 C,
1 atmosphere. Unit measurements: ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; mg/nw = milligrams per cubic
meter, and ppm = parts per million.
^EPA standards specify that maximum 1-hour, 8-hour, and 24-hour concentrations are not to be exceeded
more than once per year.
cSource: Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1975. Rules and regulations for air quality
control. Environmental Protection Division, Atlanta.
^Source: General Services Administration. 1973. Code of federal regulations 40: protection of the
environment, part 52. U. S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, D. C.
-------
Table 3. Ambient concentration limits which define the EPA Priority Classification System.3
Pollutant Priority
I
II
III
3 b
Sulfur oxides (ug/m )
Greater than
From-to
Less than (<)
Annual arithmetic mean
24-hour maximum
3-hour maximum
100(0.04)c
455(0.17)
60-100(0.02-0.04)
260-455(0.10-0.17)
Any cone 1300(0.50)
-1300(0.50)
60(0.02)
260(0.10)
1300(0.50)
Suspended particulates
(ug/m3)
>
From-to
<
Annual geometric mean
24-hour maximum
95
95
60-95
150-325
60
150
«) j
Carbon monoxide (mg/ni )
Greater than or
equal to
From-to
<
1-hour maximum
8-hour maximum
55
14
--
55
14
o
Nitrogen dioxide (ug/m )
Froin-to
<
Annual arithmetic mean
110
--
110
Photochemical oxidants
(ug/m3)
From-to
<
1-hour maximum
195(0.10)
195(0.10)
o
Hydrocarbons (ug/m )
From-to
<
1-hour maximum
195(0.10
"*""
195(0.10)
aSource: General Services Administration. 1973. Code of federal regulations 40: protection of
the environment, part 51. Washington, D. C.
bMicrograms/cubic meter
cValues in parentheses are parts per million (ppm).
^Milligrams/cubic meter
-------
Table 4. Priority classification of air pollutants in the Air Quality Control Regions (AQCR's)
represented in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
Pollutant
AQCR
Particulate
matter
Sulfur
oxides
Nitrogen
dioxide
Carbon
monoxide
Photochemical
oxidants
(hydrocarbons)
Metropolitan Atlanta*5
Intrastate
I
I
I
III
III
Central Georgia0
Intrastate
I
I
III
III
III
Northeast Georgia^
Intrastate
II
III
III
III
III
aSource: General Services Administration. 1973. Code of federal regulations 40: protection
of the environment, part 52. U. S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, D. C.
^Metropolitan Atlanta Intrastate AQCR includes Butts, Clayton, DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry,
and Rockdale counties.
cCentral Georgia Intrastate AQCR includes Jasper County.
"^Northeast Georgia Intrastate AQCR includes Newton and Walton counties.
-------
More specific information regarding ambient air quality in the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin may be obtained from area and point sources emission inventory
records compiled by the Air Protection Branch of the Georgia Department of
Natural Resources or from monitoring data collected by the Air Quality
Evaluation Section, GDNR. These data reveal that suspended particulates and
sulfur dioxide are the major concerns within the study area. Area source
emission estimates, by county, list no estimated emission values for nitrogen
dioxide, carbon monoxide, or hydrocarbons. Emission estimates for suspended
particulates range from 85 tons per year in Fulton County to 1 ton per year in
Butts County (Table 5). Estimates of sulfur dioxide emissions range from 40
tons per year in Fulton County to 0 tons per year in Butts, Clayton, and Jasper
counties (Table 5).
Appendix A (Table A-l) contains a list of identified point sources within the
study area (these facilities are listed by county, and therefore all may not
be located within actual project boundaries), major air pollutants discharged
by each (in tons per year), and allowable pollutant discharges. Figure 2
shows the relative locations of these air pollution sources. Like the area
sources data, the point source data indicate that the area's major air pollutants
are suspended particulates and sulfur dioxide. These data also reveal that
facilities within the area are generally emitting suspended particulates and
sulfur oxides far below their maximum allowable emissions for these pollu-
tants. According to EPA, Air Enforcement Branch (personal communication, Atlanta,
7 January 1977), six facilities within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are not
currently in compliance with state and federal ambient air quality standards.
These facilities, however, are meeting an EPA-approved schedule for attaining
compliance.
The state maintains air quality monitoring stations in three counties which lie
partially within the Upper Ocmulgee drainage. Suspended particulates are
measured at one location—the McDonough Health Center--in Henry County; at three
locations—the DeKalb County Health Department, Doraville Health Center, and
Lithonia Health Center—in DeKalb County; and at 11 locations in Fulton County-
representative Fulton County locations chosen for this study are the Fulton
County Health Department, South River Treatment Plant, Georgia Tech Placement
Center, and Fire Station #34. Of these three counties, only Fulton County has
state monitoring data regarding sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon
-------
Table 5. Area source emission estimates for air pollutants in the
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.a
a
Air quality b Emission estimates (tons/year)
control region (AQCR) County Suspended particulates Sulfur dioxide
Metropolitan Atlanta Butts 1 0
Intrastate
Clayton 3 0
DeKalb 45 21
Fulton 85 40
Gwinnett 13 7
Henry 7 4
Rockdale 2 1
Central Georgia Jasper 5 0
Intrastate
Northeast Georgia Newton 7 1
Intrastate
Walton 7 1
aSource: Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Division, Air Protection Branch, Atlanta. 1975.
bYear of record for each county's data is 1974.
C
Concentrations of nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide
are extremely low in these counties; area source data sheets provided by
Georgia's Air Protection Division list no emission estimates for these
pollutants.
-------
J \
Norcrou (2)
GwoMtt County v,
(I no city 9Mt«m)
ATLAW'
' RAdutt* Courify/ V |
"?%.(I n* city vHnUl ) ( ,
Cotmqtom ¦
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
MAJOR AIR POLLUTION SOURCES
FIGURE 2
-------
monoxide; photochemical oxidants have been monitored in DeKalb County. Hydro-
carbons are not currently monitored in the Atlanta area, as the State has
experienced some difficulties with their analytical system and is presently
awaiting EPA approval of a new analyzer (personal communication, Air Quality
Evaluation Section, GDNR, Atlanta, 7 January 1977).
Monitoring data from DeKalb, Fulton, and Henry counties for 1975 and the first
and second quarters of 1976 represent a typical air quality picture for the
project area. These data, presented in Appendix A (Tables A-2, A-3, and A-4-),
reveal that suspended particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and
carbon monixide, are generally quite low and only once during this time period
was any established air quality standard for these four parameters exceeded —
3
the 24-hour maximum suspended particulates value of 164.0 ug/m recorded at the
Georgia Tech Placement Center in 1975 exceeded the State and secondary Federal
3
standard of 150 ug/m . Although mean concentrations of photochemical oxidants
(ozone) measured at South DeKalb College are also generally rather low, both
q
state and federal maximum 1-hour standards (98 and 160 ug/m , respectively) were
exceeded in 1975 and in the second and third quarters of 1976 (Table A-5).
Generally all available data indicate the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin currently
possesses relatively clean air, with state and federal ambient air quality
standards rarely exceeded, except in the case of ozone in DeKalb County. The
data reveal that the major pollutants in the area are suspended particulates
and sulfur dioxide, but even these pollutants are generally well below
adopted ambient air quality standards.
c. Noise — Noise is a parameter of air quality and excessive noise is classified
as an environmental pollutant (U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1974). Noise
is usually measured at the source in decibels (dB), with the dB level inversely
proportional to the distance from the source (Table 6). Some of the effects of
noise caused by transportation, construction, manufacturing, blasting, etc.,
are interference with communication and sleep and damage to hearing. Furthermore,
the human body interprets loud noise as a stress, and the body's physiological
response to such noise is similar to its responses to danger (U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency 1972).
Much of the Yellow River sub-basin is rural and excessive noise is not a signifi-
cant problem at this time. Likely noise pollution sources in the sub-basin would
be airports, superhighways and certain industrial operations, such as quarrying.
Existing airports and superhighways in the area are shown on Figure 3.
-------
Table 6. Sound levels and human response.3
Cause
Noise level
in decibels
Human response
Jet takeoff from 200 ft
Auto horn from 3 ft
Jet takeoff from 2000 ft
Construction site
(Estimated) Quarry
operation
Heavy truck from 100 ft
Freeway traffic from 50 ft
Freight train from 50 ft
Light auto traffic from
100 ft
(Estimated) rural area
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Pain
Maximum vocal
effort
Hearing damage
with 8 hour
exposure
Stress reactions
Annoyance;
interrupts
conversation
Barely audible
Threshold of hearing
aSource: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1972. Noise
pollution. Washington, D. C. 12 pp.
-------
Noise pollution is controlled by federal law in the Noise Control Act of
1972. There are no state or local ordinances for the Yellow River sub-
basin (personal communication, T. M. Leslie, environmental engineer, Atlanta
Regional Commission, Atlanta, Georgia, 2 December 1976); however, the Atlanta
Regional Commission (ARC) has proposed a noise policy for its planning
district, which includes DeKalb, Gwinnett, and Rockdale counties. The ARC
(1976) uses a composite noise rating (a weighted decibel measure that allows
for duration and other factors) and its plan states:
New residential land uses should be prevented in those
areas within the 100 composite noise rating contour experienc-
ing most intense noise impacts. Incentive programs should be
developed and implemented for the encouragement of industrial,
commercial and other land uses in appropriate portions of the
100 composite noise rating contour.
Similar noise policies are expected from the Mcintosh Trail and Northeast
Georgia Area Planning and Development commissions which cover the remaining
counties of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
d. Odor — A survey was made of the five counties comprising the major portion
of Upper Ocmulgee River Basin—DeKalb, Gwinnett, Newton, Rockdale, and Walton—
and facilities in these counties that might be major odor producers were
listed (Table 7). However, none of these facilities is actually in the
Yellow River sub-basin; most are located within 5 mi of the drainage divide,
to the northwest (Figure 4). The average prevailing wind direction, from
the northwest for most of the year, may bring odors from these industries
to the Yellow River sub-basin but there are no data to confirm this. Odor
pollution is not currently a problem in the Yellow River sub-basin.
-------
Table 7. Survey of odor-producing facilities in the Yellow River sub-basin
area.3
Chemical
Number
of
facilities
Facility
location,
city
Chlorine, compressed/liquified
0
—
Acetylene, CCL, and gases
elemental compressed/liquified
0
—
Pigments, such as TiC^ or
Zn oxide
0
Acids, such as sulfuric or nitric
1
Chamblee
Resins and plastics
1
Tucker
Household bleaches
3
Decatur,
Tucker and
Conyers
Textile finishes
0
—
Paint products
5
Decatur,
Tucker,
Norcross
and
Chamblee
Chemical compounds, cyclic
intermediates
0
—
Insecticides
0
--
Total
10
aSource: Personal communication, Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
Environmental Protection Division, Air Protection Branch, Atlanta, December
1976.
-------
IJACKSON
' LAKE
, ¦" ¦ LIMITED ACCESS HI4mUY3
O AMPONTS
- ¦ KMLRQA03
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS. AIRPORTS 8
RAILROADS
FIGURE 3
-------
Oteotur
ATLAN
.JACKSON
' LAKE
» Km.
Ml.
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
LOCATION OF ODOR PRODUCING FACILITIES
FIGURE 4
-------
2. Land
a. Physical and Chemical --
1) Topography. Georgia lies within five physiographic provinces. A
small section of the Appalachian Plateaus province is in the extreme northwest
corner of the state; the Valley and Ridge province and the Blue Ridge pro-
vince are in the north; the Piedmont province is south of these, and the
Coastal Plain province occupies approximately the southern half of the
state. The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is entirely within the Piedmont pro-
vince.
The Piedmont province is characterized by rolling and hilly topography,
although a few mountains, most of which are outliers of the Blue Ridge, do
occur. In the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin there are isolated mountains, such
as Stone Mountain and Panola Mountain, which are erosion-resistant and
which stand several hundred feet above the surrounding area. However, the
basin terrain is generally rolling, with local relief of approximately 100
to 200 ft. Near Jackson Lake the elevations range from about 600 to 800 ft
above mean sea level (msl), while elevations near the headwaters range
from about 900 to 1100 ft above msl.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is drained by a dendritic stream pattern.
The South River drainage is the most striking dendritic system; the Alcovy
River drainage displays an almost parallel pattern. The streams have
gentle gradients and few rock exposures; many streams are aggrading and
have substantial deposits of alluvium (Herrmann 1954). Structural or
lithologic control of drainage is often lacking in the Piedmont province
(Thornbury 1965) and the overall fluvial cycle of the study area is probably
one of maturity.
Streams within the Upper Ocmulgee drainage ultimately empty into the
Atlantic Ocean. At the northern end of the basin, in the Duluth, Norcross,
and Suwanee quadrangles, the headwaters are cutting within 1 mi of the
tributaries of the Chattahoochee River, which flows to the Gulf of Mexico.
Stream profiles of the Alcovy, Yellow, and South rivers are shown in Figures
5, 6, and 7, respectively.
-------
~r
65
U.S.29-R.M.62.3
~r
53
US 78- R.M.42.2
1R. I05I-R.M.33.B
| GEORGIA R.R. BRIOGE-R.M. 28.9
U.S. 278-R.M. 23.7
nqa.
ut IOOO
£ -
J
8
X
4
H 900
•-
111
f 800
700
henoersonmill rd
R.M.14.8
-r
45
NEWTON
FACTORY
BRIDGE
R.M.9.B
LAKE JACKSON
60
~I
50
~r~
40
-r~
35
~T~
30
~T~
25
RIVER MILES ABOVE CONFLUENCE WITH SOUTH RIVER
STREAM PROFILE
ALCOVY'RIVER
FIGURE 5
-------
1100
SR 80- R.M.69.S
1000
8R ieo-R.M.ee.i
DAVIS HILL R0.-R.M.S8.C
SR 8348- R.M. 63.0
ANHISTOWN AD.-44.7
PLEASANT HILL RD.-R.M.37.4
SR 80-R.M. 31.8
8R I3B-R.M.89.7
ALMON RO.-R.MMO
PORTERDALE OUMP
R.M.18.0
<
K
X
<
hi
a
ID
L
til
•00
800
700
ROCKY PLAIN RO.
R.M.9.7
~r
00
_r
48
~T~
40
"T"
38
T~
88
LAKE
JACKSON
"T
70
-r
•s
"T"
•0
"T
88
~T
30
RIVER MILES ABOVE CONFLUENCE WITH SOUTH RIVER
f UV <-»
STREAM PROF/LE
YELLOW RIVER
FIGURE 6
-------
I SOUTH EXPRESSWAY A.M. #1,4
PAYOR RD. R.M. 80.B
LAKEWOOD AVE R.M. S9.7
»00 -
J0NEB80R0 RD. R.M.97.B
US M R.M, 8®.4
Ul
>
uj
•00 -
BOULOERCREST RD. R.M.BS.S
PATHERSVILLE RD. R.M.31.7
9«UP RD. R.M. BO.0
FLAKES MILL RD. R.M.47.0
PANOLA SHOALS TOO
KLONDIKE RD. R.M SB •
S.R.I38 R M.SS.t
OOELMY BRIDGE R.M. tt.B
SRCO R M.83.0
SUTLER'S BRIDOE
i. IS.I
•00 -
8R Bl
R.M.II
•0
~r
SB
t~
80
~r
48
40
T
SB
~T
30
-r
IS
~r
10
RIVER MILES ABOVE CONFLUENCE WITH ALC0VY RIVER
STREAM PROFILE SOUTH RIVER
FIGURE 7
-------
The Yellow River displays a gentle gradient as it falls an average of approxi-
mately 10 to 12 ft per mi from its headwaters to Jackson LakeJ Feet per
mile of fall for each designated stream segment in the Yellow River sub-
basin are shown in Table 8. Valleys cut by the Yellow River and its
tributaries are not unusually deep or narrow. One named escarpment,
McDaniels Bluff in the Snellville quadrangle, stands about 100 ft above
the river. Shoals are present in the Yellow River in the Porterdale
quadrangle. Near Jackson Lake, low-lying lands are likely to be marshy
(Worthville quadrangle). Another extensive marsh is located along Big
Haynes Creek, a tributary of the Yellow River, in the Milstead quadrangle.
The Yellow River sub-basin is more urban at the western and northern sides
near Atlanta, and developed lands, including towns and roads, are usually
located at higher elevations on broad ridgetops. Roads are especially
likely to follow ridges. For example, Ga-20, which parallels 1-20 near
Conyers, follows the drainage basin divide of the Yellow River and South
River sub-basins in the Conyers quadrangle. In the Lawrenceville quadrangle,
Ga-82 follows the divide between the Alcovy River and Yellow River sub-
basins.
Areas within the Yellow River sub-basin where the slope of the land is
greater than 25 percent are plotted on Figure 8. In the Yellow River sub-
basin these slopes are usually found along drainageways, with the greatest
frequency occurring in Gwinnett County where the headwaters have cut a
more rugged terrain. In Newton County {at the mouth of the Yellow River)
there are no slopes greater than 25 percent. Areas of pavement and other
rock outcrop are not included in the slope designations.
2) Geology. The rocks of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin in the
Piedmont province are composed of igneous and metamorphic types that are
often collectively termed crystalline rocks. As opposed to sedimentary
rocks, which usually exist in distinguishable stratified units, crystalline
rocks display a very complex structure. The study area has undergone ex-
tensive metamorphism with extreme deformation. Much of the Upper Ocmulgee Basir
Hhe upper reach falls approximately 15 ft/mi, while the lower reach
falls an average of 6 ft/mi.
-------
-1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
TABLE 8
FALL PER REACH OF SWEETWATER CREEK
(see figure 9 for stream reaches)
IDENTIFICATION
REACH
OF
LENGTH
REACH
(MILES)
WTF 3192
.0
WTF 3192 to trubutary mouth
1.0
WTF 3545
.0
WTF 3545 to tributary mouth
1.8
Tributary to Sweetwater cr.
.6
Sweetwater cr.
.0
Sweetwater rd. to tributary
.7
WTF 3221
.0
WTF 3221 to tributary mouth
1.6
Tributary to Shackleford rd.
.2
Shack!eford rd. WTF 3551
.0
Shackleford rd. to Cruse rd.
.9
Cruse rd WTF 0026
.0
Cruse rd. to Beaver Ruin cr
1.0
WTF 2275
.0
WTF 2275 to WTF 0010
.4
WTF 0010
.0
WTF 0010 to WTF 2268
.4
WTF 2268
.0
WTF 2268 to Mitchell rd.
.1
Mitchell rd.
.0
Mitchell rd to WTF 3478,3230
1.0
WTF 3478,3230 '
.0
WTF 3478,3230 to 1-85
.1
1-85 to WTF 3214
.2
WTF 3214
.0
WTF 3214 to WTF 3207/tributary
.4
WTF 3207 tributary
.0
Tributary to Indian Trail rd
.3
Indian Trail rd to WTF 3212
.3
WTF 3212
.0
WTF 3212 to Hi 11 crest rd.
.3
Hi 11 crest rd to WTF 3217
.2
WTF 3217
.0
WTF 3217 to Beaver Ruin rd
1.8
Beaver Ruin rd to Bromolow cr
1.1
WTF 2259
.0
WTF 2259
.7
WTF 0018
.0
WTF 0018 to Hopkins Pond rd
.3
Hopkins Pond to Hopkins Mill
.4
Hopkins Mill rd to cr mouth
.9
WTF 2274,3219
.0
WTF 2274,3219 to N. Beaver Ruin
1.8
N. Beaver Ruin cr to Shackleford
.7
-------
TABLE 8 (continued)
PAGE 2
NO
IDENTIFICATION
REACH
AVERAGE
OF
OF
LENGTH
OF FALL
REACH
REACH
(MILES)
PER MILE
6-46
Shackleford rd to trubutary
1.2
6.667
47
WtF 3194
.0
-
48
WTF 3194 to trivutary mouth
1.3
30.769
49
Tributary to Arc Way
.2
5.0
50
Arc Way to Bromolow dr mouth
,6
3.333
51
Bromolow cr to beaver Hills sd
.0
-
52
Beaver Hills S/D to Plsnthill
.5
6.00
53
Pleasanthill rd to Br Cr mouth
.9
4.444
54
Beaver Ruin cr to WTF 0050
.0
-
55
WTF 0050
.0
-
56
WTF 0050 to WTF 3193
.1
10.0
57
WTF 3193
.0
-
58
WTF 3193 to US 29
.1
10.0
59
US 29 to WTF 0024
.8
2.5
60
WTF 0024
.0
-
61
WTF 0024 to Jackson cr
1.0
4.0
62
WTF 3223,3224
.0
-
63
WTF 3223,3224 to tributary mouth
1.8
22.222
64
WTF 2265,2266
.0
-
65
WTF 2265,2266 to Blackwood rd
.2
30.0
66
Blackwood rd to Rockbridge rd
.8
25.0
67
Rockbridge rd to tributary
.4
10.0
68
Tributary to Dickens rd
.2
30.0
69
Dickens rd to WTF 3216,3549
.8
10.0
70
WTF 3216,3549
.0
-
71
WTF 3216,3549 to Hi 11 crest rd
.4
10.0
72
Hi 11 crest rd to WTF 0049
.4
10.0
73
WTF 0049
.0
-
74
WTF 0049 to US 29
.2
10.0
75
US 29 to Camp cr
,6
10.0
76
County Line to WTF 3233
.1
40.0
77
WTF 3233
.0
-
78
WTF 3233 to WTF 0036
.2
30.0
79
WTF 0036
.0
-
80
WTF 0036 to Harmony Grove Ch rd
.8
30.0
81 =
Harmony Grove rd to Rockbridge
.8
20.0
82
Rockbridge rd to WTF 2263
1.0
16.0
83
WTF 2263
.0
-
84
WTF 2263 to Cole dr
.4
15.0
85
Cole dr to Ki11ian Hill rd
.7
11.429
86
Killian Hill to camp cr mouth
.4
10.000
87
Camp cr to WTF 3195
.5
8.000
88
WTF 3195
.0
-
89
WTF 3195 to Arcado rd
.4
10.000
90
Arcado rd to Lester rd
1.3
6.154
91
Lester rd to Jackson cr mouth
.4
10.0
92
Jackson cr to Sweet cr mouth
1.1
5.455
-------
PAGE 3
TABLE 8
FALL PER REACH OF THE YELLOW RIVER
NO
IDENTIFICATION
REACH
AVERAGE
OF
OF
LENGTH
OF FALL
REACH
REACH
(MILES)
PER MILE
1
OAKLAND RD TO WTF 3550
.8
12.5
2
WTF 3550
.0
-
3
WTF 3550 TO DAVIS HILL RD
.5
4.
4
DAVIS HILL TO US 29
1.6
6.25
5
US 29 TO PEW CR
.9
6.667
6
WTF 2271
.0
¦ -
7
WTF 2271 TOUS 29
2.0
20.
8
US 29 TO WTF 0053/TRIBUTARY
.6
33.333
9
WTF 0053/TRIBUTARY
.0
-
10
TRIBUTARY TO PEW CR MOUTH
1.0
18.0
n
PEW CR TO WTF 0044
.2
5.
12
WTF 0044
.0
-
13
WTF 0044 TO PUGHS CR
1.0
7.
14
WTF 0045
.0
-
15
WTF 0045 TO PUGHS CR MOUTH
.9
31.111
16
PUGHS CR TO ARNOLD RD
.0
-
17
ARNOLD RD TO HUTCHINS RD
1.7
8.235
18
HUTCHINS RD TO BANKSTON CR
.4
7.5
19
BANKSTON CR
.0
-
20
BANKSTON CR TO FORK CR
.5
6.0
21
WTF 3228
.0
-
22
WTF 3228 TO WTF
1.5
17.333
23
WTF 3206
.0
-
24
WTF 3206 TO FORK CR MOUTH
1.5
20.00
25
FORK CR TO SWEETWATER CR
.8
5.0
26
SWEETWATER CREEK
.0
-
27
SWEETWATER CR TO WTF 049A,0057
.0
=
28
WTF 049A.0057
.0
-
29
WTF 049A,0057 TO RIVER DR
.1
10.
30
RIVER DR TO WTF 2505/TRIBUTARY
1.3
6.15
31
WTF 2505/TRIBUTARY
.0
-
32
WTF 2505/TRIBUTARYT0 WTF 2276 TRIB
1.2
3.333
33
WTF 22767TRIBUTARY
.0
-
34
WTF 2276/TRIBUTARY TO FIVE FORKS-T
.4
2.50
35
FIVE FORKS-T RD TO TURKEY CR.
1.4
4.29
36
TURKEY CR
.0
-
37
TURKEY CR TO WATSON CR
• 1
10.
38
WATSON CR.
.0
-
39
WATSON CR TO KILLIAN HILL RD
.4
7.5
40
KILLIAN HILL RD TO GARNER CR
.6
5.
41
WTF 0039
.0
-
42
WTF 0039 TO WTF 3199,3552/TRIBUTARY
.5
32.
43
WTF 3199,3552/TRIBUTARY
.0
-
44
WTF/TRIBUTARY TO GARNER CR MOUTH
1.7
27.65
45
GARNER CR TO WTF 0056
1.1
9.0
-------
TABLE 8 (continued)
PAGE 4
NO
IDENTIFICATION
REACH
AVERAGE 1
OF
OF
LENGTH
OF FALL
REACH
REACH
(MILES)
PER MILE
46
WTF 0056
.0
47
WTF 0056 TO POUNDS CR
1.0
6.0
48
POUNDS CR
.0
-
49
POUNDS CR TO US 78
.0
-
50
US 78 TO UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
1.5
5.33
51
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.0
-
52
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO JACKS CR
.9
15.55
53
WTF 3543
.0
-
54
WTF 3543 TO WTF 0041
1.4
35.71
55
WTF 0041
.0
-
56
WTF 0041 TO JACKS CR MOUTH
1.7
37.65
57
JACKS CR TO ANNISTOWN RD
.4
15.00
58
ANNISTOWN RD TO S. ANNISTOWN
1.2
20.00
59
S. ANNISTOWN RD TO WTF 3200/TRIB
.0
-
60
WTF 3200,0058/TRIBUTARY
.0
-
61
WTF/TRIBUTARY TO CENTERVILLE CR
1.2
7.50
62
CENTERVILLE CR
.0
-
63
CENTERVILLE CR TO GA 124
.6
5.00
64
GA 124/WTF 0051
.0
-
65
GA 124 TO STONE MTN CR
.4
5.00
66
WTF 3129
.0
-
67
WTF 3129 TO CROOKED CR
3.5
9,14
68
CROOKED CR
.0
-
69
CROOKED CR TO STN MTN CR MOUTH
1.8
15.56
70
STONE MTN CR TO NORRIS LAKE
1.1
5.45
71
NORRIS LAKE
.0
-
72
NORRIS LAKE TO NORRIS LAKE RD
j
6.0
73
NORRIS LAKE RD TO SWIFT CR
l.*7
4.35
74
SWIFT CR
.0
-
75
SWIFT CR TO PLEASANTHILL RD
.1
4.0
76
PLEASANTHILL RD TO LAKE CAPRI
.6
9.333
77
LAKE CAPRI
.0
-
78
LAKE CAPRI TO OFF WEST WAY
.3
2.667
79
OFF WEST WAY TO LAKE ROCKAWAY
1.3
2.615
80
LAKE ROCKAWAY/WTF 3391
.0
-
81
LAKE ROCKAWAY TO HAMMOCK CR
.2
3.0
82
HAMMOCK CR
.0
-
83
HAMMOCK CR TO NEW IRWIN BR RD
.5
6.0
84
NEW IRWIN BR RD TO MARK BRANCH
.1
4.0
85
WTF 3389
.0
-
86
WTF 2385
1.6
50.62
87
MARK BRANCH OT GA20
2.0
2.5
88
GA 20/ConYERS WATERS INTAKE
.0
-
89
GA 20 TO BOAR TUSK CR
1.2
26.667
90
WTF 72
.0
-
91
WTF 72 TO BOAR TUSK CR MOUTH
1.2
58.333
92
BOAR TUSK CR TO CARR BRANCH .
.6
6.667
93
CARR BRANCH
.0
-
94
CARR BRANCH TO GA 138
.6
6.667
.95
GA 138 TO QUIGG BRANCH
1.4
2.357
96
QUIGG BRANCH
.0
-
97
QUIGG BRANCH TO GEES MILL RD
1.2
3.333
98
GEES MILL RD TO UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
1.2
2.500
-------
i a d l t a i^conciuaea; rabt o
NO
IDENTIFICATION
REACH
AVERAGE FT
OF
OF
LENGTH
OF FALL
REACH
REACH
(MILES)
PER MILE
99
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.0
100
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO BIG HAYNES CR
.5
4.0
101
TEMPLE-JOHNSON RD/WTF 0046
.0
-
102
TEMPLE-JOHNSON RD TO PATE RD
.9
11.11
103
PATE RD TO LENORA RD
.9
8,89
104
LENORA RD TO ROCKBRIDGE RD
1.7
9.41
105
ROCKBRIDGE RD TO GA 20
1.3
7.69
106
GA 20 TO INDIAN SHOALS
2.1
38.10
107
INDIAN SHOALS TO ZINGARA RD
1.2
13.33
108
ZINGARA RD TO BLACK SHOALS RD
1.0
20.00
109
BLACK SHOALS RD TO WINFIELD CR
2.1
10.48
no
WINFIELD CR
.0
-
m
WINFIELB CR TO MILLER BOTTOM
.5
12.0
112
MILLER BOTTOM RD TO GA 138
.9
11.11
113
GA 138 TO BELOW MILL POND
.3
13.33
114
BELOW MILL POND TO L HAYNES CR
.3
46.667
115
LITTLE HAYNES CR
.0
-
116
LITTLE HAYNES CR TO PIPELINE
.1
60.00
117
PIPELINE TO BALD ROCK RD
2.8
2.14
118
BALD ROCK RD TO BIG HAYNES MOUTH
.8
6.25
119
BIG HAYNES CR TO MT TABOR RD
1.4
4.29
120
MT TABOR RD TO GUM CR
.9
5.556
121
GUM CR
.0
-
122
GUM CR TO GA 12/US 278
.9
2.222
123
GA 12/US 278 TO UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.2
5.0
124
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.0
-
125
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO UNNAMED TRIB
1.7
1.765
126
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.0
-
127
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO WTF 3359 TRIB
.6
1.667
128
WTF 3359
.0
-
129
WTF 3359 TO TRIBUTARY MOUTH
2.5
20.00
130
UNNAMEED TRIBUTARY TO BROWN BR RD
.2
15.00
131
BROWN BR RD TO BEAVERDAM CR
1.9
2.105
132
BEAVERDAM CR
.0
-
133
BEAVERDAM CR TO GA 81
.6
3.333
134
GA 81 PORTERDALE WATER INTAKE
.0
-
135
GA 81 TO WTF 2498
1.0
42.000
136
WTF 2498
.0
-
137
WTF 2498 TO LANGSTON SHOALS
2.8
6.429
138
LANGSTON SHOALS TO DRIED IND
.2
10.0
139
WTF 3361
.0
-
140
WTF 3361 TO WTF 2359
5.0
25.60
141
WTF 2359
.0
-
142
WTF 2359 TO DRIED IND CR MOUTH
4.1
21.463
143
DRIED IND CR TO DOG BRNACH CR
.8
1.25
144
DOG BRANCH CR
.0
-
145
DOG BRANCH CR TO STEWART RD
.7
1.429
146
STEWART RD TO ROCKY PLAINS RD
1.3
1.538
147
ROCKY ELAINS RD TO UNNAMED TRIB
1.7
1.176
148
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.0
-
149
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO UNNAMED TRIB
.8
1.250
150
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
.0
-
151
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO LAKE CAMPBELL
1.1
1.818 -
152
LAKE BULOW COMPBELL
• 9
-
153
LAKE CAMPBELL TO GA 212
.5
2.0
154
GA 212 TO POTTS CR
2.4
2.083
155
POTTS CR
.0
-
156
POnS CR TO GA 36
1.4
2.143
-------
area is affected by the Brevard shear zone in which the Chattahoochee River,
located north of the project area, flows. Faults and fracture zones are common.
The crystalline rocks in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are thought to be
dated from Precambrian to late Paleozoic and are thus probably greater
than 200 million years old (Thornbury 1965). Numerous outcrops occur in
the basin, including large granitic domes such as Stone Mountain and wide
flat areas of granitic exposures termed pavements. Other areas are covered
by residual soils (saprolite) and parent material of variable depths.
Biotitic gneisses, mica schist, and amphibolite are the most common rocks
in the basin. Other types include granites and granitic gneisses. Small
areas of ultramafic rocks are found slightly south of Stone Mountain. A
geologic map of the Yellow River sub-basin in Rockdale County (Figure 10)
displays the northwest-southeast trending diabase dikes and the narrow
quartzite veins that are common to the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin area.
Pavements, especially frequent in Rockdale County, occur throughout the
study area.
The best-known rock types for the area are the Stone Mountain granite, a
gray, equigranular, micaceous granite, and the Lithonia gneiss, which is
light gray, evenly banded, medium-grained, and extremely hard. These
granitic and related rocks are the most important for surface mine operations
in the area (Table 9). Other mineral resources for the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin are listed in Table 10.
Current topographic maps (Milstead, Conyers, Loganville, and Snellville
quadrangles) list four quarries in the Yellow River sub-basin in Rockdale
County. However, Figure 10 plots the quarries present about 25 years ago
in that area and also in parts of adjacent counties. The erosion of these
abandoned quarries has contributed significant sediment to the streams --
the presence of suspended granitic dust in the Yellow River is said to be
the source of that stream's name (Bagby 1969) -- and acid runoff con-
tributes to degradation of the area's surface water quality. The Atlanta
Regional Commission (1974) reports:
-------
GEOLOGIC MAP OF ROCKDALE COUNTY
PAVEMENT
DIABASE DIKE
PORPHYROBLAST1C BIOT1TE GNEISS
AMPHIBOLITE GNEISS
/VV/W
A/VW
MUSCOVITE QUARTZ1TE
lOOOOft.
GARNET MICA SCHIST
LITHONIA GNEISS
SOURCE! McCOLLUM, M.J. 1966 GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
AND GEOLOGY OF ROCKDALE COUNTY,GEORGIA.GEORGIA STATE
DIVISION OF CONSERVATION, DEPARTMENT OF MINES, MINING
AND GEOLOGY,THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY INFORMATION
CIRCULAR 33. ATLANTA. 17 pp. S I PLATE.
FIGURE 10
-------
Table 9. Upper Ocmulgee River Basin area surface mine operations.3
County
Product
Number of facilities
Clayton
Granite
1
DeKalb
Granite
3
Fulton
Clay
3
Granite
3
Sand
3
Gwinnett
Granite
2
Sand
1
Henry
Granite
1
Newton
Sand
1
Rockdale
Sand
Gravel
1
Walton
Granite
1
aSource: Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1974. Georgia
surface mine operators. Environ. Protection Div., Land Reclamation Sect.,
Macon. 52 pp.
-------
Table 10. Mineral resources of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin area.3
Mineral or rock
Principal use
Beryl
Aquamarine is gem variety
Feldspar
Glass, pottery, enamel, abrasives
Gold
Jewelry
Granite, gneiss,
schist and related rock
Dimension stone, crushed stone,
gravel, poultry grit
Mi ca
Roofing, cement, paint
Sand
Roadfill, construction
Sill imamte (fibrolite)
Refractory insulation
Structural clay
Pottery, refractories
aSource: Georgia Department of Mines, Mining and Geology. 1969.
Mineral resource map.
-------
N
U LARGE QUARRY
* SMALL QUARRY
4 ml.
/
source: HERRMAN.L.A 1994. geology of the stone
MOUTAIN - LITHONIA DISTRICT, GEORGIA. GEORGIA
state division of conservation, department
OF MINES, MINING AND GEOLOGY, THE GEOLOGICAL
SURVEY BULL. No.61. ATLANTA.IS» pp B 8PLATES.
QUARRIES IN YELLOW RIVER SUB-BASIN
FIGUREII
-------
The State of Georgia now requires all operators of currently
active mines to reclaim surface mined lands after raining operations
have ceased. Previously abandoned mines, however, are not covered
by the new reclamation laws.
In discussing the use of mined lands as sanitary landfills the Commission
continues:
studies have shown that mined lands can be reclaimed as sanitary
landfills without damage to water quality or other environmental
detriment. However, full protection of the environment requires
careful site selection, site preparation and landfill techniques.
However, no surface-mined lands in the Yellow River sub-basin are now being
reclaimed as landfill sites.
The Yellow River sub-basin area is considered tectonicly stable. It is
located far within the boundaries of the North American plate, a position
where earthquakes are rare (Gross 1972). No locations in the sub-basin
are especially susceptible to subsidence or slump. The exfoliation nature
of the granite domes, however, may influence rock breakage, particularly
where the foliation is at a very steep angle, as on the north side of Stone
Mountain.
3) Soils. Most of the soils of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are
residual (formed by material weathered from the underlying rock). Other
factors of climate, relief, and biota also influence the character of these
soils, but their chemical and mineral composition is largely due to the
parent rocks from which they are derived. This area has been exposed to
erosional processes for an extensive period of time and a thick mantle of
decomposed rock and soil is present at many locations.
In the Yellow River sub-basin, soils are derived from granite and biotitic
gneisses and schists. These rocks commonly produce gray to deep red
saprolite (unconsolidated, untransported weathered rock also termed "rotten
rock") and distinctive dark red clayey soils. The amount of clay is
limited by the felsic and mafic minerals in the parent rocks. In the
-------
sub-basin, Appling, Cecil, and Davidson soils contain large amounts of
clay derived from weathered feldspars. Madison soils contain clay, but
they also contain muscovite, which is resistant to weathering and which
is retained in the soil. Louisburg soils are sandy and contain little
clay, as they are formed from material high in silicious rock and quartz
sand (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Soils on the uplands and ridgetops in the sub-basin generally have been
in place long enough for distinct horizons to develop. Alluvial soils
in the sub-basin are more recent and lack horizons. The sub-basin soils
are generally acid and range in pH from 4.0 to 6.0 (U. S. Department of
Agriculture 1967).
The soils in the Yellow River sub-basin have been grouped by association,
a group of one or more major soils and at least one minor soil that occur
in a distinctive proportional pattern (Figure 12,Table 11). These
associations have heen placed in four main categories (Figure 8): floodplain
soils, stream terrace soils, ridgetop soils (where the slope is less than
10 percent), and upland side slope soils (where the slope is greater than
10 percent) — no stream terrace associations occur in the Yellow River
sub-basin. These Yellow River sub-basin associations, by county and
category, are listed in Table 12.
Not included in the soils associations are the areas of rock outcrop,
pavements, or other rock land (land where hard rock is at or near the
surface). Rock land is not suited to farming and supports only minimal
vegetation. These areas, however, have limited recreational use and,
in the Yellow River sub-basin, are often surface mined.
Generalized characteristics for each association in the Yellow River sub-
basin are presented below.
Applinq-Louisburq-Cecil. This association occurs in Walton County on both
ridgetops and upland side slopes. The soils are well-drained to excessively
drained and have a friable surface layer of coarse sandy loam. The soils
-------
Table 11. Key to soil associations by category.3
Floodplains
County
DeKalb
Gwinnett
Newton
Rockdale
Walton
Ridqetops
DeKalb
Gwinnett
Newton
Rockdale
Walton
Upland Side Slopes
DeKalb
Gwinnett
Number
Newton
Rockdale
Walton
7
8
9
10
3
4
5
6
2
3
4
5
9
10
14
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
6
7
8
2
Soil Association
Cartecay-Toccoa-Wehadkee
Chewacla-Congaree-Wehadkee
Chewacla-Wehadkee
Chewacla-Wehadkee
Congaree-Chewacla-Wehadkee
Chewacla-Wehadkee
Gwinnett-Hiwassee-Musella
Pacolet-Loui sburg-Wedowee
Appling-Cecil-Pacolet
Ceci1-Madi son-Gwi nnett
Appling-Pacolet-Louisburg
Madison-Pacolet-Appling
Gwinnett-Ceci1-Davi dson
Appling-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Appli ng-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Cecil-Gwinnett
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Madi son-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Appling-Loui sburg-Pacolet
Hadison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Appling-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Appling-Louisburg-Cecil
Loui sburq-Pacolet-Wedowee
Pacol et-Hadi son-Gwinnett
Pacolet-Gwi nnett-Loui sburg
Madi son-Pacolet-Loui sa
Wedowee-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Gwi nnett-Musel1a-Pacolet
Gwi nnett-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Loui sburg-Pacolet-Wedowee
Louisburg-Pacolet-Wedowee
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Loui sburg-Wedowee-Pacolet
Appling-Loui sburg-Ceci1
Table 11. Continued
-------
Table 11 (concluded)
aSources: Atlanta Regional Metropolitan Planning Commission. 1967.
Rockdale County general soil map. Atlanta, Georgia.
Georgia State Highway Department. 1965. Newton County
general highway map. Atlanta.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1964. Walton County soil
survey. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C. 70 pp.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1967. Gwinnett County soil
survey. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C. 94 pp.
U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1975. DeKalb County general
soil map. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C.
-------
Table 12. Yellow River sub-basin soil associations by county and category.
County
Floodplain
Stream
terrace
Ridgetop, < 10% slope
Upland side slope,
>10% slope
Newton
Rockdale
DeKalb Cartecay-Toccoa-
Wehadkee
Gwinnett Chewacla-Congaree-
Wehadkee
Chewacla-Wehadkee
Chewacla-Wehadkee
Congaree-Chewacla-
Wehadkee
Gwinnett-Hiwasee-Musella
Pacolet-Louisburg-Wedowee
Appl i ng-Pacolet-6wi nnett
Cec i1-Mad i son-Gwi nnett
Appling-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Madison-Pacolet-Appling
Gwinnett-Cecil-Davidson
Appling-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Appli ng-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Cecil-Gwinnett
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Cecil-Appling-Davidson
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Appling-Louisburg-Pacolet
Appling-Pacolet-Louisburg
Louisburg-Pacolet-Wedowee
Pacolet-Madison-Gwinnett
Pacolet-Gwinnett-Louisburg
Madison-Pacolet-Louisa
Wedowee-Pacolet-Louisburg
Gwinnett-Musella-Pacolet
Gwi nnett-Pacolet-Loui sburg
Loui sburg-Pacolet-Wedowee
Louisburg-Pacolet-Wedowee
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett
Louisburg-Wedowee-Pacolet
Walton
Chewacla-Wehadkee
Appling-Louisburg-Cecil
Appl ing-Louisburg-Ceci1
-------
may be stony. The Appling soils are mottled with red and yellow and the
Cecil soils have a red, mottle-free subsoil. Much of the association is
eroded and does not have a high agricultural potential (U. S. Department
of Agriculture 1964).
Applinq-Louisburg-Pacolet. This association is found in Rockdale County
on gently sloping ridgetops with less than 10 percent slope. The soils
have a clayey to loamy subsoil and are well-drained (Georgia Department
of Natural Resources 1974b).
Applinq-Pacolet-Gwinnett. This association is characterized by well-drained
soils with a clayey subsoil that occurs on narrow to broad interstream
divides. Much of this associations is wooded and most of the acreage is
eroded. The soils are well suited to pasture and moderately well suited
to tilled crops (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Applinq-Pacolet-Louisburq. This association is common on the ridgetops
throughout the Yellow River sub-basin. The soils are well-drained and
have a clayey to loamy subsoil. Much of this association is cultivated
or pastured; the rest is wooded or idle. The soils are well suited to
general farming (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Cartecay-Toccoa-Wehadkee. This association is characterized by alluvial soils
along floodplains. It is found in DeKalb County along drainageways and
the soils are subject to frequent flooding. The soils range from poorly
drained to well-drained (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1975).
Ceci1-Appling-Davidson. This association is found in Newton County on
gently sloping ridgetops. These soils are well-drained and have a loamy
surface layer with a red clayey subsoil (Georgia State Highway Department
1965).
Cecil-Gwinnett. In Newton County this association is found on gently
sloping ridgetops with less than 10 percent slope. These soils are well-
drained and have a loamy surface with a clayey subsoil (Georgia State High-
way Department 1965).
-------
Ceci1-Madison-Gwinnett. This association, in DeKalb County, occurs on
moderately sloping ridgetops. The soils are well-drained and have a
coarse loamy surface with a clayey subsoil (U. S. Department of Agriculture
1975).
Chewacla-Wehadkee. This association is characterized by nearly level
floodplains of recent alluvium along streams that overflow more often than
once every 5 years. Streams have well-defined channels. The depth to
the water table is generally about 15 to 30 in. Much of the association
is too wet for cultivated crops. A small percentage is suitable for tilled
crops, without artificial drainage — those areas are on well-drained
alluvial land and well-drained Congaree soils. With adequate drainage
this association will produce good to excellent pasture with generally high
yields (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1964).
Chewacla-Congaree-Wehadkee. This association is characterized by broad to
narrow, nearly level floodplains along streams that are subject to overflow.
In most places the areas are flooded once every 5 years. In Gwinnett
County, the stream channels are wel1-defined and in some places have cut
into bedrock, but in many places the channels are clogged with silt. The
soils are poorly to well-drained. Chewacla soils have a surface layer
that is predominantly reddish-brown silt loam. Congaree soils have a
surface layer of dark brown or dark yellowish-brown fine loam. Their sub-
soil is brown fine sandy loam or sandy clay loam. In the Wehadkee soils,
the surface layer is light brownish-gray, silty clay loam. Without drainage,
only the Congaree soils on floodplains are suitable for tilled crops.
Pastures on this association are excellent if the soils are properly
drained. Poorly drained areas support mixed hardwoods (U. S. Department
of Agriculture 1967).
Congaree-Chewacla-Wehadkee. The soils in this association are well-drained
to poorly drained and they occur in Rockdale County along nearly level
floodplains. The surface is silty loam and the subsurface is silty clay
loam (Georgia Department of Natural Resources 1974b).
-------
Gwinnett-Cecil-Davidson. This association occurs in Gwinnett County on
narrow to fairly broad, very gently sloping to gently sloping ridgetops.
The surface of the soils is dark reddish-brown to dark red. Because most
of the association is eroded, the dusky-red subsoil is often exposed.
The soils are well-drained and are suited to farm and non-farm uses (U. S.
Department of Agriculture 1967).
Gwinnett-Hiwassee-Musella. This association is found in DeKalb County along
stream courses where the slope angles are greater than 10 percent and the
soils are well-drained to excessively drained. The surface is generally
a sandy to clay loam and the subsoil is red clay (U. S. Department of
Agriculture 1975).
Gwinnett-Musel1a-Pacolet. This association occurs in Gwinnett County and
is characterized by short, steep side slopes and many drainageways. The
surface layer generally is reddish-brown to dark red, and the subsoil is
red, dark red, or dusky-red and is clayey. The Gwinnett and Pacolet soils
are well-drained, while the Musella soils are somewhat excessively to
well-drained. The Gwinnett and Musella soils are formed in materials
weathered chiefly from diorite, hornblende gneiss, and diabase, and the
Pacolet in material weathered from granite, gneiss, and similar rocks
(U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Gwinnett-Pacolet-Louisburg. This association typically has short, moderately
steep to steep side slopes and many well-defined drainageways. In most
places the floodplains along the drainageways are narrow. This association
is mostly along the Yellow River and the lower reaches of Sweetwater and
No Business creeks. Gwinnett soils are formed in material weathered chiefly
from diorite, hornblende gneiss, and diabase; the Pacolet and Louisburg
soils are formed in material weathered from granite and gneiss. All the
soils are well-drained and have a red to yellowish-brown clayey to loamy
subsoil (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
-------
Louisburg-Pacolet-Wedowee. This association, found on short, steep side
slopes, occurs in the more southern counties of the Yellow River sub-basin.
The soils are thin, well- to excessively drained, and have many rock out-
crops. The subsoil is yellowish-brown, red, or yellowish-red and loamy
to clayey. These soils are poorly suited to farming and most of the
association is wooded (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Louisburg-Wedowee-Pacolet. This association occurs in DeKalb County on
steep upland side slopes. The soils are characteristically sandy and stony
and are poorly suited to farmland. All the soils in this association are
well-drained. The subsoil is sandy clay loam to clay (U. S. Department of
Agriculture 1975).
Madison-Pacolet-Appling. This association is found on narrow, very gently
sloping to gently sloping ridgetops in Gwinnett County, all of the soils
are well-drained. Much of this association is eroded and the clayey sub-
soil is exposed. In the less eroded areas, the surface layer is gravelly
sandy loam to sandy loam, but in the more eroded areas it is sandy clay
loam. Most of this association is wooded (U. S. Department of Agriculture
1967).
Madison-Pacolet-Gwinnett. This association is characterized by well-drained
sandy and clayey loams to sandy clays. The soils are derived from
weathered gneiss, granite and mica schist. The association, found on both
ridgetops and upland side slopes with slope angles that range from 5 to
40 percent, occurs in Newton and Rockdale counties. This land is poorly
suited to agriculture but rather well suited to woodland productivity
(Georgia State Highway Department 1965; Georgia Department of Natural
Resources 1974b).
Madi son-Pacolet-Louisa. This association occurs in Gwinnett County and
consists of moderately steep, short side slopes. The soils, which follow
the many branching drainageways in the sub-basin and which thus reflect a
prominent dendritic pattern, have a red to yellowish-red clayey to loamy
-------
subsoil. The surface layer is friable, gravelly sandy loam. These well-
to somewhat excessively drained soils are poorly suited to crops, pasture,
or nonfarm uses due to the steep slopes, draughtiness, and severe hazard
of erosion {U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Pacolet-Gwinnett-Louisburg. This association is found in DeKalb County
along stream courses where the slope angles are greater than 10 percent.
The soils are well-drained to excessively drained. The surface is
generally a sandy to clay loam and the subsoil is red clay. The Pacolet
and Louisburg soils are derived from granite and gneiss (U. S. Department
of Agriculture 1975).
Pacolet-Louisburq-Wedowee. This association is found in DeKalb County on
very gently sloping ridgetops. The soils are well-drained and have a red,
yellowish-brown or strong brown clayey to loamy subsoil (U. S. Department
of Agriculture 1975).
Pacolet-Madison-Gwinnett. This association is found in DeKalb County on
sloping to steep hillsides adjacent to drainageways. The soils are well-
drained and have a dominant red and dark red clayey to loamy subsoil
(U. S. Department of Agriculture 1975).
Wedowee-Pacolet-Louisburg. This association occurs in Gwinnett County on
steep side slopes along well-defined drainageways. It contains many rock
outcrops and most of the soils, which are well- to excessively drained,
are eroded. These soils have a yellowish-red to yellowish-brown subsoil
and the surface area is sandy loam. The association has a cover of mixed
hardwoods and pines, as the acreage is poorly suited to crops or pasture
(U. S. Department of Agriculture 1967).
Limitations and suitabilities of the soils in the sub-basin associations
are listed in Table 13.
-------
Table 13. Suitabilities of Yellow River sub-basin soils.9
Soil name
Roadfill
Residence
Light
industry
Septic tank
filter fields
Sewage
lagoons
Sanitary
landfills
Topsoil
Shrink-swel1
potential
Appling
Fb
F
M
M
P
F
F
M
Cecil
F
F
M
M
P
F
F
F
Chewacla
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
Congaree
F
P
P
P
P
P
G
F
Davidson
F
F
M
F
P
M
P
F
Gwinnett
F
F
M
M
F
F
P
M
Hiwassee0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Louisa
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
Loui sburg
G
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
Madison
F
F
M
M
P
F
P
M
Musella
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
M
Pacolet
F
F
M
M
P
F
P
M
Wedowee
F
M
P
P
P
P
F
M
Wehadkee
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
M
aSource: U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1967. Gwinnett County soil survey. Soil Conservation
Service, Washington, D. C. 94 pp.
Key: P -- Poor, severe limitations
F -- Fair, severe to slight limitations
M -- Moderate
G -- Good, little or no limitations
Data on the suitabilities of this soil, which is found only in DeKalb County, are not currently
av^'^ble The DeKalb Countv Soil Survey, which will include this data, is scheduled for publication
in ,^.3.
-------
b. Biota (Biotic Communities) -- Recognition, identification, and visual
delimitation of biotic communities are based upon a knowledge of inter-
relationships among physical environmental factors, upon major plant
associations, or upon dominant organisms which are grouped together be-
cause of physical environmental constraints. In a strict sense the term
"biotic corrcnunity" is conceptual and represents a composite of all physical
(climate, geology, hydrology, soils, etc.) and biological (plant and animal)
entities. Application of the concept at a regional level such as the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin or the Yellow River sub-basin unavoidably incorporates
a certain latitude of error which can be eliminated only by repeated field
truthing — an expensive and time-consuming process. Moreover, in defining
communities, it is recognized that environment is dynamic and adjusts both
to natural processes and to disturbances resulting from the activities of
man. Consequently the characterization of biotic communities, given the
variables of spatial arrangement and time, often predicates delineation of
boundaries where only gradients exist.
The approach for this investigation utilizes U. S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Level II land use mapping with map units as defined by Anderson et al. (1976).
Supplementing this baseline information is an expanded description which
focuses on the Yellow River sub-basin and which was prepared from a survey
of pertinent literature and field reconnaissance^ by Coastal Zone Resources
Corporation personnel. The purpose of this section is to describe the
project area biological components as reported in the literature and ob-
served in the field in the context of USGS land use categories. The
applicability of community types and descriptions presented in this report
are considered valid only for riverine and slope habitats of the central
Piedmont.
Hhe initial field survey was conducted 24-27 November 1976. Plant species
observed during this interval are listed in Appendix B. The 28 sites in-
ventoried in detail by CZRC are shown on Figure 12; environmental
descriptions of these sites are in Appendix C.
-------
1) Urban or Built-up Land
Urban or Built-up Land is comprised of areas of intensive
use with much of the land covered by structures. Included in this
category are cities, towns, villages, strip developments along
highways, transportation, power, and communications facilities,
and areas such as those occupied by mills, shopping centers,
industrial and commercial complexes, and institutions that may,
in some instances, be isolated from urban areas.
As development progresses, land having less intensive or
nonconforming use may be located in the midst of Urban or Built-up
areas and will generally be included in this category. Agri-
cultural land, forest, wetland, or water areas on the fringe of
Urban or Built-up areas will not be included except where they
are surrounded and dominated by urban development. The Urban or
Built-up category takes precedence over others when the criteria
for more than one category are met. For example, residential
areas that have sufficient tree cover to meet Forest Land criteria
will be placed in the Residential category. (Anderson et al. 1976)
The Urban or Built-up Land category, which encompasses approximately 16 per-
cent of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, is represented by seven major
community types (as delineated on USGS Level II land use maps): (a)
residential; (b) commercial and services; (c) industrial; (d) transpor-
tation, communication, and utilities; (e) industrial and commercial
complexes; (f) mixed urban or built-up land; and (g) other urban or
built-up land.
The salient factor in terms of biotic abundance in those communities is
the level at which site alteration has occurred. Disturbance that has
irrevocably altered the setting such that the previous biological com-
position no longer exists includes such examples as large industrial sites,
Hartsville Airport (Atlanta International), and area shopping centers.
Occasionally the site alteration may entail major landfills so that even
the slope that formerly existed at the site can no longer be ascertained.
Forest cover is obliterated and with it the component animals. Small-
scale landscaping with ornamental shrubbery usually replaces the previous
vegetation except on non-paved transportation areas where grasses are
planted for substrate stabilization, aesthetics, or to provide safety margins.
-------
Major alteration in which remnants of the previous vegetation is left —
chiefly for landscaping purposes -- is a second level of site alteration.
In this case a few individuals of canopy trees are left, and it is possible
to reconstruct the natural history of the former biotic community. Some
of the more gregarious species of wildlife are retained, and the site is
used by migrants as well as introductory species which find suitable
habitat in a scant natural setting.
A third level of alteration probably exemplifies the most current trend in
urban development, since it emphasizes the natural environment and
recognizes the importance of undeveloped open space and the higher appraisal
value of the more desirable and rustic settings. Here the biota still retains
part of the character of the former biotic coir,munity and the major losses
are due principally to vegetation where the structure is now located and
to more secretive wildlife species. This level of alteration typifies the
higher quality suburban residential setting, light industrial and small
business sites, city parks, and other "natural" areas.
Maintained areas, like many other sub-natural communities, provide "edges"
or breaks along forested communities in which species diversity may be
enhanced. Because of the availability of contiguous habitat types, more
animal species' can find feeding, cover, and breeding and nesting habitats
in close proximity. For game species such as white-tailed deer, turkey,
and bobwhite, "edge" is an element of optimum habitat and thus serves as
a buffer to the more intensified development. Particularly along streams,
these corridors of communities allow the more wide-ranging and elusive
species to venture into urban areas, to runway aprons, borrow pits, etc.,
wherever cover and an abundance of preferred forage food may be found.
(a) Residential
Residential land uses range from high density, represented
by the multiple-unit structures or urban cores, to low density,
where houses are on lots of more than an acre, on the periphery of
urban expansion. Linear residential developments along trans-
portation routes extending outward from urban areas should be in-
^Animal species probably inhabiting communities in the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin are listed in Appendix B.
-------
eluded as residential appendages to urban centers, but care must be
taken to distinguish them from commercial strips in the same locality.
The residential strips generally have a uniform size and spacing of
structures, linear driveways, and lawn areas; the commercial strips
are more likely to have buildings of different sizes and spacing,
large driveways, and parking areas. Residential development along
shorelines is also linear and sometimes extends back only one
residential parcel from the shoreline to the first road.
Areas of sparse residential land use, such as farmsteads, will
be included in categories to which they are related unless an appro-
priate compilation scale is being used to indicate such uses
separately. Rural residential and recreational subdivisions, how-
ever, are included in this category, since the land is almost
totally committed to residential use, even though it may have
forest or range types of cover. In some places, the boundary will
be clear where new housing developments abut against intensively
used agricultural areas, but the boundary may be vague and
difficult to discern when residential development occurs in small
isolated units over an area of mixed or less intensive uses. A
careful evaluation of density and the overall relation of the area
to the total urban complex must be made.
Residential sections which are integral parts of other uses may
be difficult to identify. Housing situations such as those existing
on military bases, at colleges and universities, living quarters for
laborers near a work base, or lodging for employees of agricultural
field operations or resorts thus would be placed within the In-
dustrial, Agricultural, or Commercial and Services categories.
(Anderson et al. 1976)
Residential areas make up about 70 percent of all Urban and Built-up Land
in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. Vegetation in residential areas,
particularly in the newer areas that have been constructed in the last few
years, still retains much of the character of the previous community. If
the area was originally a mixed pine-hardwood slope, then the former biotic
community can be generally identified by those trees left for landscape
purposes. If an old field site originally, then the site has a well-
maintained lawn with ornamental shade trees of various sizes having been
added. Rarely is the residential site completely devoid of trees.
Native plants which tend to be left intact, primarily because of their
size, desirability, or tolerance to minor landscaping, are white oak
-------
(Quercus alba), black oak (Quercus velutina), sugar maple (Acer saccharum),
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), American holly (Ilex opaca),
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), loblolly and shortleaf pine (Pinus
taeda, P_. echinata), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) ~ in brief, any
trees which occupy the site are usually protected where reasonably possible
during construction activities. The smaller plants, namely shrubs and
ground cover herbs are usually eliminated, except in those infrequent but
increasingly common instances where the "woodland aspect" is desired.
For those residential areas where all of the covering vegetation has been
removed during site preparation, little space is available for native wild-
flowers and animals to recolonize. Thus animals commonly associated with
structures, such as the house sparrow (Passer domesticus), starling (Sturnus
vulgaris), or house mouse (Mus musculus), may find nesting and/or feeding
areas. Undesirable species such as rock dove (Columbia livia), commonly
known as the pigeon, Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), and black rat (Rattus
rattus) frequently invade decrepit and abandoned residential structures.
In areas where a remnant of the former vegetation has been left, many species
of wildlife such as migratory songbirds and small mammals find suitable
habitat. Typical passerine birds are American robin (Turdus migratorius),
gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos),
blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata), cardinal (Cardinalis cardinal is), yellow-
bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius), and house wren (Troglodytes aedon).
Frequent residents of shade trees and lawns are gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis), Southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), Eastern chipmunk
(Tamias striatus), and Eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus). If the residential
area is located in a particularly wooded habitat, mammals such as Virginia
opossum (Didelphis virginiana), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), and
raccoon (Procyon lotor) may occasionally be sighted.
-------
(b) Commercial and Services
Commercial areas are those used predominantly for the sale of
products and services. They are often abutted by residential,
agricultural, and other contrasting uses which help define them.
Components of the Commercial and Services category are urban central
business districts; shopping centers, usually in suburban and out-
lying areas; commercial strip developments along major highways and
access routes to cities; junkyards; resorts; and so forth. The
main buildings, secondary structures, and areas supporting the basic
use are all included — office buildings, warehouses, driveways,
sheds, parking lots, landscaped areas, and waste disposal areas.
Commercial areas may include some noncommercial uses too small
to be separated out. Central business districts commonly include
some institutions such as churches and schools, and corranercial strip
developments may include some residential units. When these non-
commercial uses exceed one-third of the total commercial areas, the
Mixed Urban or Built-up category should be used. There is no separate
category for recreational land uses at Level II since most recreational
activity is pervasive throughout many other land uses. Selected
areas are predominantly recreation oriented, and some of the more
distinctive occurrences such as drive-in theaters can be identified
on remote sensor imagery. Most recreational activity, however,
necessarily will be identified using supplemental information.
Recreational facilities that form an integral part of an institution
should be included in this category. There is usually a major visible
difference in the form of parking facilities, arrangements for traffic
flow, and the general association of buildings and facilities. The
intensively developed sections of recreational areas would be included
in the Commercial and Services category, but extensive parts of golf
courses, riding areas and so forth would be included in the
Other Urban or Built-up category.
Institutional land uses, such as the various educational,
religious, health, correctional, and military facilities are also
components of this category. All buildings, grounds, and parking
lots that compose the facility are included within the institutional
unit, but areas not specifically related to the purpose of the in-
stitution should be placed in the appropriate category. Auxiliary
land uses, particularly residential, commercial and services, and
other supporting land uses on a military base would be included in
this category, but agricultural areas not specifically associated
with correctional, educational, or religious institutions are
placed in the appropriate agricultural category. Small institutional
units, as, for example, many churches and some secondary and elementary
schools, would be mappable only at large scales and will usually be
included within another category, such as Residential. (Anderson
et al. 1976)
-------
Vegetation of commercial and service areas is usually limited to weedy
species that thrive in crevices of pavement, in narrow strips of land along
sidewalks or adjacent to buildings, and in vacant lots, landscaped beds, and
other small patches of soil. The species composition is highly variable
with little, if any, predictable occurrences. Members of the grass, pea,
and aster families are noted for colonizing wherever space permits, and
single plants or clumps of goosegrass (Eleusine indica), crabgrass (Digitaria
sanquinalis), paspalum (Paspalum boscianum), ragweed (Ambrosia artemesiifolia),
dog fennel (Eupatorium capil1ifolium), and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale)
are common. Other weeds of these sites are horse nettle (Solanum
carolinense), toad-flax (Linaria canadensis), peppergrass (Lepidium
virginicum), and henbit (Lamium amplexicaule). Occasionally one finds
naturalized species, escaped from cultivated plots, or persistent
cultivars.
A portion of pre-existing land cover is usually maintained around commercial
and service structures, and in this respect commercial and service areas
sometimes resemble residential areas in both plant and animal composition.
Animals of high mobility may feed in one type of community, nest in another,
and rest in still a third; consequently, species such as rock dove, starling,
house sparrow, domestic dogs and cats, and black rat hardly typify specific
community types but are associated with all types of structures in and
around which suitable habitat is supplied.
(c) Industrial
Industrial areas include a wide array of land uses from light
manufacturing to heavy manufacturing plants. Identification of
light industries — those focused on design, assembly, finishing,
processing, and packaging of products ~ can often be based on the
type of building, parking, and shipping arrangements. Light
industrial areas may be, but are not necessarily, directly in con-
tact with urban areas; many are now found at airports or in relatively
open country. Heavy industries use raw materials such as iron ore,
timber, or coal. Included are steel mills, pulp and lumber mills,
electric-power generating stations, oil refineries and tank farms,
chemical plants, and brickmaking plants. Stockpiles of raw materials
and waste-product disposal areas are usually visible, along with
transportation facilities capable of handling heavy materials.
-------
Surface structures associated with mining operations are included
in this category. Surface structures and equipment may range from a
minimum of a loading device and trucks to extended areas with access
roads, processing facilities, stockpiles, storage sheds, and numerous
vehicles. Spoil material and slag heaps usually are found within a
short trucking distance of the major mine areas and may be the key
indicator of underground mining operations. Uniform identification
of all these diverse extractive uses is extremely difficult from
remote sensor data alone. Areas of future reserves are included in
the appropriate present use category, such as Agricultural Land or
Forest Land, regardless of the expected future use. (Anderson et al.
1976)
Industrial sites probably impose the sharpest limits on biota and present
the greatest difficulty to survival. The site itself offers little
suitable habitat; vehicular traffic and noise may be excessive and,
generally, more favorable habitats are nearby. Nesting and feeding space
is scarce for animals, and those plants which occur there are species
typical of commercial and service areas. Only in exceptional cases, such
as grain milling facilities, is the habitat conducive to extensive faunal
usage.
(d) Transportation, Communications, and Utilities
The land uses included in the Transportation, Communications, and
Utilities category occur to some degree within all of the other Urban
or Built-up categories and actually can be found within many other
categories. Unless they can be mapped separately at whatever scale
is being employed, they usually are considered an integral part of
the land use within which they occur. For that reason, any statistical
sunmary of the area of land uses in this category typically repre-
sents only a partial data set. Statistical area summaries of such
land uses aggregated from Levels III and IV, though, would include
more accurate area estimates.
Major transportation routes and areas greatly influence other
land uses, and many land use boundaries are outlined by them. The types
and extent of transportation facilities in a locality determine the
degree of access and affect both the present and potential use of the
area.
Highways and railways are characterized by areas of activity
connected in linear patterns. The highways include rights-of-way,
-------
areas used for interchanges, and service and terminal facilities.
Rail facilities include stations, parking lots, roundhouses, repair
and switching yards, and related areas, as well as overland track
and spur connections of sufficient width for delineation at mapping
scale.
Airports, seaports, and major lakeports are isolated areas of
high utilization usually with no well-defined intervening connections,
although some ports are connected by canals. Airport facilities in-
clude the runways, intervening land, terminals, service buildings,
navigation aids, fuel storage, parking lots, and a limited buffer
zone. Terminal facilities generally include the associated freight
and warehousing functions. Small airports (except those on rotated
farmland), heliports, and land associated with seaplane bases may
be identified if mapping scale permits. Port areas include the docks,
shipyards, dry-docks, locks, and waterway control structures.
Communications and utilities areas such as those involved in
processing, treatment, and transportation of water, gas, oil, and
electricity and areas used for airwave communications are also in-
cluded in this category. Pumping stations, electric substations,
and areas used for radio, radar, or television antennas are the major
types. Small facilities, or those associated with an industrial or
commercial land use, are included within the larger category with
which they are associated. Long-distance gas, oil, electric, tele-
phone, water, or other transmission facilities rarely constitute
the dominant use of the lands with which they are associated.
(Anderson et al. 1976)
Transportation, communication, and utility corridors offer locally small
but collectively large habitat for many of the plant and animal species
that normally occupy the ecotone between open areas and woodlands. After
the clearing and construction phases, these corridors may be planted for
substrate stabilization, or if left undisturbed will become colonized by
herbs, shrubs, vines, and seedlings of trees, similar in total composition
to adjacent woodlands. Pine is one of the first tree invaders. After a
few years the aspect of these narrow strips is somewhat like that of an
abandoned field left to grow up in brush and thickets, maintaining the
same types of animals that would be found in old field habitats. When
this phase -- the thicket and sapling stage -- is maintained by an in-
frequent right-of-way clearance program, a straw-and-leaf seed bed is
-------
induced, thereby holding moisture, reducing erosion, and providing wildlife
food and cover.
The flora of transportation, communication, and utility routes varies with
the topography and type of maintenance performed. Near the highway rights-
of-way sod-forming grasses are usually planted — the most commonly planted
sod-forming grass is fescue (Festuca octoflora, _F. elatior, and £. obtusa) —
while on steep embankments of road cuts and fills, sericea, a type of
lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) is frequently planted. Railroad rights-of-
way through the region frequently support adventive species of plants not
found in adjacent biotic communities. If the corridor is treated with
herbicides, herbaceous vegetation will usually dominate, particularly
annual weeds and robust perennials which seasonally sprout from rootstocks.
If the area is maintained by manual or mechanical methods, woody species,
characterized by copius stump sprouts, will be more common.
East of the Plesant Hills Road bridge over the Yellow River in extreme
eastern DeKalb County, a major utility line crosses the river and flood-
plain, and through maintenance of the right-of-way, a semi-disturbed
bottomland habitat is maintained beneath the high voltage line. As a re-
sult of the infrequency of plant removal, together with alluvium and
readily available moisture, a vegetation cover of coarse weeds now thrives,
including a common Coastal Plain species of bottomland fields, bladder-pod
(Glottidium vesicarium). The road shoulder at this crossing also is
populated by another typical Coastal Plain inhabitant, the fire ant, which
has been known from this part of the Piedmont of Georgia for about 15 years
(personal communication, Georgia Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry,
Entomology, Atlanta, 14 January 1977).
The dense shrub cover that develops along corridors enables certain small
mammals such as the short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda) and white-
footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus), as well as birds such as the song
sparrow (Melospiza melodia), rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus),
-------
and prairie warbler (Dendroica discolor) to take advantage of the abundant
seed and berry crops.
Large mammals, such as white-tailed deer (Qdocoileus virginianus) and gray
fox, that range over extensive areas use these corridors for feeding and
travel between woodland communities. Utility poles, together with the low
vegetation, provide excellent perches for birds of prey and possible
nesting sites for woodpeckers. The open space above these corridors is
used during the feeding hours by bats, of which the region's most common
species is likely the little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus).
(e) Industrial and Commercial Complexes
The Industrial and Commercial Complexes category includes those
industrial and commercial land uses that typically occur together
or in close functional proximity. Such areas commonly are labeled
with terminology such as "Industrial Park", but since functions such
as warehousing, wholesaling, and occasionally retailing may be found
in the same structures or nearby, the more inclusive category title
has been adopted.
Industrial and Commercial complexes have a definite remote
sensor image signature which allows their separation from other Urban
or Built-up land uses. Because of their intentional development as
discrete units of land use, they may border on a wide variety of other
land use types, from Residential Land to Agricultural Land to Forest
Land. If the separate functions included in the category are
identified at Levels III or IV using supplemental data or with
ground survey, the land use researcher has the discretion of
aggregating these functions into the appropriate Level II Urban or
Built-up categories or retaining the unit as an Industrial and Com-
mercial Complex. (Anderson et al. 1976)
The biotic character of industrial and corrmercial complexes is minor in
relation to the project area as a whole, and those species which may reside
or forage in these areas are often found in the more intensive residential,
commercial and services, and industrial sites. The reader is referred to
these sections for appropriate discussion.
-------
(f) Mixed Urban or Built-up Land
The Mixed Urban or Built-up category is used for a mixture of
Level II Urban or Built-up uses where individual uses cannot be
separated at mapping scale. Where more than one-third intermixture
of another use or uses occurs in a specific area, it is classified
as Mixed Urban or Built-up Land. Where the intermixed land use or
uses total less than one-third of the specific area, the category
appropriate to the dominant land use is applied.
This category typically includes developments along transpor-
tation routes and in cities, towns, andbuilt-up areas where
separate land uses cannot be mapped individually. Residential,
Commercial, Industrial, and occasionally other land uses may be
included. A mixture of industrial and commercial uses in Industrial
and Commercial Complexes as defined in category 15 are not included
in this category. Farmsteads intermixed with strip or cluster
settlements will be included within the built-up land, but other
agricultural land uses should be excluded. (Anderson et al. 1976)
Mixed urban or built-up land is a biotic community of considerable importance
in the study area, primarily due to the potential increase in size of this
community as land uses in the project area change. This category currently
comprises such a small area that, at the USGS Level II mapping scale of
1:100,000, only 31.88 acres within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are so
classified. Because the category is an inclusive one -- that is, small
tracts of other communities such as residences, small fields, pastures,
garden plots, and groves of trees are grouped together -- the biota is
likewise varied and characteristic of the component communities.
Plants in this land use category include both native and introduced species.
Remnant natural stands of forest, preserved or planted shade trees of
lawns, weeds and grasses of pastures, barnyards, vacant lots, vegetable
and feed crops, and old field weeds are a few of the assemblages of vege-
tation to be expected in mixed urban or built-up areas.
The faunal composition of mixed urban sites similarly includes animals
from woodlands as well as those more commonly associated with houses and
various types of agricultural and commercial buildings. Despite predation
-------
by domestic pets, it is in this mosaic of communities that small game
animals such as the gray squirrel, Eastern cotton-tail (Sylvilaqus
floridanus), bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), and mourning dove (Zenaida
macroura) are able to subsist within a relatively urban setting. The
abundance of rodents, insects, and eggs or juveniles of small animals
supports predacious birds such as the screech owl (Qtus asio) and American
kestrel (Falco sparverius), reptiles such as the black rat snake (Elaphe
obsoleta obsoleta) and Eastern hognose snake (Heterodon platyrhinos), and
amphibians such as the American toad (Bufo americanus).
(g) Other Urban or Built-up Land
Other Urban or Built-up Land typically consists of uses such as
golf driving ranges, zoos, urban parks, cemeteries, waste dumps,
water-control structures and spillways, the extensive parts of such
uses as golf courses ..., and undeveloped land within an urban
setting. Open land may be in very intensive use but a use that does
not require structures, such as urban playgrounds, botanical gardens,
or arboreta. The use of descriptions such as "idle land", "vacant
land", or "open land" should be avoided in categorizing undeveloped
lands within urban areas on the basis of the use of remote sensor
data, since information generally is not available to the interpreter
to make such a refinement in categorization. (Anderson et al. 1975)
Plants associated with other urban and built-up lands may consist of only
a few species such as the commonly planted Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactyl on)
on golf courses to the hundreds of species found and cultivated in Fernbank
Garden Center. The extent of disturbance in large part determines the
variety of species; if disturbance is severe, then few species are able to
thrive. Conversely, if disturbance is minimal, the composition will be
diverse. In mapping this category, the sites are usually narrow and are
masked by adjacent communities when remote sensing techniques are employed.
Therefore the wildlife that is found in the community often represents
transient species that are moving through the zone to less disturbed areas
or that are foraging for short periods of time in this community.
-------
2) Agricultural Land
Agricultural Land may be defined broadly as land used primarily
for production of food and fiber. On high-altitude imagery, the
chief indications of agricultural activity will be distinctive
geometric field and road patterns on the landscape and the traces
produced by livestock or mechanized equipment. However, pasture and
other lands where such equipment is used infrequently may not show
as well-defined shapes as other areas. These distinctive geometric
patterns are also characteristic of Urban or Built-up Lands because
of street layout and development by blocks. Distinguishing between
Agricultural and Urban or Built-up Lands ordinarily should be possible
on the basis of urban-activity indicators and the associated con-
centration of population. The number of building complexes is smaller
and the density of the road and highway network is much lower in
Agricultural Land than in Urban or Built-up Land. Some urban land
uses, such as parks and large cemeteries, however, may be mistaken for
Agricultural Land, especially when they occur on the periphery of
the urban areas.
The interface of Agricultural Land with other categories of land
use may sometimes be a transition zone in which there is an inter-
mixture of land uses at first and second levels of categorization.
Where farming activities are limited by wetness, the exact boundary
also may be difficult to locate, and Agricultural Land may grade
into Wetland. When the production of agricultural crops is not
hindered by wetland conditions, such cropland should be included
in the Agricultural category. This latter stipulation also includes
those cases in which agricultural crop production depends on wetland
conditions, such as the flooding of ricefields or the development of
cranberry bogs. When lands produce economic commodities as a
function of their wild state such as wild rice, cattails, or certain
forest products commonly associated with wetland, however, they should
be included in the Wetland category. Similarly, when wetlands are
drained for agricultural purposes, they should be included in the
Agricultural Land category. When such drainage enterprises fall into
disuse and if wetland vegetation is reestablished, the land reverts
to the Wetland category.
The Level II categories of Agricultural Land are: Cropland and
Pasture; Orchards, Groves, Vineyards, Nurseries, and Ornamental
Horticultural Areas; Confined Feeding Operations; and Other Agri-
cultural Land. (Anderson et al. 1976)
-------
The most striking characteristic of land use in the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin, perhaps, is the transition from agriculture, which now accounts
for approximately 25 percent of all land use in the project area, to urban
land use. Cotton, corn, grain sorghum, soybeans, wheat, and other crops
are now relegated to a small proportion of the land in the counties
surrounding the City of Atlanta, and residential clusters are replacing
old fields. The decline in farms, the reduction in farm acreage, and the
proportion of all land in farms for the period 1964-69 (Table 14) give an
indication of this transition. Particularly notable is the 49 percent
reduction of farms in Rockdale County and the nearly 65 percent change in
farm acreage in DeKalb County, leaving only 5 percent of the latter county
in agricultural production.
As might be expected the production of livestock and poultry, because of
the readily available market in Atlanta and nearby satellite cities, ex-
ceeds crop production in most cases. Yet the competitive land market and
increasing costs of taxes, equipment, seed, fertilizer, utilities, and
farm buildings tend to offer an incentive to the farmer to sell his land
for residential or commercial purposes and either abandon farming altogether
or attempt to resettle. As shown in Table 14, this process is now occurring
within the project area, particularly in Rockdale, DeKalb, Gwinnett, and
Fulton counties. Outlier counties, located further from the Atlanta
metropolitan area, are currently less affected and show a smaller percentage
of decline in number of farms and farm acreage. Although agricultural
lands are scattered throughout the project area, the conversion from agri-
cultural to urban and built-up lands will undoubtedly intensify in the
future.
(a) Cropland and Pasture
The several components of Cropland and Pasture now used for
agricultural statistics include: cropland harvested, including bush
fruits; cultivated summer-fallow and idle cropland; land on which crop
-------
Table 14. Farms, land use changes of agricultural enterprise, value of products, and source distribution
in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, Georgia.3
Butts
Clayton
DeKalb
Fulton
Gwinnett
Henry
Jasper
Newton
Rockdale
Wal toi
Farms (1969)
211
159
115
507
591
531
255
339
184
638
Percent change 1964-1969
-26.5
2.6
-41.6
-37.1
-40.4
-16.2
13.3
-22.4
-49.0
-21.0
Farm acreage (thousands)
52
17
9
56
52
91
81
84
25
112
Percent change 1964-1969
-23.4
-24.1
-63.9
-36.1
-45.1
-15.4
-33.4
-15.9
-42.3
-9.5
Proportion of all land in farms
44.1
17.7
5.2
16.4
18.5
43.0
33.8
48.2
30.6
53.2
Average acres per farm
248
106
78
110
87
171
316
247
136
176
No. farms less than 10 acres
9
9
11
40
34
22
11
6
4
21
No. farms more than 1,000 acres
4
1
0
3
1
8
10
11
5
13
Percent farms with sales of $2500+
66
26
42
59
54
49
82
73
23
65
Value of farm products sold by farms with sales of $2500 and over
Average sales per farm ($'s)
13,608
20,236
35,482
19,692
46,919
17,023
37,548
29,694
14,438
29,396
Percent from crops
16.6
7.3
13.0
15.3
1.7
21.1
0.8
4.8
13.6
13.0
Percent from dairy products
33.2
withheld
51.1
5.3
2.4
41.6
23.9
34.6
23.0
9.2
Percent from livestock and
livestock products
21.3
20.1
15.0
23.2
4.9
25.4
15.7
26.4
30.6
15.5
Percent from poultry and
poultry products
24.6
withheld
18.5
54.5
90.6
9.5
59.1
34.1
32.8
61.2
aSource: U. S. Department of Commerce, Social and Economic Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census.
1973. County and city data book, 1972. U. S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1020 pp.
-------
failure occurs; cropland in soil-improvement grasses and legumes;
cropland used only for pasture in rotation with crops; arid pasture
on land more or less permanently used for that purpose. From imag-
ery alone, it generally is not possible to make a distinction between
Cropland and Pasture with a high degree of accuracy and uniformity,
let alone a distinction among the various components of Cropland
(Hardy, Belcher, and Phillips, 1971). Moreover, some of the com-
ponents listed represent the condition of the land at the end of the
growing season and will not apply exactly to imagery taken at other
times of the year. They will, however, be a guide to identification
of Cropland and Pasture. Brushland in the Eastern States, typically
used to some extent for pasturing cattle, is included in the Shrub-
Brushland Rangeland category since the grazing activity is usually
not discernible on remote sensor imagery appropriate to Levels I and
II. This activity possibly might be distinguished on low-altitude
imagery. Such grazing activities generally occur on land where crop
production or intensive pasturing has ceased, for any of a variety of
reasons, and which has grown up in brush. Such brushlands often are
used for grazing, somewhat analogous to the extensive use of range-
lands in the West.
Certain factors vary throughout the United States, and this vari-
ability also must be recognized; field size depends on topography,
soil types, sizes of farms, kinds of crops and pastures, capital
investment, labor availability, and other conditions. Irrigated land
in the Western States is recognized easily in contrast to Rangeland,
but in the Eastern States, irrigation by use of overhead sprinklers
generally cannot be detected from imagery unless distinctive circular
patterns are created. Drainage or water control on land used for
cropland and pasture also may create a recognizable pattern that may
aid in identification of the land use. In areas of quick-growing
crops, a field may appear to be in nonagricultural use unless the
temporary nature of the inactivity is recognized. (Anderson et al.
1976)
Croplands and pastures are vegetated by a variety of weeds in addition to
the customary row crops, small grains, and fodder legumes and grasses.
Generally the agricultural lands lie at the eastern and southern extremes
of the project area where urban pressure is less pronounced. In Rockdale
County where outcrops of granite are exposed or lie close to the surface,
the most lucrative farming areas are mostly located on the cleared flood-
plains where a cover of alluvium provides deep, fertile soil for agri-
cultural pursuits. Even where rocks are present on the uplands, the outcrops
-------
are often fenced and provide scanty, low-quality forage. The demise of
farming as an occupational activity in the Atlanta region also is evidenced
by the presence and relative abundance of old fields -- abandoned agri-
cultural lands not yet grown up in thickets, brush, or trees.
Vegetation development in croplands and pastures depends upon two seed
sources -- buried viable seeds (Oosting and Humphries 1940) and dispersal
from nearby communities. The combination of these two sources produces a
highly diverse assemblage, provided that disturbance from cultivation and
seasonal plowing occur. Once the croplands are abandoned, the diversity
of annual weeds is replaced by a constituency of perennial weeds, and
later by seedlings of tree and shrub species.
A colonizing sequence has long been noticed in plant composition, and the
chronological timing has been investigated at numerous sites where the
abandoned cropland situation exists. These observations about vegetation
changes in old fields considerably strengthened the concept of succession
that originated with Warming in Denmark (1891, as cited in Morrison and
Yarranton 1974) and that was popularized by Cowles (1399) in his classic
study of the Indiana sand dunes. In the southeastern United States the
work of Oosting (1942), Keever (1950), Quarterman (1957), and Odum (1960)
established "old-field succession" as the model for "ecosystem development"
by which croplands and pastures, barring continued disturbance, revert to
forests. Therefore the biotic composition of croplands should in a broad
sense be viewed as a community in transition with the degree of old field
or forest expression directly related to the extensiveness and frequency
of disturbance. Considered in this respect, the occasional trees or shrubs
in pastures or perennial grasses in old fields can be more lucidly under-
stood.
Characteristic vegetation of fields and pastures includes many species
of annuals and perennial asters, grasses, and legumes. In fallow fields,
weeds such as Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), horseweed (Erigeron
canadensis), plantain (Plantago lanceolata, P_. virginica, P. aristata),
-------
horse nettle, dog fennel, and goosegrass may occur together with or may
replace crabgrass, Johnson grass (Sorghum halapense), and morning-glories
(Impomea spp.). In older fields that have lain fallow for a few years,
there may be other serai stages of old field succession such as broomsedge
(Andropogon virqinicus), horseweed, and pine seedlings. In still older
fields the invasion of pine and hardwood seedling may make aerial dis-
tinction between agricultural lands and forested lands impossible since
they are truly in a transition period from one type of land use to another.
The plants of pastures often include occasional trees, usually young pines,
which are left to give shade to livestock. Fescue, clover (Trifolium spp.),
and other varieties of grasses are sown for pasture, and sometimes small
grain fields of mixed wheat, oats, rye, or barley are temporarily fenced
for livestock grazing. After harvest corn fields are often fenced for
swine prior to the fall or winter slaughter. Not infrequently adventive
weeds are introduced into pasture lands through livestock feed, con-
tamination of seeds purchased for sowing, by animal vectors, or by wind
or other abiotic means.
Croplands and pastures play an integral role in the project area, especially
when they are located within close proximity to woodlands or bottomlands.
Individuals of many species of birds and mammals often travel several miles
and pass through many community types, including croplands, in one day's
or one night's hunt. Wintering flocks of waterfowl move more or less
regularly from lake to lake or farm pond to farm pond. Crows (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), robins, mourning doves, blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus),
and starlings accumulate in late summer-early fall, and winter roosts
numbering 50,000 or more birds fly out as many as 50 to 70 mi each morning
to feed in fields, pastures, feedlots, woods, and various ecotones, then
return each night to their established roosting site in some 1-3 acres
of thicket woodland. In so doing, these birds often "stage" or tarry
around such open areas as landfills, hedgerows, fields, and meadows.
-------
Diverse habitats, large open spaces, and unimpaired mobility are necessary
to the survival of large birds of prey. Hawks, vultures, and owls nest
or roost in various types of woodland habitats but forage across fields
and pastures. Wintering flocks of goldfinches (Spinus tristis). evening
grosbeaks (Hesperiphona vespertina), and purple finches (Carpodacus purpureus)
do not have the local home ranges typical of most small birds but rather
roam loosely across several woody communities and old field ecotones. In
spring and fall migration, large numbers of species "spill out" of their
usual preferred communities and forage wherever proves to be advantageous.
Many of the larger mammals — opossum, raccoon, striped skunk (Mephitis
mephitis), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), gray fcx, otter (Lontra canadensis),
deer, — and the bats also range across considerable distances and several
community types in single foraging expeditions. Their appearance in crop-
lands and pastures,or overhead in the case of bats, can sometimes be ob-
served during twilight or dawn hours. Croplands and pastures contain the
preferred foods of herbivores, which in turn are preyed upon by carnivorous
species. As with the birds, each of these mammals has a primary or preferred
habitat for breeding and for nesting or resting cover; nevertheless,
individuals do exploit additional biotic communities found within their
ranges.
(b) Orchards, Groves, Vineyards, Nurseries, and Ornamental
Horticultural Areas
Orchards, groves, and
nut crops. Nurseries and horticultural areas, which include
horticultural and seed-and-sod areas and some greenhouses, are used
perennially for those purposes. Tree nurseries which provide seed-
lings for plantation forestry also are included here. Many of these
areas may be included in another category, generally Cropland and
Pasture, when identification is made by use of small-scale imagery
alone. Identification may be aided by recognition of the combination
of soil qualities, topography, and local climatological factors needed
for these operations: water bodies in close proximity which moderate
the effects of short duration temperature fluctuations; site selection
-------
for air drainage on sloping land; and deep well-drained soils on
slopes moderate enough to permit use of machinery. Isolated small
orchards, such as the fruit trees on the family farm, usually are
not recognizable on high-altitude imagery and are, therefore, not
included. (Anderson et al. 1976)
The plants found in orchards, groves, vineyards, nurseries, and ornamental
horticultural areas can be extremely diverse, owing to the numbers of
cultivated species. In mappable units, these sites are few in number and
small in size. The principal orchard trees are peach (Prunus persica) and
pecan (Carya il1inoensis). Many rural homes have an occasional fruit tree
such as peach and pear (Pyrus communis), or bushes such as fig (Ficus
carica), but these are considered with other units. Vineyards, as one
ordinarily thinks of them, are absent in the project area, and nurseries
and horticultural areas occupy an insignificant part of the project area
total.
Because of the small size of this land use type, there is no distinct
biotic composition, and those animals which may be found at any one time
in this community type are most likely visitors from other adjacent and
nearby habitats.
(c) Confined Feeding Operations
Confined Feeding Operations are large, specialized livestock
production enterprises, chiefly beef cattle feedlots, dairy operations
with confined feeding, and large poultry farms, but also including
hog feedlots. These operations have large animal populations restricted
to relatively small areas. The result is a concentration of waste
material that is an environmental concern. The waste-disposal problems
justify a separate category for these relatively small areas. Con-
fined Feeding Operations have a built-up appearance, chiefly composed
of buildings, much fencing, access paths, and waste-disposal areas.
Some are located near an urban area to take advantage of transportation
facilities and proximity to processing plants.
Excluded are shipping corrals and other temporary holding
facilities. Such occurrences as thoroughbred horse farms generally
do not have the animal population densities which would place them
in this category. (Anderson et al. 1976)
-------
Although confined feeding operations are scattered along the eastern periphery
of the project area, they do not constitute a large area of the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin and hence do not play an important role in sustenance
of wildlife species. Practically barren of plants, the confined feeding
operations are very important in terms of livestock utilization, and for
those non-commercial species of animals which occur here, the most abundant
would likely be ubiquitous birds such as the house sparrow and starling,
rats, and mice.
An important environmental aspect of confined feeding operations is the
potential for water pollution (both surface and sub-surface) from runoff
and deep percolation of undesirable minerals and organic compounds from
these areas. If located near a surface stream, runoff from confined feedlots
can result in increased biochemical oxygen demand and thus decreased levels
of dissolved oxygen, as well as increased nutrients which may result in
algal blooms.
Pollution of groundwater may also result from confined feeding operations,
as nitrates and nitrites, ammonia, phosphorus, potassium, calcium,
magnesium, various soluble salts, and organic matter percolate through the
soil and enter groundwater aquifers. In an extensive research project in
which he took soil samples from 21 beef cattle feedlots in Georgia, Fordham
(1973) found that average topsoil nitrate within feedlot areas was less
than 20 ppm and that only potassium showed appreciable movement in the
soil profile. He concluded that pollution of groundwater from beef
cattle feedlots is probably not significant in Georgia. The lack of
large groundwater supplies and, in many areas, well-developed soil pro-
files also reduces concern about potential soil and groundwater pollution
from confined feeding operations in the project area.
(d) Other Agricultural Land
Other land uses typically associated with the first three
categories of Agricultural Land are the principal components of the
Other Agricultural Land category. They include farmsteads, holding
-------
areas for livestock such as corrals, breeding and training facilities
on horse farms, farm lanes and roads, ditches and canals, small farm
ponds, and similar uses. Such occurrences generally are quite small
in area and often uninterpretable by use of high-altitude data. Even
when they are interpretable from such data, it may not be feasible
to map them at smaller presentation scales, which generally results
in their inclusion with adjacent agricultural use areas. This
category should also be used for aggregating data for land uses
derived at more detailed levels of classification. (Anderson et al. 1976)
The difference between cropland and pasture and other agricultural land is
in many cases extraordinarily subtle. Thus the biotic composition may be
slightly or not at all different. The small scale of the differences —
roadside ditches, farm lanes, and roads, etc. — is advantageous only to
those animals and plants which thrive on small space or in areas of frequent
disturbance. The Eastern mole and the American toad seem to frequent these
kinds of habitats. In the case of small farm ponds, there is often a
periphery of marsh or aquatic plants which provides food and cover for wetland
species. Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) and ducks such as the ring-necked duck
(A.ythya collaris), hooded merganser (Lophodt.yes cucullatus), mallard (Anas
platyrh.ynchos), and gadwall (Anas strepera) frequent these ponds.
Another type of habitat in other agricultural land which cannot be separately
mapped but which is one of the most valuable for animals is the habitat
provided by hedgerows and narrow strips of thickets. Here small game animals,
such as Eastern cottontail, bobwhite, and mourning dove, and numerous species
of rodents and songbirds find food, cover, and nesting sites, when fields
are harvested, plowed, etc. Close observation reveals that birds of prey such
as hawks may perch along hedgerows during the day, while owls use hedgerow
trees for observation posts during the night. The plant life which provides
all of these amenities for wildlife are such species as blackberry (Rubus
argutus), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), sassafras (Sassafras
albidum), wild blackcherry (Prunus serotina), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana),
and others. Around old house sites there may be remnants of formerly cultivated
-------
species of plants such as chinaberry (Melia azederach), hog plum (Prunus
umbel 1ata), tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima), or fruit trees such as
peach and pear.
3) Forest Land
Forest Lands have a tree-crown areal density (crown closure
percentage) of 10 percent or more, are stocked with trees capable
of producing timber or other wood products, and exert an influence
on the climate or water regime. Forest Land generally can be identi-
fied rather easily on high-altitude imagery, although the boundary
between it and other categories of land may be difficult to delineate
precisely.
Lands from which trees have been removed to less than 10 percent
crown closure but which have not been developed for other uses also
are included. For example, lands on which there are rotation cycles
of clearcutting and block-planting are part of Forest Land. On such
lands, when trees reach marketable size, which for pulpwood in the
Southeastern United States may occur in 2 to 3 decades, there will
be large areas that have little or no visible forest growth. The
pattern can sometimes be identified by the presence of cutting operations
in the midst of a large expanse of forest. Unless there is evidence
of other use, such areas of little or no forest growth should be in-
cluded in the Forest Land category. Forest land which is grazed
extensively, as in the Southeastern States, would be included in this
category because the dominant cover is forest and the dominant activities
are forest related. Such activities could form the basis for Levels
III or IV categorization. Lands that meet the requirements for Forest
Land and also for an Urban or Built-up category should be placed in
the latter category. The only exceptions in classifying Forest Land
are those areas which would otherwise be classified as Wetland if not
for the forest cover. Since the wet condition is of much interest
to land managers and planning groups and is so important as an environ-
mental surrogate and control, such lands are classified as Forested
Wetland.
Auxiliary concepts associated with Forest Land, such as wilderness
reservation, water conservation, or ownership classification, are not
detectable using remote sensor data. Such concepts may be used for
creating categories at the more detailed levels when supplemental
information is available.
At Level II, Forest Land is divided into three categories:
Deciduous, Evergreen, and Mixed. To differentiate these three
categories effectively, sequential data, or at least data
-------
acquired during the period when deciduous trees are bare,
generally will be necessary. (Anderson et al. 1976)
Forest land, totaling 472,444.66 acres, covers about 53 percent of the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin and thus represents the largest single land use category
in the study area.
(a) Deciduous Forest Land
Deciduous Forest Land includes all forest areas having a pre-
dominance of trees that lose their leaves at the end of the frost-
free season or at the beginning of a dry season. In most parts of
the United States, these would be the hardwoods such as oak (Quercus),
maple (Acer), or hickory (Carya) and the "soft" hardwoods ...
(Shelford, 1963). ... Deciduous forest types characteristic of
Wetland, such as tupelo (Nyssa) or cottonwood (Populus deltoides),
also are not included in this category. (Anderson et al. 1976)
Two associations of deciduous forests are present in the project area: (1)
a rich, usually north-exposure slope component dominated largely by old
growth beech (Fagus grandifolia), white oak, tulip poplar, and sugar maple,
and (2) a ridge component that is dominated almost exclusively by rock
chestnut oak (Quercus prinus). A variant of the slope forest found on
excessively steep slopes and bluffs is the laurel bluff in which the under-
story is dominated by the evergreen shrub, mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia).
Although the slope component is found on cool north-facing slopes, and
therefore maintains a more montane temperature and moisture regime, the
most notable characteristic is the deep well-drained soil. Consequently
these habitats have a diverse flora, particularly spring wildflowers, a
feature that lends considerable appeal to such areas as Soapstone Ridge,
McDaniel's Bluff, and other wooded slopes of both the South and Yellow rivers.
In contrast, the rock chestnut oak component occurs on thin soils, often
over granite, and the subsequent assemblage of wildflowers is more or less
an impoverished flora of weedy types, typically members of the pea family
and the aster family. (A prominent ridge of this type community lies south
of Porterdale -- Ga 81 follows the crest of this ridge.)
-------
An idealized transect down a slope on which the rock chestnut oak community
grades into the beech-maple community would have the following aspect:
at the top of a ridge with thin soil and occasional exposed boulders would
be short broad-crowned trees of rock chestnut oak and occasional scarlet
oak (Quercus coccinea) or mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa). The under-
story would consist of sourwood (Oxydendron arboreum), black gum (Nyssa
sylvatica), sparkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum), and squaw huckleberry
(Vaccinium stamineum), while the groundcover would be sparse with only
occasional plants of pipsissewa (Chimaphila maculata), goldenrod (Solidago
spp.), needle grass (Stipa avenacea), and other xeric woodland species.
The midslope would display a slightly more diverse flora, with tulip poplar,
sweetgum, and understory saplings of sugar maple, flowering dogwood, etc.
scattered among the canopy oaks and hickories. The lower slope vegetation
would vary, depending upon exposure, and would probably consist of upper
slope species if facing a southerly direction or, if facing a northerly
direction, would likely contain beech, tulip poplar, sugar maple, and
numerous species of understory trees and shrubs. Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides) would be common ground cover species.
Animals of the deciduous forest may be separated into vertical zones of
habitation: ground, understory, and overstory layers. Bird species that
feed and/or nest in the ground layer are the ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus),
veery (Catharus fuscescens), brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum), fox sparrow
(Passerella iliaca), and woodcock (Philohela minor). Woodland game
animals include raccoon, opossum, white-tailed deer, gray squirrel,
Eastern cottontail, mourning dove, and bobwhite. Small, less mobile
mammals typical of this layer include the short-tailed shrew, Eastern
chipmunk, white-footed mouse, and woodland vole (Microtus pinetorum).
Reptilian species in the deciduous forest are abundant and diverse. Common
inhabitants include the Eastern box turtle (Terrapene c. Carolina), black
rat snake, Eastern hognose snake, and broad-headed skink (Eumeces laticeps).
Terrestrial woodland salamanders that use humid microhabitats throughout
the ground layer are the spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum),
marbled salamander (A. opacum), small-mouthed salamander (A. texanum), and
Eastern tiger salamander (A. t. tigrinum).
-------
Abundant food and protective cover in the understory layer are utilized by
birds such as the wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina), hooded warbler
(Wilsonia citrina), and downy woodpecker (Dendrocopus pubescens). Gray
squirrels, opossums, and Southern flying squirrels (Glaucomys volans)
nest in snags, hollow trees such as sourwood, and understory trees.
The forest canopy supplies seasonal blossoms, buds, and seeds as well as
emergent insects that are used for food by the red-eyed vireo (Vireo
olivaceus), scarlet tanager (Piranga olivacea), tufted titmouse (Parus
bicolor), common flicker (Colaptes auratus), and various warblers (Dendroica
spp.). The abundant birds and small mammals are preyed upon by two
typical residents of the deciduous forest -- the great-horned owl (Bubo
virginianus) and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). Feeding throughout
the forest and roosting in its hollow trees and dense foliage are several
bat species that include the little brown myotis, eastern pipistrelle
(Pipistrellus subflavus), and red bat (Lasiurus boreal is). Although frogs
are usually associated with water, the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor)
typically forages and calls high in the deciduous canopy.
Transition zones between the deciduous forest and mixed or evergreen forests
and old fields provide habitat diversity suitable for avian species not
characteristic of either community. The common crow is a ubiquitous visitor
of such ecotones, although for roosting and nesting this bird seems to
prefer dense pine woodlands. Birds common to this edge are the song sparrow,
indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea), common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas),
and prairie warbler. The Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii) and sharp-
shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) frequently perch and hunt along the
forest-field ecotone.
(b) Evergreen Forest Land
Evergreen Forest Land includes all forested areas in which the
trees are predominantly those which remain green throughout the year.
Both coniferous and broad-leaved evergreens are included in this
-------
category. In most areas, the coniferous evergreens predominate, ...
[and] are commonly referred to or classified as softwoods. They in-
clude such ... species as ... the shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata),
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and other southern yellow pines. ...
(Anderson et al. 19761
Evergreen forests in the project area are composed of loblolly pine
plantations or transitional forests of either loblolly pine or shortleaf
pine or both. Small stands of red cedar occur only rarely. Pine forests
usually occur on soils of low fertility and high acidity, commonly on old
fields long abandoned or on sites formerly covered by forests in which the
canopy species have been timbered and/or burned. Loblolly pine is the
most abundant pine in the project area. Due to decreased light levels as
a result of canopy closure, pine seedlings are not as successful as hard-
wood seedlings and, when the shade tolerant seedlings and saplings of hard-
wood species survive, young pine saplings often die before reaching full
sunlight. The understory, therefore, is usually dominated by hardwood
species such as sweetgum, black gum, and sourv/ood. Under normal succession
processes the evergreen forests gradually revert to mixed forests and even-
tually to deciduous forests, according to the classic papers on Piedmont
old field succession.
The complement of herb species is more stereotyped. Pipsissewa, elephant's
foot (Elephantopus tomentosus), yellow jessamine (Gelsemium sempervirens),
and Japanese honeysuckle' occur predictably throughout this community.
The contribution of biomass to pine forest soil decay organisms is very
rapid but is often localized. Piles of bark often accumulate at bases of
pine trees, contributing substantially to inhibition of young individuals
of other plant species, as well as adding to the recyclable biomass of
the forest. The relatively dense groves of pines tend to enhance the
density of insect pests such as the Southern pine bark beetle (Dendroctonus
frontalis) that has reached epidemic proportions in forests in certain
-------
parts of the South. This beetle and a related species, the ips beetle
(Dendroctonus ips), tend to favor trees struck by lightning (which in
itself may be fatal). Once bark beetles have infested pine trees, they
quickly tunnel beneath the bark into the living tissue or cambium and
effectively girdle the tree, preventing movement of minerals and metabolic
products between the roots and the branches. An invasion of secondary in-
sects often follows. In addition, the bark beetles serve as the vector
for a bluish-black fungus which readily grows into the heartwood, leaving
a blue-streaked appearance and rendering the wood virtually useless.
Upland pine forests have less bird life in summer, both in kinds and in
numbers, than either deciduous forests or wetland forests. Just the
reverse is true in winter ~ the hardwood communities are bare and open,
while there is a good supply of food and cover amidst the needles of the
pines. In summer, the pines are hot, dry, and sunlit, while deciduous
woods are shaded, cool, and moist. The yellow-throated warbler (Dendroica
dominica) and the pine warbler (JL pinus) are especially distinctive in-
habitants of pines. The ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula) also
frequents pine stands.
In winter, pine and mixed pine-hardwood stands characteristically have mixed
flocks of birds of up to 15 or more species and 100 or more individuals which
slowly forage through the tree canopies. Common members of these groups
are permanent and/or winter residents such as woodpeckers (Centurus carolinus,
Dryocopus pileatus, Dendrocopos boreal is, etc.), nuthatches (Sitta spp.),
tufted titmice, Carolina chickadees (Parus carolinensis), Carolina wrens
(Thryothorus ludovicianus), and pine warblers.
In pine plantations where a depauperate hardwood understory occurs, the
fauna is usually less diverse than in stands which contain patches of
hardwoods, thickets, or a relatively diverse understory. In other words,
animal diversity is positively correlated with floral diversity. Although
-------
amphibians and reptiles are not as abundant in this land use category as
in other types of communities, such as wetland forests, the American toad,
Eastern box turtle, Eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus), Eastern
hognose snake, Northern black racer (Coluber c. constrictor), and copperhead
(Agkistrodon contortrix) are frequent inhabitants. Mammals such as the
gray squirrel, Eastern chipmunk, and white-footed mouse are also present
in this community.
(c) Mixed Forest Land
Mixed Forest Land includes all forested areas where both ever-
green and deciduous trees are growing and neither predominates. When
more than one-third intermixture of either evergreen or deciduous
species occurs in a specific area, it is classified as Mixed Forest
Land. Where the intermixed land use or uses total less than one-
third of the specified area, the category appropriate to the dominant
type of Forest Land is applied, whether Deciduous or Evergreen.
(Anderson et al. 1976)
In total acreage the mixed forest land occupies the greatest proportion
(30 percent) of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. Seldom does one encounter
an upland forest stand which does not contain at least loblolly pine or
red cedar. Much of what has been said of upland hardwood forest and pine
forest is applicable to this land use designation. While the mixed forest
land may be considered intermediate between hardwood and pine lands since
the total plant composition contains features of both types, the overall
relative importance of each species may be quite different.
Occurrence of this forest type can be interpreted as (1) a post-mature
pine forest in which loblolly pine is becoming less common, (2) a lumbered
forest in which the hardwood species have been removed, or (3) a sustained
mixed forest in which both hardwoods and pine are intermittently removed.
Such hardwood species as sweetgum, black gum, tulip poplar, white oak,
and the more xerophytic species of oak and hickory share the canopy dominance
with pine. Surprisingly, red maple (Acer rubrum), ordinarily a common
-------
constituent of Piedmont forest, was infrequently observed in the Yellow
River sub-basin. Understory species are the same as those mentioned for
upland hardwood forest, although sourwood may be more abundant.
Near the bases of slopes where the upland forests grade into the floodplain
forest, the soil may be deeper, of a heavier texture, and less well-drained.
Consequently there may be a subtle mixture of floodplain species migrating
upslope into the mixed forest. It is here that one may find a greater
abundance of tulip poplar, hop hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), and possibly
an occasional sycamore (Platanus occidental is) or ironwood (Carpinus
caroliniana).
The shrub and herb species are also much the same as in slope hardwoods,
varying according to the abundance or virtual absence of pine. Christmas
fern is often abundant especially on north slopes. Shrubs include squaw
huckleberry, witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), fringe-tree (Chionanthus
virginicus), nanny-berry (Viburnum prunifolium), bladdernut (Staphylea
trifolia), while vines include crossvine (Anisostichus capreolata),
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), and sawbrier (Smilax glauca).
One of the ecological features of the upland mixed pine-hardwood forest com-
pared with the mature hardwood forest is that the former is successionally
transitional. Loblolly and shortleaf pine trees are in various stages of
senescence, and as they die and decay the subsequent detritus (litter) is
recycled in the forest ecosystem. This process is evident by the gradual
establishment of new saprophytic organisms (decomposers) that produce
changes in the physiochemical nature of the litter and upper soil horizons.
These changes contribute to and are reflected by the appearance and develop-
ment of upland hardwood forest species.
The mixed pine-hardwood community has a more varied terrestrial vertebrate
composition than either the upland hardwood or the upland pine forests,
because of the greater diversity of plant species and the tendency toward
-------
a greater and distinctive stratification. While the mixed forest is a
definite vegetation type, both in biotic components and percentage presence
in the area, its animal life is perhaps best understood as a combination
of the pine and hardwood types. For instance, some nesting birds extending
into the mixed woodlands from the pines are pine warbler, ovenbird, and
brown-headed nuthatch (Sitta pusillah while some species from the hard-
woods are the red-bellied woodpecker (Centurus carolinus), downy woodpecker,
and great crested flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus). The same mixing of
species is true for winter-resident birds, for a number of kinds of
mammals, lizards, and snakes, and even for such amphibians as the marbled
salamander, slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), American toad, gray
treefrog, and Eastern narrow-mouthed toad (Gastrophryns carolinensis).
4) Barren Land
Barren Land is land of limited ability to support life and in
which less than one-third of the area has vegetation or other cover.
In general, it is an area of thin soil, sand, or rocks. Vegetation,
if present, is more widely spaced and scrubby than that in the Shrub
and Brush category of Rangeland. Unusual conditions, such as a
heavy rainfall, occasionally result in growth of a short-lived, more
luxuriant plant cover. Wet, nonvegetated barren lands are included
in the Nonforested Wetland category.
Land may appear barren because of man's activities. When it may
reasonably be inferred from the data source that the land will be
returned to its former use, it is not included in the Barren category
but classified on the basis of its site and situation. Agricultural
land, for example, may be temporarily without vegetative cover be-
cause of cropping season or tillage practices. Similarly, industrial
land may have waste and tailing dumps, and areas of intensively
managed forest land may have clear-cut blocks evident.
When neither the former nor the future use can be discerned and
the area is obviously in a state of land use transition, it is con-
sidered to be Barren Land, in order to avoid inferential errors.
(Anderson et al. 1976)
-------
(a) Bare Exposed Rock
The Bare Exposed Rock category includes areas of bedrock ex-
posure, scarps, talus, slides, and other accumulations of
rock without vegetative cover. ... (Anderson et al. 1976)
USGS Level II land use maps show 366.6 acres of Bare Exposed Rock in the
Yellow River sub-basin. This acreage includes Stone Mountain and adjacent
exposures, but other rock outcrops are scattered throughout the project
area. A notable belt extends southeastward from Stone Mountain across
Rockdale County and into Newton County. On aerial photographs the charac-
teristic islands of outcrop vegetation tend to be misleading and subse-
quently some of the exposures have erroneously been mapped as pasture lands.
Despite the fact that these rock exposures contain endemic and endangered
species and that considerable biological research has been conducted on
these "natural laboratories", there is at present no current data on the
total acreage or condition of the Piedmont granite outcrops in Georgia.
Exploration and study of these unusual formations in the southeastern
United States began in the late eighteenth century. Because Stone Mountain
was the national focal point, many species were first collected and des-
cribed from this locality. Additional research in adjacent states has
since determined that the biota is unique and characteristic of similar
granite rocks in northern Alabama and the Piedmont of the Carolinas.
The flowering plants that are found on these outcrops are restricted to
shallow pools and depressions containing thin, infertile soil. McVaugh
(1943) listed more than 40 species of plants occurring on granite outcrops
which distinguish these habitats from the adjacent or surrounding Piedmont
vegetation. Burbanck and Piatt (1964) reported that of the total of 76
species found in 40 island communities on outcrops slightly more than half
(39 species) were considered to be characteristic of these habitats; the
remaining species were likely invaders from adjacent woodlands, fields, or
pastures. In the Panola Mountain area, for example, 406 taxa of flowering
-------
plants were recorded by Bostick (1971) — these taxa included species typical of
granite outcrops, introduced and persistent species found around abandoned
home sites, and forest species of nearby woodlands.
Soil depths, organic turnover, moisture and temperature stresses, seed
availability, and other plant competitors are among the restrictive
factors influencing vegetation abundance, survival through the period of
fruit maturation, and biotic zonation. The latter feature, zonation, is
a conspicuous and noteworthy point since the biophysical interrelationships
of the island communities work ever so intricately to produce distinct
vegetation patterns. At least while in the herbaceous stages, the plants
become arranged in concentric circles, each ring often composed of a
single species. In the shallowest depressions only crustose lichens and
mosses are able to survive, but as soil accumulates from inorganic
weathering and detrital degradation, herbs eventually replace the lichen
communities, and these in turn are replaced by woody vegetation. Seldom
are the soil depths sufficient for the development of trees, and as
Burbanck and Piatt (1964) point out, the woody plants are subject to ex-
treme moisture stress, occasionally culminating in death of the plants.
Plant diversity is positively correlated with depth of the soil. Further-
more, "soils 2 cm deep have an organic content of about 3% and a pH of
about 4.0; those 10 cm deep, an organic content of about 4% and a pH of
about 4.2; and those over 15 cm deep, an organic content of about 8% and
a pH of about 4.5" (Burbanck and Piatt 1964).
In their taxonomic revision of certain outcrop species of the genus
Arenaria (Family: Caryophyllaceae), McCormick et al. (1971) postulated
that the outcrop flora belonging to this group is composed of relicts of
an Arcto-Tertiary flora which once covered the Appalachian Highlands. As
erosion occurred along the Piedmont fall line and outcrops were exposed,
the habitats of the granites provided refugia where these diminutive plants
could survive. In searching sandstone outcrops in Tennessee, these in-
-------
vestigators found the same or similar granite outcrop species. Confirming
evidence by Whitehouse (1933) on Texas granite outcrops lends credence to
the Arcto-Tertiary derivation of this flora.
Within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, granite outcrops are protected at
Stone Mountain State Park, at Mount Arabia, and at Panola Mountain. A
few sites, while not drastically altered, have been fenced for the
minimal forage afforded to livestock. Road construction across a prominent
outcrop on the east bank of the Yellow River near Bald Rock Road
necessitated blasting and loss of habitat, while other outcrops such as
the one along Irwin Bridge Road north-northwest of Milstead have been
subject to trash disposal. Not to be underestimated are the seasonal
forays of biologists and wild flower enthusiasts whose zeal for collecting
occasionally surpasses judicious appraisal and specimen selection.
Herbaceous and woody plants found on the outcrops of the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin are of several life forms. Pockets of shallow soil in full sunlight
contain such species as Sedum smallii, usually referred to in the literature
by its old generic name Diamorpha, prickly-pear (Opuntia compressa), a
member of the cactus family, and fameflower (Talinum teretifolium).
Inconspicuous but often present in large numbers in the island communities
are wiry plants with small leaves such as rushfoil (Crotonopsis elliptica)
and orange-grass (Hypericum gentianoides). Grass-like plants such as the
endemic sedge Cyperus granitophi!us, the rush Juncus georgianus, and
bentgrass (Agrostis elliottiana) are present. If ephemeral pools are
present, a likely inhabitant is the very rare and endangered Amphianthus
pusillus, which sends up floating leaves in mid-April. Trees in the
shallow peripheral soils frequently include various species of pine and
hickory and also the rare Georgia oak (Quercus georgiana).
The sparseness of vegetation and the scarcity of water and soil make the
outcrops unattractive habitat for most wildlife. During the field survey
in November, numerous mourning doves were observed on or in nearby trees
at the Bald Rock outcrop.
-------
(b) Strip Mines, Quarries, and Gravel Pits
Those extractive mining activities that have significant sur-
face expression are included in this category. Vegetative cover
and overburden are removed to expose ... [mineral] deposits ...
[and] stone, ... . Quarrying of building and decorative stone and
recovery of sand and gravel deposits also result in large open sur-
face pits. Current mining activity is not always distinguishable,
and inactive, unreclaimed, and active strip mines, quarries, borrow
pits, and gravel pits are included in this category until other
cover or use has been established, after which the land would be
classified in accordance with the resulting use or cover. Unused pits
or quarries that have been flooded, however, are placed in the
appropriate Water category. (Anderson et al. 1976)
The biotic composition of strip mines, quarries, and gravel pits varies
from nearly negligible to moderately abundant -- especially in sites
long abandoned and allowed to grow up in brush. At active mine sites
there is often a peripheral area of waste ground where stone has either
been removed or where the rock is that which was culled from the com-
mercially exploitable material. Here a few weedy or shrub species begin
to grow and provide food for birds and small mammals which seek shelter
and nesting sites among the labyrinths of these rock piles. As for the
active parts of quarries, the biota is restricted to species that may
accidently wander into the area, or to birds which fly over the quarry
operation.
(c) Transitional Areas
The Transitional Areas category is intended for those areas
which are in transition from one land use activity to another.
They are characterized by the lack of any remote sensor information
which would enable the land use interpreter to predict reliably the
future use or discern the past use. All that actually can be
determined in these situations is that a transition is in progress,
and inference about past or future use should be avoided. This
transitional phase occurs when, for example, forest lands are
cleared for agriculture, wetlands are drained for development, or
when any type of land use ceases as areas become temporarily bare
-------
as construction is planned for such future uses as residences,
shopping centers, industrial sites, or suburban and rural residential
subdivisions. Land being altered by filling, such as occurs in
spoil dumps or sanitary landfills, also is indicative of this transi-
tional phase. (Anderson et al. 1976)
Transitional areas in the Yellow River sub-basin comprise more than 3,000
acres. Many smaller areas which should be included in this category were
of inconsequential size and were included in other categories. Diversity
of both plant and animal components may be large or small, depending upon
the location, the types of previous disturbance, the proximity of forest
communities, the availability of water, and the frequency of man's
activities in the general vicinity.
In the Atlanta suburbs and the small outlying towns, the considerable
disturbance which accompanies construction is widespread. Disruption of
cover, food sources, nesting sites, and young is a common occurrence.
Landscaping, following the initial construction may alleviate biotic
crowding from adjacent communities but the replaced habitats are of
dubious benefit to the former wildlife of the site, and as is often the
case, other species more tolerant of the disturbed conditions invade the
site and compete directly for the reduced resources.
Within a less urbanized environment, certain transitional areas may en-
hance wildlife populations, as when forest lands are partially cleared,
leaving strips of woodlands along ditches or hedgerows to be utilized by
small game species. However, in the Atlanta area transition communities
are more typically represented by areas like the landfill off Arnold Road
in Gwinnett County. Here the common inhabitants are rats and mice,
starlings, crows, and other species which nest or feed around carrion,
garbage, and trash heaps.
Endangered Species — The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (PL 93-205)
provides for the protection of endangered and threatened animals and plants.
The following section discusses those endangered and threatened species which
may utilize habitat provided by the biotic communities described under the
Land land-use category.
-------
/ -
Endangered species are those in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of their ranges; threatened species are those which
are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of their ranges. The United States List of
Endangered Fauna (U. S. Department of the Interior 1974) has been published
in the Federal Register under the auspices of PL 93-205. An official
Federal list of threatened flora for the United States is not currently
available; however, a preliminary list of endangered and threatened plants
has been published by the Smithsonian Institution (1975).
1) Plants. On June 16, 1976 the Director, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, issued in the Federal Register (FR 41
(117):24524-24572), "a proposed rulemaking which would determine approxi-
mately 1700 native, U. S., vascular plant taxa to be Endangered Species,
pursuant to Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-
1543, 87 Stat, 884: hereinafter, the Act)."
Five major background events led to this proposal:
(a) passage of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 on December 28,
1973;
(b) presentation of a preliminary list of plants by the Secretary
of the Smithsonian Institution (House Document No. 94-51);
(c) publication of a notice by the Director "describing the pro-
cess of determination of 'Critical Habitat1 for Endangered and Threatened
species, as encouraged by section 2(b) and provided for by section 7 of the
Act";
(d) publication of the Director's "acceptance of the report of
the Smithsonian Institution as a petition within the context of section 4(c)
(2) of the Act, and of his initiation thereby of a review of the status of
the plant taxa named therein as well as any habitat of these taxa which
might be determined to be critical, pursuant to section 7 of the Act"; and
-------
i
(e) issuance by the Fish and Wildlife Service of the "proposed
rules," /47 CFR( 110):22916-22922/ which among other things:
. set forth the procedural steps of determining Endangered
or Threatened Species of plants;
. proscribe the prohibitions which apply to such Endangered
or Threatened plants or to the seeds, roots, or parts
thereof;
. establish procedures, conditions, and criteria for the appli-
cation for and issuance of permits to conduct otherwise
prohibited activities.
The proposal describes the conditions under which a species may be designated
Threatened or Endangered:
Section 4(a) of the Act states that the Secretary may determine
a species to be an Endangered Species or a Threatened Species be-
cause of any of the five factors following:
(1) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(2) Overutilization for commercial, sporting, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(3) Disease or predation;
(4) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(5) Other natural or mandate factors affecting its continued
existence. /41 CFR(117):24524/
Ramifications of the proposal are also stated:
Determination that a plant is a Threatened or Endangered Species
would, among other things, make that species, including its seeds,
roots, or other parts, subject to the prohibitions of section 9(a)
(2) of the Act which reads as follows:
(2) Except as provided in sections 6(g) (2) and 10 of this Act,
with respect to any endangered species of plants listed pursuant to
section 4 of this Act, it is unlawful for any person subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States to-
(A) Import any such species into, or export any such species
from the United States;
(B) Deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate
or foreign commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the course of a
commercial activity, any such species;
-------
' 'l
I
(C) Sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce
any such species; or
(D) Violate any regulation pertaining to such species or to any
threatened species of plants listed pursuant to section 4 of this
Act and promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to authority provided
in this Act. /41 CFR(110):22916/
These regulations, as proposed in the June 7, 1976 Federal Register, would
provide for the issuance of permits to carry out otherwise prohibited ac-
tivities under certain circumstances. Such permits would be available for
scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the species.
In some instances permits may be issued during a specified period of time to
relieve undue economic hardship which would be suffered if such relief were
not available.
In addition to the proposed Federal rules, the Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, Game and Fish Division, issued State regulations on September 13,
1976. Entitled "Protection of Endangered, Threatened, Rare,, or Unusual
Species" (Chapter 391-4-13), the State regulations establish, among other
points, (1) purpose and (2) prohibited acts:
The purpose of these rules and regulations is to establish the
organizational structure and administrative procedures to be followed
in the protection of endangered species of plant and animal life.
The Department of Natural Resources is authorized by the Wildflower
Preservation Act of 1973'(Ga. Laws 1973, p. 333, et seq.), the
Endangered Wildlife Act of 1973 (Ga. Laws 1973, p. 932, et seq.),
the laws relating to game and fish (Ga. Laws 1955, p. 483, et seq.)
as amended, in particular by (Ga. Laws 1968, p. 497, et seq.) and
other laws administered by the Department of Natural Resources, to
promulgate rules and regulations for the protection of designated
species. The Department of Natural Resources is required by the
Endangered Wildlife Act of 1973 and the Wildflower Preservation Act
of 1973 to designate all plant and animal species indigenous to the
state which are determined by the Department to be "rare", "unusual",
or in "danger of extinction". Such species are then "protected species"
and subject to the provisions of the above-cited laws and the rules
and regulations of the Department of Natural Resources. The Depart-
ment is required to review periodically its "protected species" list
and to make additions or deletions when appropriate.
-------
Species (Common Name)
Isoetes virginica (Quillwort)
Nestronia umbel!uta (None)
Phacelia dubia var. georqiana (None)
Plantago cordata (Plantain)
Schisandra glabra (None)
Scutellaria ocmulgee (Skullcap)
Smilax leptanthera (Greenbrier)
Talinum menqesii (None)
Waldsteinia lobata (Barren strawberry)
Habitat
Of taxonomic question as to whether
a distinct species; found in pools
on granite outcrops
Parasitic on oaks in dry oak-
hickory woods
Shallow soil of granitic outcrops
Shoals and rocky streambeds
Rich hardwoods
Riverbanks in the Ocmulgee River
Basin
Doubtfully a distinct species;
moist woodlands
Shallow soil of granite outcrops
Rich bottomland woods and moist
wooded slopes
Two potential litigation conflicts exist over the enforcement of regulations
pertaining to the protection of designated "Endangered" or "Threatened"
plants. The first of these is general in scope and might be tested anywhere
within the State. The controversy stems from the accepted acknowledgement
that wildlife species, because of their free-ranging activity, are con-
sidered property of the State and hence are subject to the applicable
rules and regulations as carried out by wildlife agencies. On the other
hand, the plant life is considered the property of the landowner; conse-
quently, there is no legal precedent establishing State jurisdiction over
regulations dealing with the vegetation.
The second problem ultimately relates to the first. Noting that all of the
confirmed Endangered and Threatened plants in the project area occur in
-------
391-4-13-.06 Prohibited Acts. The following acts regarding
protected species of animals and plants are prohibited:
(b) Protected Plant Species. Prohibited acts concerning pro-
tected plant species include:
1. No person within this State shall cut, dig, pull up or other-
wise remove any protected species from public land unless such person
has secured an appropriate permit from the Department.
2. No person within this State shall sell or offer for sale,
for any purpose, any protected plant species, unless such species
was grown on private land and is being sold by the landowner or with
the permission of the landowner.
3. No person within this State shall transport, carry, or
otherwise convey any protected plant species from the land of another
unless each shipment thereof has affixed a tag supplied by the
Department showing that the person so transporting, carrying or
conveying such protected species has removed such specimen(s) from
the private lands of another person with the permission of such other
person and has a written document in his possession evidencing such
permission, and further evidencing that such specimen has not been
sold in violation of section (b) above. (H.B. 594, Sections 4-6).
Endangered and Threatened plants of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are listed
in Table 15. These species were either observed during the field survey by
Coastal Zone Resources Corporation personnel, or citations for their
occurrence in the project area were found in the botanical literature.
Certain other species, which were not observed in the project area but
for which the distributions were given in regional floras as "Piedmont of
Georgia" or for which the preferred habitats were observed are listed
below:
Species (Common name)
Carex amp!isquama (None)
Habitat
Specific habitat undetermined but
associated with granite outcrops
-------
v \ ¦
Table 75 . (concluded)
Species Status Comments
Family POACEAE: Grass
Panicum 1ithophilum T
Family PORTULACACEAE: Purslane
Portulaca smal 1i i E
Family SCROPHULARIACEAE: Figwort
Amphianthus pusillus E
Reported from granitic outcrops
Shallow soil in depressions
on granite
Ephemeral; appearing in April
in shallow pools on granite
aSource: U. S. Department of the Interior. 1976. Endangered and
threatened wildlife and plants. Federal Register 41(117): 24524-24572.
bSource: Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1976. Rules
and regulations for the protection of endangered, threatened, rare, and
unusual species. Atlanta. 10 pp.
-------
\
Table 15 . Endangered3'b or Threatened13 plants in the Upper Ocmulgee Basin,
Species
Status
Comments
Division PTERIDOPHYTA: Ferns
Family ISOETACEAE: Qui 11wort
Isoetes melanospora T
Shallow pools on Stone Mt.,
other granites
Division SPERMATOPHYTA: Seed Plants
Subdivision ANGIOSPERMAE: Flowering Plants
Family ASTERACEAE: Aster
Viguiera porteri T
Family BRASSICACEAE: Mustard
Draba aprica E
Family CRASSULACEAE: Stonecrop
Sedum pusilium T
Family CYPERACEAE: Sedge
Cyperus granitophilus T
Rhynchospora globularis T
var. saxicola
Family FAGACEAE: Beech
Quercus georgiana T
Family LAMIACEAE: Mint
Pycnanthemum curvipes E
Common on granitic outcrops
Shallow soil in depressions
on granite
Shallow soil in depressions
on granite
Shallow, moist soil in
depressions on granite
Seepages on Stone Mountain
Abundant on and around granite
outcrops
Collected in 1905 on Stone Mt.
Table 15 . Continued
-------
association with granitic outcrops, a major economic impasse could be
imminent for quarrying companies, or even for State agencies such as
the Department of Transportation, should the protection of outcrop
species be enforced. One mitigative measure written into the proposed
Federal rules is that permits may be granted if the applicant can show
that the Federal activity (i.e., protection) causes him (the applicant)
to suffer undue economic hardship /41 CFR (110):22920/.
2) Animals. The United States List of Endangered Fauna (U. S. Depart-
ment of the Interior 1974) contains five species (Table 16) which may
utilize suitable terrestrial habitat in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin:
Southern bald eagle (Haliaeetus 1. leucocephalus), peregrine falcon (Falco
peregrinus), red-cockaded woodpecker (Dendrocopos boreal is), ivory-
billed woodpecker (Campephilus principal is), and the Eastern cougar (Felis
concolor cougar).
Before enactment of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the subsequent
publication of endangered fauna, the Office of Endangered Species and
International Activities of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service published
the Threatened Wildlife of the United States (U. S. Department of the
Interior 1973) under the auspices of the Endangered Species Conservation
Act of 1969 (PL 91-135). The document presents the most up-to-date list
of fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals threatened with extinction,
in addition to listing those fish, birds, and mammals extinct or presumed
extinct in the United States. Several supplementary categories are included
in the publication on threatened wildlife: (1) peripheral species (which
occur in the U. S. at the edge of their natural range as a whole) and
(2) status - undetermined species (which have been suggested as possibly
threatened with extinction but for which a lack of sufficient information
prevents an accurate status evaluation). The threatened wildlife list in-
cludes two major categories of animals that may occur within the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin (1) threatened -- Southern bald eagle, peregrine falcon,
-------
ak U A
Table 16 . Endangered (E) ' or Status-undetermined (SU) fauna that may
occur in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
Species
Status
Comments
BIRDS
Southern bald eagle
(Haliaeetus 1_. leucocephalus)
Peregrine falcon
(Falco peregrinus)
Red-cockaded woodpecker
(Dendrocopos boreal is)
A scarce permanent
resident of the coast;
may occur in the project
area as a transient.
A winter resident in
Georgia, primarily along
the coast. Probably are
rare transients in Upper
Ocmulgee River 3asin.
Has state-wide range in
Georgia. Preferred habitat
is mature pine woodlands.
Probably a scarce permanent
resident of Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin.
Ivory-billed woodpecker
(Campephilus principal is)
American osprey
(Pandion haliaetus)
SU
May be extinct -- has not
been observed in Georgia
for many years.
Coastal summer resident in
Georgia. Feeds primarily
on fish. Probably an un-
common transient of proj-
ect area.
Merlin
(Falco columbarius)
SU
An uncommon transient and
winter resident throughout
Georgia. May utilize open
spaces in the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin.
MAMMALS
Eastern cougar
(Felis concolor)
Probably has state-wide
range in Georgia. Prefers
remote wilderness areas.
Likely occurs only as a
transient in Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin.
Table 16. Continued
-------
Table 16 (concluded)
aSource: U. S. Department of the Interior. 1974. United States list
of endangered fauna. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. 22 pp.
^Source: Cranshaw, D., ed. 1976. Endangered wildlife. Pages 22-26
in Outdoors in Georgia, September 1976. Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, Atlanta.
cSource: I). S. Department of the Interior. 1973. Threatened wildlife
of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. 289 pp.
-------
red-cockaded woodpecker, ivory-billed woodpecker, and Eastern cougar and (2)
status-undetermined -- American osprey (Pandion haliaetus) and merlin (Eastern
pigeon hawk, Falco columbarius) (U. S. Department of the Interior 1973).
The State of Georgia also has an official list of "protected species" which
includes endangered, threatened, rare, and unusual species defined as:
"Endangered species" means any resident species which is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range, or one which is designated as endangered under the pro-
visions of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (PL 93-205).
"Threatened species" means any resident species which is
likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range or
one that is designated as threatened under the provisions of
the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (PL 93-205).
"Rare species" means any resident species which, although
not presently endangered or threatened as previously defined,
should be protected because of its scarcity.
"Unusual species" means any resident species which exhibits
special or unique features and because of these features deserves
special consideration in its continued survival in the state.
Animal species on this list that theoretically may be found in the project
area are the peregrine falcon, Southern bald eagle, ivory-billed woodpecker,
red-cockaded woodpecker, and Eastern cougar (Felis concolor). All of these
species are classified as endangered.
The Southern bald eagle was once a fairly common resident on Georgia's
coast (Burleigh 1958), but observations throughout the State are now
uncommon and appear to be primarily of migrant birds. The bald eagle is
currently a scarce permanent resident of the coast (Cranshaw 1976) and, in
past years, has been observed in the Atlanta area (Burleigh 1958). No
resident bald eagles are known to inhabit the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin,
-------
but migrating or transient birds may feed and rest in the area. Although
their primary food is fish, the bald eagle may occasionally feed on ducks,
coots, rabbits, or other animals, mostly as carrion.
The peregrine falcon, a winter resident that occurs primarily along the coast,
prefers open areas (either terrestrial or aquatic) where it preys mainly on
birds, although mammals and large insects also make up a small portion of
its diet (Reilly 1968). No residents are known within the project area;
however, these birds have been observed in the vicinity of the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin (Burleigh 1958) and likely are rare transients in the
area.
The red-cockaded woodpecker has a state-wide range in Georgia. It is likely
a scarce permanent resident in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, as its pre-
ferred habitat (mature longleaf or loblolly pines) occurs in the area.
These woodpeckers construct nesting and roosting cavities in mature, living
pines that are often infested with red heart disease.
The ivory-billed woodpecker has not been observed in Georgia for many years
and probably no longer exists in the State. The mature bottomland hard-
woods of the project area, however, are the preferred habitat of this
species whose decline is thought to be due to elimination of such areas.
Large tracts of over-mature timber are necessary to provide adequate food
(wood-boring insect larvae) for these birds. Therefore, although the ivory-
billed woodpecker could theoretically reside in the project area, it
probably is not present.
The Eastern cougar probably has a state-wide range in Georgia. This animal
inhabits large tracts of wilderness areas and will not tolerate much
human disturbance; its preferred food is deer. Since little of the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin classifies as wild and remote, the Eastern cougar
probably occurs only as a transient in the project area.
-------
The American osprey (status undetermined) is an uncommon transient in the
project area. This bird feeds entirely on fish and typically inhabits
coastal areas; the osprey is a common summer resident on Georgia's
coast (Burleigh 1958). Sitings of migrant ospreys have been documented
in Athens and Atlanta (Burleigh 1958).
The merlin is an uncommon transient and winter resident throughout Georgia
(Burleigh 1958). This species is essentially a bird of open country,
feeding primarily on smaller birds. According to Burleigh (1958) the
merlin has been observed in Athens (1928) and Atlanta (1932, 1949, and
1952); thus, this species may utilize open spaces in the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin.
No endangered or threatened reptiles or amphibians are known to occur
within the project area.
-------
3. Wetlands and Water-land Interfaces
a. Physical and Chemical -- Wetlands and water-land interfaces include
freshwater marshes, river swamps and bottomland forests, floodplains, and
stream banks and lake shores. These areas generally represent transitions
from upland habitat to open water and are characterized by complex physical,
chemical, and biological interactions. Biota inhabiting wetlands and
water-land interfaces are dependent upon the physical and chemical pro-
cesses that created and now maintain these areas - i.e., rich alluvial
soils; readily available moisture; natural, periodic inundations by flood-
waters, etc.
Of great concern to man are the seasonal inundations of water-land inter-
faces. In the past, due to readily available water, rich alluvial soil, and
aesthetic appeal, commercial, agricultural, and residential development
often occurred along watercourses. As previously stated, urban development
is currently occurring throughout the study area, particularly south and
east of Atlanta, and although most of the development is in the higher
elevations, some is moving downslope towards the floodplains (U. S. Army,
Corps of Engineers 1975). In order to prevent structural loss, and perhaps
loss of human lives, the Corps of Engineers is attempting to map flood
hazard zones throughout the U. S., and in 1975, at the request of DeKalb
County officials, the Savannah District Office prepared a report on
special flood hazard information for some minor tributaries in DeKalb County.
Only four streams within the Yellow River sub-basin — Crooked Creek,
Little Stone Mountain Creek, and tributaries of Crooked Creek and Stone
Mountain Creek — were included in this study, which mapped 100-year and
500-year flood areas. (The 100-year flood is defined as a flood that has a
one percent chance of occurring during any given year, while a 500-year
flood is defined as the largest flood that can be expected to occur as a
result of a severe combination of meteorological and hydrological conditions
that are reasonably characteristic of the area). In 1971, the Savannah
District mapped Intermediate Regional Floods (floods that have an average
occurrence once in 100 years) and Standard Project Floods (floods of rare
occurrence) along the Yellow River in Rockdale and Newton counties. From
-------
these studies, and from maps of flood-prone areas prepared by the USGS, a
generalized map (Figure 12) showing estimated 100-year flood overflow limits
was prepared. The figure shows areas where flood waters will be greatest
in areal extent, in some cases greater than 1/2 mile wide, for a 100-year
flood. Estimated crest of such a flood is 20-25 feet above normal. This
would increase the width of the Yellow River at all points, but for graphics
purposes, only the marshlands, floodplains, and exceptionally low-lying
junctures are displayed at this scale as flood-damaged areas. Areas par-
ticularly susceptible to flooding are numbered on Figure 10; Table 17 is an
index to these areas. (USGS and Corps of Engineers data were supplemented
by CZRC analyses of the most current 7.5 minute series topographic maps of
the Yellow River sub-basin. The lines are estimated boundaries and do not
represent exact limits of flood overflow). In Gwinett County, the Yellow
River cuts a sinuous, moderately steep valley between the mouth of Jackson
Creek and the Annistown Bridge-Horseshoe Bend area. There is little or no
floodplain. This section would sustain flood damage in a 100-year flood from
greatly increased velocity of high waters, but inundations generally would be
confined to the narrow valleys. Because this section would not exhibit wide-
spread (wider than about 0.1 mi) inundation at this scale, it is not color
shaded on the map.
Reflecting concern over development in floodplain areas, the Atlanta Regional
Development Plan (ARC 1976) proposes that "All structures that can be damaged
or land uses that can impede flood waters or reduce storage volume must be
built outside the 100-year flood limit."
b. Biota (Biotic Communities) — Biotic communities of wetlands and water-
land interfaces are mapped on USGS Level II land use maps as Wetland. Both
forested wetland, wetlands dominated by woody vegetation, and nonforested
wetland, wetlands dominated by herbaceous vegetation, occur in the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin. These areas, however, represent only a small portion
(approximately 1.5 percent) of the basin.
1) Wetland
Wetlands are those areas where the water table is at, near, or
above the land surface for a significant part of most years. The
hydrologic regime is such that aquatic or hydrophytic vegetation
usually is established, although alluvial and tidal flats may be
-------
Table 17. Index to flood-prone areas shown on Figure 1^3.
1. Along Yellow River, floodplain, near Ga 36 bridge
2. Along Yellow River, marshland, (unnamed tributaries), south of
Lake Bulow Campbell
3. Along Yellow River, marshland, (unnamed tributaries), north of Lake
Bulow Campbell
4. Along Yellow River, marshland (unnamed tributaries), between Lake
Bulow Campbell and Rocky Plains road bridge
5. Along Yellow River, at juncture of Dog Branch
6. Along Yellow River, at juncture of Dried Indian Creek
7. Along Yellow River, floodplain, north of Porterdale
8. Along Yellow River, marshland, (unnamed tributary) south of 1-20
9. Along Gum Creek at juncture of Little Gum Creek
10. Along Yellow River and Big Haynes Creek, extensive marshland, at the
juncture of those streams
11. Along Big Haynes Creek at juncture of Little Haynes Creek
12. Along Little Haynes Creek at juncture of Sandy Creek
13. Along Brushy Fork Creek below Lake Carlton
14. Along Big Haynes Creek, floodplain, (unnamed tributaries), below
Johnson Lake
15. Along Yellow River at juncture of Carr Branch
16. Along Yellow River, floodplain, between Lake Rockaway and juncture of
Swift Creek
17. Along Jackson Creek, floodplain, by Newton Lake
18. Along Sweetwater and Beaver Ruin creeks, at their juncture
-------
nonvegetated. Wetlands frequently are associated with topographic
lows, even in mountainous regions. Examples of wetlands include
marshes, mudflats, and swamps situated on the shallow margins of
bays, lakes, ponds, streams, and manmade impoundments such as
reservoirs. ... Shallow water areas where aquatic vegetation is
submerged are classed as open water and are not included in the
Wetland category.
Extensive parts of some river flood plains qualify as Wetlands,
as do regularly flooded irrigation overflow areas. These do not
include agricultural land where seasonal wetness or short-term
flooding may provide an important component of the total annual soil
moisture necessary for crop production. Areas in which soil wetness
or flooding is so short-lived that no typical wetlands vegetation is
developed properly belong in other categories.
... Uncultivated wetlands from which ... wood products, ... are
harvested, or wetlands grazed by livestock, are retained in the
Wetland category.
Remote sensor data provide the primary source of land use and
vegetative cover information for the more generalized levels of this
classification system. Vegetation types and detectable surface
water or soil moisture interpreted from such data provide the most
appropriate means of identifying wetlands and wetland boundaries.
Inasmuch as vegetation responds to changes in moisture conditions,
remote sensor data acquired over a period of time will allow the
detection of fluctuations in wetland conditions. Ground surveys of
soil types or the duration of flooding may provide supplemental
information to be employed at the more detailed levels of classification.
Wetland areas drained for any purpose belong to other land use
and land cover categories such as Agricultural Land, Rangeland,
Forest Land, or Urban or Built-up Land. When the drainage is dis-
continued and such use ceases, classification may revert to Wetland.
Wetlands managed for wildlife purposes may show short-term changes
in land use as different management practices are used but are properly
classified Wetland.
Two separate boundaries are important with respect to wetland
discrimination: the upper wetland boundary above which practically
any category of land use or land cover may exist, and the boundary
between wetland and open water beyond which the appropriate Water
category should be employed.
Forested Wetland and Nonforested Wetland are the Level II
categories of Wetland. (Anderson et al. 1976)
(a) Forested Wetland
Forested Wetlands are wetlands dominated by woody vegetation.
-------
Forested Wetland Includes seasonally flooded bottomland hardwoods,
mangrove swamps, shrub swamps, and wooded swamps including those
around bogs. Because Forested Wetlands can be detected and mapped
by the use of seasonal (winter/summer) imagery, and because de-
lineation of Forested Wetlands is needed for many environmental
planning activities, they are separated from other categories of
Forest Land.
The following are examples of typical vegetation found in
Forested Wetland. Wooded swamps and southern flood plains contain
primarily ..., tupelo (N.yssa), oaks (Quercus), and red maple (Acer
rubrum). ... Shrub swamp vegetation includes alder (Alnus), willow
(Salix), and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidental is). (Anderson et al. 1976)
Bottomland forests in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are technically of
two types: (1) an alluvial component found on silt-sand banks and fluvial
terraces and (2) a swamp forest component situated in poorly drained de-
pressions behind levees. The alluvial forest is one of the most common
forest types found in the Piedmont floodplains. Its width is a function
of stream meandering and relative erodibility of substrate, and hence
topography. In broad valleys with alluvial forest, box elder (Acer
negunda), sycamore, hackberry (Celtis laevigata), river birch (Betula
nigra), sugar maple, and occasional tulip poplar and loblolly pine are
the usual dominant species. On higher, better-drained sites, Southern red
oak (Quercus falcata), black oak, and bitternut hickory may be important domi-
nants, while on the most poorly drained sites sweetgum and willow oak may be
more abundant. The swamp forest, on the other hand, may be comprised of
sweetgum, black gum (tupelo in the Alcovy drainage), overcup oak (Quercus
lyrata), and species of ash (Fraxinus americana and £_. pennsylvanica).
The standing water regime appears to be the critical and limiting factor
to the type of sv/amp forest development — if excessive water accumulates
and stands for long periods, significant die-back of the forest may occur.
The understory vegetation of the two forests differs markedly. Alluvial
forests usually support a considerable variety of small trees and small
shrubs such as pawpaw (Asimina triloba), ironwood, spicebush (Lindera
benzoin), sugar maple, occasionally beech and witch hazel (Hamamelis
-------
virqiniana), and the ubiquitous privet (Liqustrum sinense). Swamp forests
may or may not have understory vegetation, but if present, the commoner
species are alder (Alnus serrulata) and Virginia willow (Itea virqinica).
The presence or absence of understory evidently depends upon the water-
logged condition of the soils, standing water of long duration, and
dispersal mechanisms of swamp-inhabiting species. The forest floor may
contain many herbaceous species in alluvial habitats or few in swampy
habitats. Cane (Arundinaria qigantea) is an efficient competitor, and
where present soon establishes dense clones, forming shady thickets or "cane-
brakes" that preclude the successful invasion of less shade-tolerant her-
baceous species.
In certain sites where selective lumbering has occurred or where the force
of floodwaters prevents forest maturation, the floodplain may be colonized
by dense tangles of Jananese honeysuckle, common greenbrier (Smilax
rotundifolia), catbrier (Smilax bona-nox, S_. smal 1 ii, and S_. walteri),
crossvine, blackberry, and other robust perennials which knit together
the vegetation and thereby form a near-impenetrable thicket.
The high diversity and typically large size of trees in alluvial forests
as contrasted with swamp forests is due to the richness of alluvial soils,
the availability of favorable moisture conditions, the dispersal of seeds
and nuts by floodwaters and floodplain wildlife, and the lack of man-
dominated disturbance. Because many of the alluvial forest trees are of
little commercial value, only selective cutting has taken place, and this
has occurred primarily in areas with moderately good access.
Occasionally short-lingering woodlands of fast-growing species such as
river birch, black willow (Salix nigra), and cottonwood (Populus deltoides)
develop off point bars and along river shorelines, but erosion of the banks
together with the unpredictability of severe flooding seldom permits any-
thing more than a temporal forest to develop.
-------
The intimate association of wetlands and water-oriented biotic communities
makes it difficult to discuss faunal constituents under separate headings.
Nearly all animals characteristic of wetlands extensively use both the
aquatic and terrestrial portions of their environment. Exceptions include
typical woodland species, such as the white-tailed deer, that move into
the area to feed on the terrestrial vegetation and several species of
salamanders that remain submerged in water or mud for most of their lives.
Wetlands, both forested and nonforested, provide a multitude of habitats for
wildlife and thus possess perhaps the richest of faunal constituents.
Mammals utilizing forested wetland communities include the raccoon, white-
tailed deer, river otter, muskrat, mink (Mustela vision), and beaver
(Castor canadensis). Raccoons usually feed in marshes or swamps along
streams, ponds, and lakes; their diet includes fruits, nuts, grains, insects,
bird eggs, and especially aquatic animals such as frogs and crayfish. Deer
are primarily browsers that feed on leaves and twigs of various tree and
shrub species; however, they also consume mast, fruits, grasses, and grains.
Natural deer foods, including ironwood, yellow jessamine, Japanese honey-
suckle, tulip poplar, red bay, black cherry, sassafras, Virginia willow,
and various species of oaks, greenbriers, and blackberries (Halls and Ripley
1961) are abundant in the forested wetlands of the project area. River
otter, muskrat, and mink may be seen in forested wetlands, but are perhaps
best associated with aquatic habitats or nonforested wetlands, as these
mammals are semi-aquatic.
Smaller mammals utilizing the forested wetland community include the white-
footed mouse and cotton mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus), which are commonly
found together in swampy regions. Both the Eastern cottontail and the swamp
rabbit (Sylvilagus aquaticus) utilize the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's
forested wetlands.
-------
Reptiles and amphibians are abundant in wetlands and associated bodies of
water. The green frog (Rana clami tan melanota), spotted salamander, and
marbled salamander, which require ephemeral or permanent bodies of water
for breeding, are likely found in this community. Other amphibians probably
occurring are the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) and the American toad.
Reptiles typically found in this community include the common box turtle,
black rat snake, copperhead, Eastern kingsnake (Lampropeltis g. getulus),
broad-headed skink, and Southeastern five-lined skink (Eumeces
inexpectatus).
Avian inhabitants of forested wetlands are extremely diverse. Species that
nest in tree cavities in swamps and marshes include the wood duck (Aix
sponsa), hooded merganser, prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria citrea),
and Carolina wren. Ground-nesting birds include the Savannah sparrow
(Passerculus sandwichensis) and common yellowthroat warbler. The great
frlue-heron (Ardea herodias), green heron (Butorides virescens), and cattle
egret (Bubulcus ibis) nest in shrubs or trees in the forested wetland
community.
Forested wetlands, although only a small percentage of the project area,
are quite valuable communities, as they represent a rapidly disappearing,
multiple-use environment. These areas provide valuable habitat for some of
America's rarest animal species, natural storage for floodwaters, water treat-
ment for purifying water, extremely high organic productivity /gross primary
productivity of southern swamps has been estimated at 20,000 kilocalories per
square meter per year (KCal/m /yr ) on average favorable sites, and at 40,000
2
KCal/m /yr on especially favorable sites—personal communication, Eugene
Odum, as cited in Wharton1969/, as well as an excellent scientific
laboratory where one may study the fundamental ecological interrelation-
ships between the physical and biotic components of the natural environment
(Wharton 1969). These areas also represent a large portion of the few
remaining true wilderness areas in the southeastern United States and thus
possess a great, though intangible, value.
-------
(b) Nonforested Wetland
Nonforested Wetlands are dominated by wetland herbaceous vege-
tation or are nonvegetated.
The following are examples of vegetation associated with Non-
forested Wetland. ... Both narrow-leaved emergents such as cattail
(Typha), bulrush (Scirpus), sedges (Carex), ... and other grasses
(for example, Panicum and Zizaniopsis miliacea), and broad-leaved
emergents such as waterlily (NupharT"Nymphea), pickerelweed
(Pontederia), arrow arum (Peltandra), [and] arrowhead (Sagittaria),
... are typical of ... freshwater locations. Mosses (Sphagnum) and
sedges (Carex) grow in wet meadows and bogs. (Anderson et al. 1976)
Nonforested wetland in the project area consists primarily of overgrown
ponds covered by marsh species or scattered wetland shrubs and of small
areas of freshwater marsh located along streambanks and lakeshores. The
typical vegetation is crowded, of low height, perennial, and home for
numerous animals of biological interest. Shrubs occur only occasionally
in this community and are usually represented by alder and buttonbush
(Cephalanthus occidental is); more common are herbaceous growths of
lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), cattail
(Typha latifolia), bulrush (Scirpus cyperinus), rush (Juncus effusus),
and knotweed (Polygonum sagittatum). The exceptional cover and seeds
afforded by these species provide suitable habitat for a wide variety of
wildlife, including the muskrat, mink, river otter, and marsh rice rat
(Oryzomys palustris). Muskrats commonly occur along the freshwater streams,
ponds, and lakes where they feed primarily on aquatic vegetation. Their
diet also occasionally includes clams, frogs, and fish. Muskrats either
build conical houses of marsh vegetation in shallow water or burrow in
banks; entrances to houses or den burrows are usually underwater. Mink
generally inhabit areas adjacent to streams, ponds, rivers, or other bodies
of water; they feed on small mammals, birds, frogs, crayfish, and fish.
River otters inhabit the swamps, marshes, and rivers. These furbearers eat
fish, frogs, crayfish, and other aquatic invertebrates and den in banks
with entrances below water. The marsh rice rat is a common semi-aquatic
inhabitant of marshes and wet, grassy areas.
-------
Reptiles and amphibians are generally abundant in this biotic community
and include species such as the little grass frog (H.yla ocularis), the
Southern chorus frog (Pseudacris niqrita), bullfrog, Eastern glass lizard
(Qphisaurus ventral is), copperhead, Eastern cottonmouth (Agkistrodon p.
piscivorous), and Eastern mud snake (Farancia a. abacura).
Nonforested wetlands and adjacent open water areas provide valuable
feeding, nesting, and resting habitat for wetland birds such as loons,
grebes, herons, egrets, geese, ducks, and rails. These birds are perhaps
the most striking inhabitants of this community.
Three game species of rails likely occur in the freshwater marshes of the
project area. These are the king rail (Rallus elegans), which nests on
the ground, Virginia rail (Rallus limicola), which nests on a platform just
above the water line, and sora (Porzana Carolina), which nests in vegetation
just above the marsh.
A wide variety of ducks utilizes the nonforested wetland habitat. Puddle
ducks, which generally feed on aquatic vegetation and small amounts of
animal matter in shallow water and occasionally on grain in croplands, in-
clude the mallard, black duck (Anas rubripes), gadwall, pintail (Anas acuta),
blue-winged teal (Anas discors), American wigeon (Anas americana), northern
shoveler (Anas clypeata), and wood duck. Diving ducks feed on aquatic
organisms usually obtained by diving under the surface of the open
waters of lakes and rivers adjacent to v/etlands. Ring-neck ducks,
lesser scaup (Aythya affinis), buffieheads (Bucephala albeola), and
ruddy ducks (Qxyura jamaicensis) are typical diving ducks that occur in
the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
Three species of mergansers utilize the shallow ponds and nonforested wet-
lands of the project area. These are the hooded merganser, red-breasted
merganser (Mergus serrator), and common merganser (Mergus merganser). Also
characteristic of this habitat is the marsh hawk (Circus cyaneus), which
preys upon small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and birds.
-------
Nonforested wetlands, like forested wetlands, serve many functions. These
areas provide valuable waterfowl habitat, stabilize shorelines and river
banks against erosion, act as sediment traps and water purifiers, con-
tribute to the nutrient input of adjacent streams and lakes, and produce
organic matter for many herbivores and omnivores which in turn may be con-
sumed by carnivores. This fragile community with its many available
habitats is vital to. the survival of many wildlife species, as well as to
many fishes whose young utilize wetlands as nursery areas. The complex
relationships among species dependent upon the wetland environment
provide the balance and stability necessary for the survival of the com-
munity as a whole. Man's activities -- home construction, stream channeliza-
tion, water impounding, waste disposal, etc. -- can quite easily upset
this delicate balance and cause irreparable damage to and subsequent loss of
our wetlands and their associated wildlife.
Endangered Species -- No endangered species are known to inhabit the
wetlands of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. Transient bald eagles and
peregrine falcons (discussed in Section 2. Endangered Species) may feed
in these areas.
-------
4. Water
a. Physical and Chemical —
1) Groundwater. Groundwater in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin occurs
in the pore spaces of saprolite and in the fractures of underlying bedrock,
in what is termed water-table conditions. There are no water-bearing
sedimentary formations (geologic aquifers) in the basin.
In The Availability and Use of Water in Georgia, Thomson et al. (1956)
describe the occurrence of groundwater in the Piedmont-Mountain province,
which includes the project area:
The rocks exposed in the Piedmont-Mountain province are
schist, gneiss, granite, quartzite and other metamorphic
rocks which have been intruded by a series of granites. ...
The metamorphic rocks are weathered and have a mantle
of decayed rock ranging in thickness from 5 to 80 feet, and
perhaps more in places. This mantle of decayed rock serves
as a giant sponge, absorbing ground water during wet seasons
and allowing it to percolate slowly downward into the cracks
of the bedrock below. The amount and depth of residuum
depends upon the type of rock, as some rocks are more resistant
to weathering than others. The residuum varies in thickness
from place to place, usually being thickest in valleys and
thinnest on hilltops. Usually erosion removes most of the
residuum from the hilltops.
... The amount of ground water available depends on the
type of rocks, the amount, distribution and intensity of
rainfall, the thickness and permeability of the residuum, and
the extent of fracturing of the underlying bedrock.
Ground water is stored in the residuum and in the fractures
in the underlying bedrock. Recharge to the ground-water body
occurs from rain falling on the ground in the immediate area
and moving downward to join the ground-water body. The water
table responds rapidly to recharge. Water in excess of the
amount capable of being infiltrated and stored flows off at
the surface or through wet-weather springs as rejected
recharge. Wet-weather springs are common throughout the
Piedmont-Mountain area.
The structure of rocks in the Piedmont-Mountain province
is a controlling factor for movement and storage. The
granites of the area hold but a small amount of water in storage,
as the fracture system in a granite represents only a very
small percentage of the total volume of the rock. Schist and
-------
gneiss are made up of many layers of minerals, and partings
along the spaces between layers may contain water. These
rocks may contain also a system of fracture like those in
granite. Where the schistosity is vertical and the parting
planes are exposed, water is taken into the ground quite
rapidly, but where the schistosity dips, even slightly, less
water is absorbed by the rocks.
The relationship of topography to groundwater quantity is strong
within the project area. In the basin the top of the zone of saturation
(the water-table) has a generalized conformity to surface'topography.
Groundwater drains away from hills; the largest quantities of groundwater
are found in lowlands or draws where there is a thick mantle of soil
(U. S. Department of the Interior 1967).
Groundwater, removed by dug, bored, and drilled wells, is used for
municipal, industrial, and domestic purposes. In the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin, due to the relatively small amounts of groundwater, most wells sus-
tain only light pumping, providing water for rural homes and mobile home
parks. Most drilled wells are less than 500 ft deep and yield approximately
10-50 gallons per minute. Any pumping greater than 100,000 gallons per
day requires a groundwater permit issued by the state. Certain operations,
such as poultry and agriculture, are excluded (personal communication, GDNR,
Water Supply Section, 8 January 1977); however, few wells within the project
area can provide a sustained yield of this amount.
Groundwater from the project area is generally of good quality. Table
18 shows value ranges obtained from chemical analyses of groundwater in
Rockdale County--these analyses were from 100 to 300-ft deep wells penetrat-
ing saprolite and other rocks typical of the Yellow River sub-basin (McCollum
1966). Although the area's groundwater is generally of good quality, some
local problems occur. Highly mineralized water with objectionable amounts
of iron may be obtained from areas that overlie dark-colored, mafic rocks.
Also, local contamination of groundwater may occur from landfills, septic
tanks, etc.
2) Surface Water
(a) General. The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin encompasses approxi-
2
mately 1400 square miles (mi ) in the Piedmont Plateau of north-central
-------
Table 18- Chemical analyses of groundwater from 100 to 300 ft-deep wells
in Rockdale County, Georgia.3
Parameter13 Range Parameter13 Range
Silica (Si02)
12-46
Bicarbonate (HCOg)
8-76
Iron (Fe)
0.0-4.0
Carbonate (CO3)
0
Calcium (Ca)
0.7-18.0
Sulfate (SO^)
0.0-10.0
Magnesium (Mg)
0.2-4.0
Chloride (CI)
0.0-5.5
Sodium (Ma)
2.1-12.0
Fluoride (F)
0.0-0.4
Potassium (K)
0.7-2.2
Nitrate (N0g)
0-12
Dissolved solids
43-125
pH
6.0-7.2
Specific
20-128
conductance
(micromhos at 25 C)
Source: McCollum, M. J. 1966. Groundwater resources and geology of
Rockdale County, Georgia. Georgia State Div. of Conserv., Dept. of Mines,
Mining and Geology, The Geological Surv. Inf. Circ. 33. Atlanta. 17 pp.
and 1 plate.
^All parameters are in parts per million, except pH and specific
conductance.
-------
Georgia. The basin contains three major rivers--the South, Yellow, and
Alcovy—which merge to form Jackson Lake (Figure 13). The South River
p
has the largest drainage area, approximately 544 mi , followed by the
2
Yellow River with approximately 448 mi and the Alcovy River with approxi-
2 —
mately 255 mi /Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory (PNERL)
__ 2
1975/. The remaining basin area, approximately 150 mi , is comprised of
the drainages of Tussahaw Creek, Bear Creek, and minor tributaries and
immediate drainage to Jackson Lake (PNERL 1975).
The South River arises in southeast Atlanta (approximate elevation
= 930 ft) and flows southeasterly over a number of shoals and rapids to its
confluence with the Yellow River at Jackson Lake (approximate elevation =
530 ft). Length of the South River is about 63 mi. The Yellow River arises
in upper Gwinnett County northeast of Atlanta (approximate elevation =
1,140 ft) and flows southerly through rolling farmland (that is undergoing
rapid urbanization) for about 70 mi to its confluence with the South River.
The Alcovy River arises in eastern Gwinnett County (approximate elevation =
1,150 ft) and flows southerly through rolling hills and swamplands for 75 mi
to Jackson Lake (Georgia Water Quality Control Board 1971). Jackson Lake
has a surface area of 7.4 square miles (19.22 square kilometers), mean depth
of 22.6 feet (6.9 meters), maximum depth in excess of 87.9 feet (26.8
9 6
meters), volume of 4.68 x 10 cubic feet (132.6 x 10 cubic meters), and mean
hydraulic retention time of about 31 days (PNERL 1975).
(b) Quantity. Hydrology of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin has
been altered as a result of a 50 million gallon per day (mgd) diversion of
water for drinking purposes from the Chattahoochee River by the City of
Atlanta (DeKalb and Gwinnett counties). Wastewater is subsequently dis-
charged into the South and Yellow rivers, thereby increasing their discharges.
The amount of diverted wastewater often exceeds the natural flow of the
South River during dry weather (Georgia Water Quality Control Board 1971).
Stream flow data for rivers and streams of the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin are scarce. Discharge data for four selected sites on the
main rivers are presented in Table 19. The mean annual discharge for South
River recorded at Butler Bridge was 559 cubic feet per second (cfs).
-------
Norcri
LANTV
Ea«t
Soetai
Clrct*
LAKE
0 5 10 IS Kn.
1 1 I 1
0 5 ML
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
MAJOR SUB-BASINS,RIVERSaTRIBUTARIES
FIGURE 14
-------
Table 19. Discharge data for rivers of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
Site of Drainage area Mean annual, discharge Period of Arithmetic mean discharge by month In cfs
measurement in square miles in cfs record 3an Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
River name
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
South River
Butler Bridge,
4.5 mi down-
stream from
Cotton River
Yellow River Highway 12
Bridge, 3.5 mi
NW of Covington
County Highway
Bridge, 3.8 mi
W of Snellvllle,
7.5 mi upstream
from Stone
Mountain Creek
Alcovy River Henderson Mill
Bridge, 7 ml SE
of Covington
456
378
134
244
559
460
171
381
1939- 760 828 1096 866 518 389 423 316 276 238 464 545
1960
1899- 641 817 817 735 446 369 281 215 208 192 351 466
1901
and
1944-
1960
1942- 249 308 345 285 181 119 105 64 54 67 125 173
1968
1928- 516 630 722 488 434 252 212 148 165 199 345 366
1931
and
1944-
1949
aSourcc: Georgia Water Quality Control Board. 1971. Upper Ocmulgee River Basin water quality survey. Atlanta. 86 pp.
^Cubic feet per second.
-------
Monthly mean values varied from 1,096 cfs in March to 238 cfs in October.
Mean annual discharges for the Yellow River recorded at highway 12 bridge
northwest of Covington and at the county highway bridge west of Snellville
were 460 cfs and 171 cfs, respectively. Mean monthly discharges at the
two stations varied from highs of 817 cfs and 345 cfs, respectively, to
lows of 192 cfs and 54 cfs, respectively. Alcovy River mean annual
discharge recorded at Henderson Mill Bridge was 381 cfs, with mean monthly
extremes of 722 cfs in March and 148 cfs in August (Georgia Water Quality
Control Board 1971). Mean flows for the South, Yellow, and Alcovy Rivers,
as reported by the Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory,
are 1,139 cfs, 844 cfs, and 478 cfs, respectively.
(c) Stream Classification. The State of Georgia (GDNR 1974c)
has established water quality standards "to provide enhancement of water
quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or
welfare in accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies,
conservation of fish, game and other beneficial aquatic life, and agri-
cultural, industrial, recreational, and other beneficial uses." Water use
classifications delineated by the state are 1) drinking water supplies;
2) recreation; 3) fishing, propagation of fish, shellfish, game and other
aquatic life; 4) agriculture; 5) industrial; 6) navigation; 7) wild river;
8) scenic river; and 9) urban stream. Streams not listed for specific
classification by the state fall into one of the following categories:
A. Streams and stream reaches which are not shown
on the Georgia Department of Transportation's
official county maps are not classified unless
they receive a wastewater discharge. In that
case, they are classified as fishing.
B. Streams and stream reaches which are shown as
naturally intermittent, ephemeral or a combina-
tion thereof on the Georgia Department of
Transportation's official county maps or which
can be documented as being intermittent by
records of the United States Geological Survey
are not classified unless they receive a
wastewater discharge. In that case, they are
classified as fishing.
C.
Stream channels, drainage ditches and canals
which are naturally intermittent, ephemeral, or
a combination thereof are not classified.
-------
D. Streams and stream reaches not specifically
classified below and not categorically classi-
fied above (A, B, or C) are classified as
fishing. (GDMR 1975b)
Streams within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are classified for
usage as drinking water, recreation, fishing, and urban. Table 20 lists
the streams and their classifications; Appendix D contains the specific
water quality criteria for these four classifications, as well as the
general criteria for all of the State's surface waters.
(d) Quality. Streams of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are
subject to pollution from domestic sewage, industrial waste, surface
runoff, accidental spills, and combined sewer (those receiving treated
sewage and surface runoff) overflows. Water quality of streams in the
basin is quite variable depending upon topography and proximity of
respective streams to pollution sources. The South River sub-basin, which
in 1970 contained 89 percent of all sanitary waste treatment design
capacity of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, has suffered the greatest
degradation of water quality. Water quality was generally better in the
Yellow River drainage and best in the Alcovy (Georgia Water Quality Control
Board 1971).
Measurements of chemical parameters and biological species
diversity were utilized in an evaluation of basin water quality during
1970. A dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration of 5 milligrams per liter
(mg/1) or greater is generally considered a minimum standard for a healthy
stream capable of supporting warmwater fishes (Lagler 1956). However,
oxygen resources of the South River were found to be severely depleted, as
evidenced by long reaches of the river having DO concentrations less than
2.0 mg/1. This condition resulted from entry of pollutants requiring
large amounts of oxygen for decomposition. Five-day biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD^) in unpolluted streams of the region ranged from 0.5 to 1.5 mg/1.
B0Dr concentrations in South River, however, exceeded 50 mg/1 in the upper
0
reaches and averaged more than 10 mg/1 in reaches down to Ga 133. Fecal
coliform bacteria, usually indicators of contamination by human intestinal
wastes, exhibited geometric means greater than 35,000 MPN (most probable
number) per 100 milliters (ml) at all stations in South River in 1969
-------
Table 20. Stream classifications within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.a
Stream
Reach
Classification
South River
South River
Yellow River
Yellow River
Yellow River
Alcovy River
Alcovy River
Alcovy River
Jackson Lake
Intrenchment Creek
Shoal Creek
Conley Creek
Doolittle Creek
Snapfinger Creek
Headwaters to Georgia Highway 81
Georgia Highway 81 to Georgia
Highway 36
Headwaters to Georgia Highway 124
Georgia Highway 124 to Porterdale
Water Intake
Porterdale Water Intake to Georgia
Highway 36
Headwaters to Georgia Highway 138
Georgia Highway 138 to Covington
Water Intake
Covington Water Intake to Newton
Factory Road Bridge
From South River at Georgia Hwy 36
From Yellow River at Georgia Hwy 36
From Alcovy River at Newton
Factory Road Bridge to Lloyd Shoals Dam
Headwaters in Atlanta to confluence
with South River
Headwaters in DeKalb County to
confluence with South River
Headwaters near Atlanta Army Depot
to confluence with South River
Headwaters in DeKalb County to
confluence with South River
Headwaters in DeKalb County to
confluence with South River
Urban
Fishing
Fishing
Drinking water
Fi shing
Fishing
Drinking water
Fishing
Recreation
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
aSource: Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1975. Classifications
for the waters of the State of Georgia. Environ. Protection Div., Atlanta, n.p.
-------
(Georgia Water Quality Control Board 1971). Contact with such waters
represents a distinct human health hazard since maximum geometric mean
numbers of fecal coliforms permitted by Georgia law have been set at
50/100 ml, 200/100 ml, and 1000/100 ml. for drinking, recreation, and
aquatic life, respectively (GDNR 1974c).
Biological evaluation of the South River was conducted in five
sections. The four upstream sections were all rated as grossly polluted
in accord with macroinvertebrate species occurrence from zero in the most
upstream section to 1, 2, and 6 in successive downstream sections. The
fifth section (adjacent to Jackson Lake) was inhabited by 27 macro-
invertebrate species, 25 of which were considered at least partially
tolerant of polluted conditions. This section, though biologically pro-
ductive, was considered polluted to moderately polluted based on
macroinvertebrate indicator species. Biological assessment of eight South
River tributaries revealed that all had been altered by siltation or
waste discharges, and that even though headwaters were of acceptable
quality, all eight streams were degraded in their middle and lower sections
(Georgia Water Quality Control Board 1971). The South River is now
reported to be improving in quality due to improved waste treatment systems
in the sub-basin (letter of 12 December 1976 from Mr. Tim Hess, District
Fisheries Biologist, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Social
Circle).
Investigation of chemical and biological water quality indicators
in the Yellow River revealed that water quality was good to excellent in
most of the river and its tributaries. Exceptions occurred in Dried
Indian Creek, which was grossly polluted by organic wastes, and the Yellow
River below Porterdale, which was classified as healthy-enriched. Deposits
of silt and granitic pebbles from past mining procedures were noted at
several locations along the river. Productivity in those areas had been
diminished by eradication of many bottom-dwelling organisms by the silt
cover (Georgia Water Quality Control Board 1971). Although water quality
in the Yellow River sub-basin has been generally good, increased urbaniza-
tion will place greater stress on aquatic systems of the area, and
corresponding deterioration of water quality is likely.
-------
The waters of the Alcovy River were classified as healthy at all stations
examined in 1970. Chemical, bacteriological, algal, and macroinverte-
brate data all supported this finding (Georgia Water Quality Control
Board 1971).
Entry of contaminants from the South, Yellow, and Alcovy rivers into
Jackson Lake provides the potential for deterioration of water quality
and the associated reduction of recreational values. During 1969 studies,
dense algal growths were noted in Jackson Lake, and high nutrient con-
centrations and fecal coliform counts were recorded for the Yellow River
and South River embayments. The study concluded that Jackson Lake was
undergoing accelerated eutrophication as a result of nutrient loads from
the South and Yellow rivers (Carrick and Hall 1969).
Data gathered during 1973 indicated that Jackson Lake was eutrophic and
was deteriorating at a rapid rate. Siltation and heavy blooms of blue-
green algae were conspicuous problems. Jackson Lake ranked thirteenth in
overall trophic quality of 14 Georgia lakes studied. Twelve lakes had less
median total phosphorus, median dissolved phosphorus, median inorganic
nitrogen, and mean chlorophyll a_; 11 lakes exhibited greater mean Secchi
disc transparency (PNERL 1975).
Samples of the 1973 study were collected at four stations on one date each
in July, September, and November. Based on inorganic nitrogen to
orthophosphate ratios, the limiting nutrient appeared to be phosphorus at
three stations in July and at two stations in September, while nitrogen
appeared limiting at one station in July, two stations in September, and
all four stations in November. Algal assay data indicated, however, that
phosphorus was limiting. The study concluded that reversal of enrichment
trends was dependent upon phosphorus, not nitrogen, control (PNERL 1975).
During 1973 point sources accounted for 66.4 percent of the total phosphorus
input to Jackson Lake. Although 67 wastewater treatment facilities
contributed to this total, 5 major facilities serving Atlanta and DeKalb
County (and discharging to the South River) accounted for 59.8 percent of
the total phosphorus input. Contributions from non-point sources in the
-------
South and Yellow rivers accounted for 25.6 and 5.8 percent, respectively,
of the total phosphorus input. The 1973 phosphorus loading rate of
33.38 grams/square meter/year for Jackson Lake (based on mean depth
and mean hydraulic retention time) was 19 times that proposed for a
eutrophic rate (Vollenweider and Dillon 1974, as cited by PNERL 1975).
Net annual nutrient accumulations in Jackson Lake for 1973 were calculated
to be 403,950 kilograms phosphorus and 771,825 kilograms nitrogen
(PNERL 1975).
b. Biota (Biotic Communities) —
The delineation of water areas depends on the scale
of data presentation and the scale and resolution charac-
teristics of the remote sensor data used for interpretation
of land use and land cover. (Water as defined by the
Bureau of the Census includes all areas within the land
mass of the United States that persistently are water
covered, provided that, if linear, they are at least
1/8 mile (200 m) wide and, if extended, cover at least
40 acres (16 hectares).) For many purposes, agencies
need information on the size and number of water bodies
smaller than Bureau of the Census minimums. These fre-
quently can be obtained from small-scale remote sensor
data with considerable accuracy. (Anderson et al. 1976)
According to USGS Level II land use maps, only 2.5 percent of the project
area falls into the Water classification. Due to the mapping scale, the
South, Yellow, and Alcovy rivers do not appear on the Level II maps under
the appropriate category, Streams and Canals. However, since this project
is the assessment of a river basin development plan and its impacts on
the area's water resources, Streams and Canals will be included in the
description of aquatic biotic communities. Two other types of communities-
Lakes and Reservoirs--are present in the project area. Although
delineated separately by the USGS Level II maps, these communities will
be discussed together.
1) Streams and Canals
The Streams and Canals category includes rivers,
creeks, canals, and other linear water bodies. Where the
water course is interrupted by a control structure, the
impounded area will be placed in the Reservoirs category.
The boundary between streams and other bodies of
water is the straight line across the mouth of the
stream up to 1 nautical mile (1.85 km). Beyond that
-------
limit, the classification of the water body changes to
the appropriate category, whether it be Lakes, Reservoirs,
or Bays and Estuaries. These latter categories are used
only if the water body is considered to be "inland water"
and therefore included in the total area of the United
States. No category is applied to waters classified as
"other than inland water" or offshore marine waters
beyond the mouths of rivers (U. S. Bureau of the Census,
1970). (Anderson et al. 1975)
Riverweed (Podostemum ceratophylTurn) is the most common submerged aquatic
vascular plant of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. This flowering plant
grows tightly attached to stones in rapidly flowing water, typically at
shoals such as those in the vicinity of Annistown Bridge in Gwinnett
County. During winter this plant may easily be mistaken for debris, roots
of shoreline trees, moss, or numerous other materials; yet this plant is
extremely important to invertebrate fauna of the stream since it provides
substrate for attachment and protection from fast currents. Riverweed
is to some extent a natural indicator of good health and water quality of
a stream, particularly in areas of rocks and shoals.
Shallow water of river shoals and gravel bars, particularly near shore,
often supports emergent species which are tightly rooted in the available
substrate. These plants include lizard's tail, water willow (Justicia
americana), arrow arum, wapato (Sagittaria latifolia), and monkey-flower
(Mimulus ringens). The latter two species were not observed in the project
area during the November field survey.
Additional flora reported from rivers and streams of the basin include
the aquatic mosses Fissidens sp. and Fontinalis sp.; the green algae
Closterium sp., Microspora sp., and Coleochaete sp.; the diatom Asterianella
sp.; and the blue-green algae Oscillatoria sp. and Anacystis cyanea
(Georgia Water Quality Control Board 1971; Kreiger 1968).
Fish fauna of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin consists of 69 species
comprising 14 families (Appendix B, Table B-5). The most abundant game
fish of the rivers and streams are members of the sunfish family and
include the bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), redear sunfish (Lepomis
microlophus), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), and largemouth bass
-------
(Micropterus salmoides). The most important non-game fish are the channel
catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) and bullheads (Ictalurus spp.). Healthy
streams of the basin are characterized by diverse fish life, including a
number of forage species such as shiners (family Cyprinidae) and darters
(family Percidae), as well as the larger predatory species. Waters of
the project area do not support trout or other coldwater fishes.
Although few extensive stream surveys have been conducted in the project
area, the occurrence of a diverse macroinvertebrate fauna has been noted
for healthy reaches of the Yellow River and its tributaries. The most
common aquatic macroinvertebrates include various species of mollusks and
certain life stages of many insects (Appendix B, Table B-6). Taxonomic
families of stream insects most frequently found include Elmidae, Tabanidae,
Tipulidae, Baetidae, Heptageniidae, Corydalidae, Aeshnidae, Gomphidae,
Perlidae, Pteronarcidae, and Hydropsychidae (letter of 25 January 1977
from Mr. Tim Hess, District Fisheries Biologist, Georgia Department of
Natural Resources, Game and Fish Div., Social Circle).
2) Lakes and Reservoirs
Lakes are nonflowing, naturally enclosed bodies of
water, including regulated natural lakes but excluding
reservoirs. Islands that are too small to delineate
should be included in the water area. The delineation
of a lake should be based on the areal extent of water
at the time the remote sensor data are acquired.
(Anderson et al. 1976)
Reservoirs are artificial impoundments of water
used for irrigation, flood control, municipal water
supplies, recreation, hydroelectric power generation,
and so forth. Dams, levees, other water-control
structures, or the excavation itself usually will be
evident to aid in the identification, although the
water-control structures themselves and spillways are
included in the Other Urban or Built-up Land category.
In most cases, reservoirs serve multiple purposes
and may include all of the land use functions just
mentioned. In certain cases like the Tennessee River,
the entire length of the trunk stream is impounded.
In such a situation, the stream exists as a stairstep
series of impoundments with waterway, flood-control,
recreation, and power-generation functions but is still
considered a reservoir, since the additional functions
are the result of impoundment. (Anderson et al. 1976)
-------
Numerous ponds, small lakes, and reservoirs occur throughout the project
area. Jackson Lake is considered one of the most important reservoirs
in Georgia (Carrick and Hall 1969) and is the most important reservoir
of the project area. It is very productive and, because of its
proximity to Atlanta, is easily accessible to a large number of sports-
men who seek fishing, boating, and other water-oriented recreation.
Waters of Jackson Lake also provide the source of energy for Georgia
Power Company's hydroelectric plant at Lloyd Shoals Dam.
Vascular plants of a lake are confined to rocks which are seldom, if
ever, exposed; to shallow marsh areas (as discussed in Nonforested
Wetlands), and to seasonally exposed bars and flats—rarely do such
plants inhabit the main portion of the lake. No submerged aquatic plants
were observed in the embayments or upper portion of Jackson Lake during
1969 studies (Carrick and Hall 1969). Utilization of the area by water-
fowl, however, does increase the chance of introduction of certain
aquatics such as duckweed and pondweed.
Dense growths of emergent aquatic plants, particularly lizard's tail, have
been observed in swampy areas adjacent to the embayments, but the steep
banks have prevented the spread of these plants to the embayment bed.
Shallow areas resulting from silt deposits, such as the mouth of the South
River embayment, permit establishment of emergent vegetation, and sparse
stands of bulrushes (Scirpus sp.) have been noted there (Carrick and Hall
1969).
Dense algal populations were recorded in Jackson Lake in 1969. Predominant
species were the green flagellate Haercatococcus buetschilli (June), the
blue-green filament Raphidiopsis curvata (August and October), and the
green flagellate Chlamydomonas sp. (October). Other abundant species
included Cyclotella sp., Nitzschia fonticola, Mavicula sp., Ankistrodesmus
falcatus, and Scenedesmus quadricauda (Carrick and Hall 1969).
Studies in 1973 revealed that algal populations had shifted toward a pre-
dominance of blue-green species. The two most abundant species in July,
-------
September, and November were blue-greens. Microcystis sp. (=Anacystis
sp.) ranked number one in July and number two in September and November.
Other predominants included Oscillatoria (ranked second in July),
Raphidiopsis sp. (ranked first in September), and Merismopedia sp. (ranked
first in October). Additional blue-green algae present and ranked among
the top five in abundance were Anabaena sp., Anabaenopsis sp., and Lynqbya
sp. (PNERL 1975). Certain blue-green algae are well-known producers of
very foul "pig pen" odors in water and the worst offenders include
Microcystis (=Anacystis) and Anabaena (Palmer 1962). Hence, the presence
of large numbers of these forms in Jackson Lake may seriously diminish
its aesthetic qualities.
Important fauna of Jackson Lake includes several species of game fishes
such as the striped bass (Morone saxatilis), white bass (Morone chrysops),
hybrid striped x white bass, largemouth bass, bluegill, redear sunfish,
and crappie. Non-game fish also important include catfish and bull-
heads. The threadfin shad (Dorosoma petenense), an important forage
species for bass and crappies, feeds primarily upon planktonic algae and
is thus a desirable resident of Jackson Lake.
Endangered Species— No endangered aquatic species are likely to occur in
the project area with the possible exception of a "freshwater clam"
mentioned on page A-29 of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Mater Quality
Management Plan (GDNR 1974d). However, this statement includes no scientific
name or reference citation so its validity cannot be verified.
The Ocmulgee shiner (Notropis callisema) and the Altamaha shiner (Notropis
xaenurus) are both known to occur in the project area. Although neither
is currently on an endangered species list, their status has not been
accurately determined and the possibility of their becoming classified
as rare or endangered does exist (based on Ramsey 1973).
5. Sensitive Natural Areas
Ramifications having to do with sensitive area definition involve site
size, degree of wetness, definition of "uniqueness" and "sensitive," and
many other aspects. The project area was viewed in a broad sense and
sites were evaluated in the condition in which they currently exist;
-------
selected natural areas are those which are (1) habitats of endangered
biota, (2) examples of undeveloped and insignificantly disturbed biota,
and (3) sites which might be better used for aesthetic and recreational
activity rather than for residential, cotraiercial, agricultural, or
other land uses. Because the selection process was critically limited
by field coverage, and because development in the Greater Atlanta area
is rapidly extending outward from the central city and often is focusing
on the high river bluff, the forest with the most magnificant trees, and
other "sensitive" and "unique" natural areas, the comments of this report
could soon become obsolete. Inmediate additional project area recon-
naissance specifically aimed toward a more intensive survey of sensitive
natural areas throughout all of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is needed.
Below are descriptions of the sites identified during this study as
sensitive natural areas; locations of these areas are shown on Figure 15.
I. Newton County—Bottomland forest along Rocky Plains
Road on west side of river, narrowing to a mountain
laurel bluff upstream about 0.5 mile from the bridge.
This area has no unusual species but is remote with
little disturbance, except trash disposal near
bridge. Large river birch, sycamore, tulip poplar,
are present here.
II. Newton County—Cedar Shoals downstream from the Ga.
81 bridge at Porterdale. This is an extensive shoal
area in which the river nearly disappears among
crevices of rocks. Bluffs along the west bank offer
potential recreational sites.
III. Newton-Rockdale County line—Shrub marsh and swamp
north of Bald Rock Road along Big Haynes Creek.
This area needs considerable inventorying for those
species of wildlife generally associated with
wetlands.
-------
IV. Rockdale County—Granite outcrop near the junction of
County road (without name on USGS Quad sheets) and
Bald Rock Road. This is presumably "Bald Rock."
Several rare outcrop species are present, as well as
Endangered and Threatened plants (Georgia oak,
Amphianthus pusillus, Sedum smallii, Isoetes melanospora,
Viqui era porteri, etc.).
V. Rockdale—Griffin Mountain is relatively isolated
and supports rather nice deciduous forest on north
and east slopes; the area needs additional study.
VI. Rockdale County—Outcrop along Irwin Bridge Road.
This outcrop is inhabited by Endangered and
Threatened plant species, but presently is used
for trash disposal.
VII. Rockdale County—Bottomlands of Big Haynes Creek
upstream from Ga. 138 bridge. This area represents
a large block of relatively undisturbed woodlands,
bisected by Bethel Road. These bottomlands could
possibly be used as a refuge for wildlife. The area
is in need of considerable field reconnaissance.
VIII. Gwinnett County—Shoals at the old Annistown Bridge,
about 2 miles west of Centerville. This is the most
"rugged" part of the Yellow River sub-basin and
potentially possesses unique invertebrates and aquatic
plants. High quality housing developments threaten
this site. We would suggest that this area be con-
sidered for nature study with a minimum of development
on and overlooking the prominent bluffs.
IX. Gwinnett County—East bank of Yellow River downstream
from the McDaniel's Bluff bridge. This represents
an excellent site for a nature trail. Potential
exists here for an excellent spring wildflower show,
but encroaching development on the east bank of river
and southeast of McDaniel's Bridge Road could easily
ruin this setting.
-------
X. Gwinett County—Swamp forest northwest of the US-29
crossing. This area probably contains wetland species
of mammals, wood ducks, etc. It represents nothing
rare but is just a little pocket of habitat different
from the rest of the surrounding area, and therefore
possesses aesthetic qualities.
-------
OuWtft
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN .
SENSITIVE NATURAL AREAS 3
INVENTORY SITES
"7 SENSITIVE NATURAL AREAS
O INVENTORY SITE
FIGURE 15
LAKE
JACK SOU
4 milM
CovM^tan
Stan*
-------
References
American Fisheries Society. 1970. A list of common and scientific names
of fishes from the United States and Canada, third edition. Spec.
Publ. No. 6. Washington, D. C. 150 pp.
American Ornithologists' Union. 1957. Checklist of North American birds,
fifth edition. Port City Press, Inc., Baltimore, Md. 691 pp.
American Ornithologists' Union. 1973. Thirty-second supplement to the
American Ornithologists' Union check-list of North American birds.
Auk 90:411-491.
Anderson, J. R., E. E. Hardy, 0. T. Roach, and R. E. Witmer. 1976. A
land use and land cover classification system for use with remote
sensor data. Geological Surv. Prof. Pap. 964, U. S. Gov. Printing
Office, Washington, D. C. 25 pp., 4 figures, and bibliography.
Atlanta Audubon Society. 1976. A summary of the spring, 1976 Fernbank
Forest birdwalks. Pages 5-6 iji the October 1976 newsletter. Atlanta,
Ga.
Atlanta Regional Conmission. 1974. Soils as possible indicators of land
development constraints. Atlanta, Ga. n.p.
Atlanta Regional Commission. 1976. Regional development plan. Atlanta,
Ga. 84 pp. and regional development plan map.
Atlanta Regional Metropolitan Planning Commission. 1967. Rockdale
County general soil map. Atlanta, Ga.
Bagby, G. T. 1969. Our ruined rivers. Pages 1-15 ijn Georgia Game and
Fish Magazine. Georgia Game and Fish Comm., Atlanta.
Barrett, L. B., and T. E. Waddell. 1973. Cost of air pollution damage:
a status report. Publ. No. AP-85, Environ. Protection Agency,
Natl. Environ. Res. Cent., Research Triangle Park, N. C. 73 pp.
Bostick, P. E. 1971. Vascular plants of Panola Mountain, Georgia.
Castanea 36(3):194-209.
Burbanck, M. P., and R. B. Piatt. 1964. Granite outcrop communities of
the Piedmont Plateau in Georgia. Ecology 45:292-306.
Burleigh, T. D. 1958. Georgia Birds. Univ. of Okla. Press, Norman.
746 pp.
Carrick, L. B., and E. T. Hall, Jr. 1969. A water quality survey of
Jackson Lake Upper Reservoir, Georgia, 1969. Fed. Water Quality
Admin, and Ga. Water Quality Control Board, Atlanta. 36 pp.
-------
Carter, H. S. 1970. Georgia tornadoes. Environ. Data Serv., Silver
Springs, Md. 12 pp. (Supplement, 1973. 1 p.)
Coker, W. C.,and H. R. Totten. 1945. Trees of the southeastern states.
Univ. of N. C. Press, Chapel Hill. 419 pp.
Conant, R. 1975. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians of eastern
and central North America, 2nd edition. Houghton Mifflin Co.,
Boston, Mass. 429 pp.
Cowles, H. C. 1899. The ecological relations of the vegetation of the
sand dunes of Lake Michigan. Botanical Gazette 29:95-117, 167-202,
281-308, 361-391.
Cranshaw, D., ed. 1976. Endangered wildlife. Pages 22-26 in Outdoors
in Georgia, September 1976. Ga. Dept. of Nat. Resour., Atlanta.
Critchfield, H. J. 1966. General climatology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, N. J. 420 pp.
Dahlberg, M. D. and D. Scott. 1971. The freshwater fishes of Georgia.
Bull. Ga. Acad. Sci. 29:1-64.
Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany (Eighth ed.). American
Book Company, New York. 1632 pp.
Fordham, H. W. 1973. Soil pollution from cattle feedlots in Georgia.
Natl. Tech. Inf. Serv., Springfield, Va. 44 pp.
General Services Administration. 1973. Code of federal regulations
40: protection of the environment, part 52. U. S. Gov. Printing
Office, Washington, D. C.
Georgia Department of Mines, Mining and Geology. 1969. Mineral resource
map.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1974a. Georgia surface mine
operators. Environ. Protection Div., Land Reclamation Sect.,
Macon. 52 pp.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1974b. The Georgia resources
assessment program user's guide: resource inventory, soils. Office
of Planning and Res., Resour. Planning Sect., Atlanta. 25 pp. and
43 soil charts.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1974c. Rules and regulations
for water quality control. Environ. Protection Div., Atlanta.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1974d. Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin water quality management plan. Environ. Protection Div.,
Atlanta.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1975a. Rules and regulations
for air quality control. Environ. Protection Div., Atlanta.
-------
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1975b. Classification for the
waters of the State of Georgia. Environ. Protection Div., Atlanta,
n.p.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1976. Rules and regulations
for the protection of endangered, threatened, rare, and unusual
species. Atlanta. 10 pp.
Georgia State Highway Department. 1965. Newton County general highway
map. Atlanta.
Georgia Water Quality Control Board. 1971. Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
water quality survey. Atlanta. 86 pp.
Golley, F. B. 1962. Mammals of Georgia. Univ. of Ga. Press, Athens. 218
Green, E. R., W. W. Griffin, E. P. Qdum, H. L. Stoddard, and I. R.
Tomkins. 1945. Birds of Georgia. The Univ of Ga. Press, Athens.
Ill pp.
Gross, M. G. 1972. Pages 79-141 J_n Oceanography: a view of the earth.
Prentice-Hall, New York.
Halls,L. K., and T. H. Ripley. 1961. Deer browse plants of southern
forests. U. S. Dept. of Agric., For. Serv., Atlanta, Ga. 78 pp.
Herrmann, L. A. 1954. Geology of the Stone Mountain-Lithonia District,
Georgia. Ga. State Div. of Mines, Mining and Geology, The
Geological Surv. Bull. No. 61. Atlanta. 139 pp. and 8 plates.
Hess, Tim B. Unpublished stream survey catch data of 1969 and 1976. Ga.
Dept. Nat. Resour., Game and Fish Div., Social Circle.
Jones, J. K., Jr., D. C. Carter, and H. H. Genoways. 1973. Checklist of
North American mammals north of Mexico. Occas. Pap. Mus. Texas
Tech Univ. 12:1-14.
Keever, C. 1950. Causes of succession on old fields of the Piedmont,
North Carolina. Ecol. Monographs 20:229-250.
Kreiger, K. A. 1968. Factors controlling the distribution of Oxytrema
suturalis Haldeman in the Yellow River of Georgia. M. S. Thesis,
Emory Univ., Atlanta, Ga. 191 pp.
Lagler, K. F. 1956. Freshwater fishery biology, second edition. Wm.
C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa. 421 pp.
LeGrand, H. E. 1967. Groundwater of the Piedmont and Blue Ridge in the
southeastern states. U. S. Geological Surv. Circ. 538. Washington,
D. C. 11 pp.
-------
Martof, B. S. 1956. Pages 65-88 j_n Amphibians and reptiles of Georgia.
Univ. of Ga. Press, Athens.
McCollum, M. J. 1966. Ground-water resources and geology of Rockdale
County, Georgia. Ga. State Div. of Conserv., Dept. of Mines,
Mining and Geology, The Geological Surv. Inf. Circ. 53. Atlanta.
17 pp. and 1 plate.
McCormick, J. F., J. R. Bozeman, & S. Spongberg. 1971. A taxonomic
revision of granite outcrop species of Minuartia (Arenaria).
Brittonia 23:149-160.
McVaugh, R. 1943. The vegetation of the granitic flat-rocks of the
southeastern United States. Ecol. Monographs 13:119-166.
Morrison, R. G. and G. A. Yarranton. 1974. Vegetational heterogeneity
during a primary sand dune succession. Can. J. Bot. 52:397-410.
National Audubon Society. 1975. The seventy-fifth Audubon Christmas
bird count. Am. Birds 29(2):327; 330-331.
National Audubon Society. 1976. The seventy-sixth Audubon Christmas
bird count. Am. Birds 30(2):338-339; 342-343.
Odum, E. P. 1960. Organic production and turnover in old field
succession. Ecology 41:34-49.
Oosting, H. J. 1942. An ecological analysis of the plant communities
of Piedmont, North Carolina. Amer. Midi. Nat. 28:1-126.
Oosting, H. J., and M. E. Humphries. 1940. Buried viable seeds in a
successional series of old field and forest soils. Torrey Bot.
Club Bull. 67:253-273.
Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory. 1975. Report on
Jackson Lake; Butts, Jasper, and Newton counties, Georgia: EPA
Region IV, Working Paper No. 290. U. S. Environ. Protection Agency.
19 pp. + appendices.
Palmer, C. M. 1962. Algae in water supplies. U. S. Dept. of Health,
Education, and Welfare, Public Health Serv., Washington, D. C.
88 pp.
Quarterman, E. 1957. Early plant succession on abandoned cropland in
the central basin of Tennessee. Ecology 38:300-309.
Radford, A. E., H. E. Ahles, and C. R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
vascular plants of the Carolinas. Univ. of N. C. Press, Chapel
Hill. 1183 pp.
Ramsey, J. S. 1973. A preliminary list of extinct and rare freshwater
fishes of Georgia. Ala. Coop. Fish. Unit, Auburn Univ., Auburn.
7 pp. mimeograph.
-------
Reilly, E. M., Jr. 1968. The Audubon illustrated handbook of American
birds. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Mew York. 524 pp.
Small, J. K. 1933. Manual of the southeastern flora. Univ. of N. C.
Press, Chapel Hill. 1554 pp.
Smithsonian Institution. 1975. Report on endangered and threatened
plant species of the United States. U. S. Gov. Printing Office,
Washington, D. C. 200 pp.
Thomson, M. T., S. M. Herrick, E. Brown et al. 1956. The availability
and use of water in Georgia. Ga. Dept. of Mines, Mining and
Geology Bull. No. 65, Atlanta. 329 pp. and 3 plates.
Thornbury, W. D. 1965. Piedmont province. Pages 88-100 j[n. Regional
geomorphology of the United States. John Wiley, New York.
U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers. 1971. Flood plain information, Yellow
River, Metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia. Savannah District,
Savannah, Ga. 35 pp. and 47 plates.
U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers. 1975. Special flood hazard information,
DeKalb County, Georgia, minor tributaries. Savannah District,
Savannah, Ga. 16 pp. and 57 plates.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1964. Walton County soil survey.
Soil Conserv. Serv., Washington, D. C. 70 pp.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1967. Gwinnett County soil survey.
Soil Conserv. Serv., Washington, D. C. 94 pp.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1975. DeKalb County general soil map.
Soil Conserv. Serv., Washington, D. C.
U. S. Department of Commerce. 1973. CI imatography of the United States-
Georgia: Monthly normals of temperature, precipitation and heating
and cooling degree days 1941-1970. Natl. Clim. Cent., Asheville,
N. C. 10 pp.
U. S. Department of Commerce. 1975. Local climatological data, annual
summary with comparative data, 1975, Atlanta, Georgia. Natl. Clim-.
Cent., Asheville, N. C. n.p.
U. S. Department of Commerce, Social and Economic Statistics Administration,
Bureau of the Census. 1973. County and city data book, 1972. U. S.
Gov. Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1020 pp.
U. S. Department of the Interior. 1973. Threatened wildlife of the
United States. Fish and Wild!. Serv., Washington, D. C. 289 pp.
-------
U. S. Department of the Interior. 1974. United States list of endangered
fauna. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Washington, D. C. 22 pp.
U. S. Department of the Interior. 1976. Endangered and threatened
wildlife and plants. Fed. Register 41(117):24524-24572.
U. S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Water Resources.
1969. Flood-prone areas maps: Jersey, Covington, Snellville,
Conyers, Porterdale, Worthville, and Mil stead quadrangles. Doraville,
Ga. (7.5 minute series)
U. S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Water Resources.
1973. Flood-prone areas maps: Loganville, Lawrenceville, and Hog
Mountain quadrangles. Doraville, Ga. (7.5 minute series)
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1972. Noise pollution.
Washington, D. C. 12 pp.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Information on levels of
environmental noise requisite to protect public health and welfare
with an adequate margin of safety. Office of Noise Abatement
and Control, Washington, D. C. n.p.
Vollenwelder, R. A., and P. J. Dillon. 1974. The application of the
phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research. Natl. Res.
Council of Canada Publ. No. 13690, Canada Cent, for Inland Waters,
Burlington, Ontario. (As cited in Pacific Northwest Environmental
Research Laboratory 1975.)
Warming, E. 1891. De psammophile Vormationer i Danmark. Medd. Naturhist.
For. Kbh. (As cited in Morrison and Yarranton 1974.)
Wharton, C. H. 1969. The southern river swamp--a multiple-use environ-
ment. Ga. State Univ.,'Atlanta. 43 pp.
Whitehouse, E. 1933. Plant succession on central Texas granite. Ecology
14:391-405.
-------
MAN-MADE ENVIRONMENT
B.l DEMOGRAPHY AND ECONOMICS
Current Population Data
Counties lying totally or partially within the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin have witnessed an ebb and flow of population growth rates since
as recently as 1962. Table 21 depicts these rates of change, using
two data sources for the periods I960, 1970, and 1975. Both the official
population estimates of the Georgia State Data Center and the U. S. Cen-
sus population reports are portrayed.
The differences between the two sources, although small, are explained
by differences in estimating techniques. While both approaches uti-
lize the multiple regression technique, the State Data Center adds tax
returns to their correlation matrix. The Bureau of Census also employs
a regression technique but combines this approach with a component me-
thod to measure net migration and housing unit estimates.
In addition to the comparison of the two estimates for 1975, Table 21
indicates the relative rank of each county for the years 1970 and 1975.
While many of the larger counties in the Basin maintained their rank
between 1970-75, significant increases in statewide ranking occurred
in the smaller counties; notably Rockdale County.
Before departing from this table, attention should be directed to the
relative ranking in growth rates from 1970 to 1975. Gwinnett County
increased its ranking statewide from 11 to 9, but achieved the number 1
ranking statewide in rate of change from 1970 to 1975. Additionally,
Rockdale (3) and Clayton (6) fell within the top ten counties in terms
of rate of population increase for the period. Significantly, the
majority of both Gwinnett and Rockdale Counties fell within the Upper
Ocmulgee Basin. Such rates of growth occurring within the Basin,
particularly within the Yellow River Sub-basin, provide emphasis to the
concern for quality growth and careful maintenance of water quality
standards.
The existing and projected population distribution for the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin is based on a gross area mean distribution method of popu-
lation aggregation. 1970 Census data was gathered by census tract
within the Atlanta SMSA, while outside the region county data was used.
Butts, Jasper, Newton and Walton Counties were found to be outside the
SMSA. By superimposing the Water Quality Management Unit (WQMU) boundar-
ies over the census and county boundaries, population levels based on
gross acreage were determined. In using this method, the population
was assumed to be evenly distributed throughout the census tracts and
counties. The immense scale of the Study Area in relation to the size
and number of census tracts involved tends to minimize the density
deviations within each population unit. Through the use of a mean me-
thodology, deviations inherent in this approach are reduced as the number
of independent actions increases, whereby they tend to compensate each
other and minimize the error factor.
-------
B 21
POPULATION ESTIMATES I960, 1970, 1975
COUNTY
1960
1970
STATEWIDE
1970 RANK
% CHANGE
1960-70
1975
STATEWIDE
1975 RANK
% CHANGE
1970-75
% CHAr
1970-7
Butts
8,976
10,560
(93)
17,6
12,700
(84)
20.27
(11)
Clayton
46,365
98,126
(8)
111.5
125,100
(8)
27.49
(6)
DeKalb
256,782
415,387
(2)
61.8
461,600
(2)
11.13
(34)
Fulton
556,326
605,210
(1)
9.2
591,200
(1)
-2.31
(151)
Gwi nnett
43,541
72,349
(11)
66.2
112,800
(9)
55.9
(1)
Henry
17,619
23,724
(38)
34.7
27,900
(37)
17.60
(15)
Jasper
6,135
5,760
(141)
-6.1
6,600
(132)
14.58
(26)
Newton
20,999
26,282
(36)
25.2
29,100
(35)
10.72
(40)
Rockdale
10,572
18,152
(54)
71.7
24,900
(41)
37.17
(3)
Walton
20,481
23,404
(41)
14.3
27,200
(38)
16.22
(19)
1,298,954
1,419,100
9.20
Source: Annual Estimates of Population for the State of Georgia, 1975, State Data Center, Office of Planning and
Budget, July 1976, Atlanta, Georgia.
-------
The population of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin as of the 1970 Census
of Population was approximately 532,400 residents (see Table 22). The
general characteristics vary throughout the Basin, which range, from the
dense urban character of the Atlanta SMSA in the western section to the
suburban and then rural character of the eastern counties. Of the total
Basin population, the Atlanta SMSA dominates its character and direction
of change.
The type of population characteristics depicted in this study are: total
population, non-white population and median family income and age. Em-
ployment characteristics are discussed later. The non-white portion
of the Basin's populace constitutes 26 percent of the total population,
which is higher than Atlanta's 22 percent level. The median family income
of all families in the Basin was $10,462, which was lower than the Atlanta
SMSA, but was higher than State of Georgia or United States levels. The
median age of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin was found to be 26.3 years,
which was older than the state's median age, but was younger than the
United States median and only slightly younger than Atlanta's 26.4
median age.
Age distribution in the Upper-Ocmulgee River Basin is depicted in the
Population Pyramids shown in Figure 16. The pyramids are divided into
male and female distributions and depict total and non-white population.
The total population pyramid shows that over 40 percent of the population
is under 20 years of age. Over 70 percent of the male population and
67 percent of the female population is under the age of 40. This type
of distribution typifies the characteristics of an urban growth region
that has had a large -in-migration of young adults of child-bearing age.
Because the bulk of the age distribution was below 40 years, it would
appear that the in-migration has occurred in the Basin within the last
10 to 15 years. In contrast, the non-white residents age distribution
shows out-migration tendencies. Within the. Basin, 48 percent of the non-
white males and 43 percent of the non-white females are shown to be under
the age of 20 years. A sharp drop in the non-white males is found from
the 10 to 19 year age- group to the 20-29 year age group. This drop is
characteristic of an area that loses its male population because of poor
job opportunities when they become of legal age. Females because of so-
cial restriction tend to leave at a later age, approximately 30 years.
The tendencies are not current and only reflect aspects of the Basin dur-
ing 1970; present conditions may have revised this distribution.
Population Characteristics by Sub-Basin
The population characteristics of the Basin have been disaggregated into
three (3) sub-basins; the South, Yellow and Alcovy Rivers and the twelve
(12) Water Quality Managements Units (W0MU) that are displayed in Table 22
-------
Water Quality
Management
Unit
TABLE 22
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS, 1970
Population
(thousands) Median
Non Family
Total White Income
Median Manu-
Age facturing
Employment
Mean Percentage
Trade
Service
Govern- Unemployment
ment Mean Percentage
South River
425.1
123.3
10,758
26.4
17.5
23.8
9.7
15.8
3.0
0401
316.4
106.7
11,073
26.7
16.5
24.6
9.8
15.9
2.9
0402
56.5
6.7
10,001
26.6
17.9
22.7
10.6
15.9
3.2
0403
30.6
3.7
10,279
24.1
20.0
21.6
7.8
15.4
2.9
0404
9.9
1.3
9,805
25.8
28.5
19.6
6.5
13.4
2.4
0405
11.7
4.9
7,967
25.3
26.2
15.8
10.8
17.5
3.8
Yellow River
80.3
8.8
9,656
25.6
31.0
20.8
7.0
12.7
2.2
0406
43.8
1.5
10,215
25.6
28.2
22.8
7.3
13.1
2.1
0407
16.4
1.7
9,143
25.8
34.3
19.5
6.7
12.1
2.1
0408
14.5
3.9
9,438
25.8
31.3
18.6
6.6
12.8
2.4
0409
5.6
1.8
7,839
26.0
43.1
14.6
7.0
10.6
2.5
Alcovy River
27.0
6.6
8,195
26.2
40.2
16.7
7.1
11.4
2.3
0410
16.9
3.3
8,473
26.3
38.9
18.4
7.0
11.5
2.1
0411
9.2
2.9
7,858
25.8
43.1
14.2
7.0
10.5
2.6
0412
0.9
.4
6,495
27.6
36.4
11.4
10.6
18.0
2.8
Upper Ocmulgee
2.8
River Basin
532.4
138.7
10,462
26.3
20.7
23.0
9.2
15.1
Atlanta SMSA
1,390.2
309.6
10,693
26.4
19.7
23.5
9.5
15.4
3.0
Georgia
—
8,165
26.0
27.2
19.5
9.2
16.2
3.2
Note: Values for WQMU gained from averaging the factors over each county's population share of each WQMU.
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Census, 1970.
-------
FIGURE 16
SO-ABOVE
70-79
60-69
50-59
40-49
30-39
20-29
10- 19
0-9
—I—
20
-i r-
15 10
male
E
PERCENT
10
-T-
15
FEMALE
BLACK POPULATION
1970
-r—
20
80-ABOVE
70-79
60-69
50-59
40-49
30-39
20-29
10-19
0-9
I—
20
10 5 PERCENT 5 10 B
MALE FEMALE
TOTAL POPULATION
1970
20
AGE DISTRIBUTION
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
-------
South River Sub-basin
The South River Sub-basin had the largest share of the population; ap-
proximately 80 percent, with 425,100 persons. WQMU #0401 had the lar-
gest share of the Sub-basin; 74 percent, with a population of 316,400
persons. The South River Sub-basin also has the largest non-white popu-
lation and the highest percentage of non-whites; 123,300 persons and
29 percent, respectively. WQMU #0401 has the most non-whites of the
Basin total and the highest percentage in the Sub-basin; 106,700 persons
and 34 percent, respectively. The lowest number of non-whites in the
South River were in WQMU #0404 and the lowest percentage was in WQMU
#0402; 1,300 persons and 11.8 percent, respectively. The South River's
median annual family income was $10,758. The lowest family income level
in the Sub-basin was found in WQMU #0405, the highest in WQMU #0401;
$7,967 and $11,073, respectively. The median age for the South River
Sub-basin residents was 26.4 in 1970. The South River Sub-basin, as
stated, has the largest share of the Basin's population, plus the highest
median family income and oldest median age.
Alcovy River Sub-Basin
The Alcovy River Sub-basin, in contrast, had the least share of the
population in the Basin; 5 percent with 27,000 residents. WQMU# 0410
had the largest population, number of non-white residents and the highest
median family income of the Sub-basin; 16,900 persons, 3,300 persons
and $8,473, respectively. WQMU #0411 had the lowest median age for its
residents; 25.8 years of age. WQMU #0412 had the lowest share of total
population, non-white residents and median family income in the Basin;
900 residents, 400 persons and $6,495, respectively. However, it had
the highest percentage of non-whites; 44 percent. The Alcovy River
Sub-basin had the lowest median family income level ($8,195) and had the
least population in the Basin.
Yellow River Sub-Basin
The Yellow River Sub-basin was in between the two extremes of the South
River and the Alcovy with a residential population of 80,300 persons.
Since the scope pf this study is to more closely focus on the Yellow
River, Table 23 was developed to further break down the population char-
acteristics into census tracts where available, subdivisions of the
counties within the Yellow River Sub-basin, and WQMUs. Population den-
sities by census tract for the Yellow River Sub-basin are indicated in
Figure 18 . WQMU #0406 had the greatest share of the population (55 per-
cent) with 43,800 residents and a population of 1,500 non-whites, approxi-
mately three (3) percent of the WQMU's population. Seventy-six percent
of this WQMU was found in Gwinnett County, with census tract 504 having the
largest share (17,900 residents). The least populated census tract in
the unit, #233, was found in DeKalb County with a population of 400 residents.
-------
0406
5r*llvtih«
0407
MountotA
As
0410
ormt P9m
0408
0403
0404
0405
,JACKSON
LAKE
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT UNITS
FIGURE 17
-------
f
LOGAWILLE^
w
RIVER
1970
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
POPULATION DENSITIES BY
CENSUS TRACT
2.01-OVER g
1.01-2.00
51 - 1.00 |
Ui
0 - .50 Q-
4 AK£
JACKSO*l
FIGURE 18
-------
TABLE 23
YELLOW RIVER SUB-BASIN POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS, 1970
BY CENSUS TRACT AND WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT UNITS
POPULATION
EMPLOYMENT
County
Census
Tract
WQMU
[thousands)
Total
Non
Wh i te
Fami ly
Income
Median
Age
Manu-
facturing
Mean Percentage
Trade Service
Govern-
ment
Unemployment
0406
43.8
1.5
10.215
25.6
28.2
22.8
7.3
13.1
2.1 .
Gwinnett
502
503
504
505
3.1
2.9
17.9
9.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.4
9,629
25.5
32.0
21.9
6.9
12.3
2.0
DeKalb
219
233
218.01
218.02
4.7
0.4
0.8
4.4
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.2
12,135
26.1
16.0
25.9
8.3
15.6
2.4
0407
16.4
1.7
9,143
25.8
34.3
19.5
6.7
12.1
2.1
Gwinnett
505
507
4.2
6.2
0.2
0.4
9,629
25.5
32.0
21.9
6.9
12.3
2.0
Rockdale
601
2.9
0.2
8,881
25.7
33.0
17.2
5.6
12.6
2.4
Walton
2.3
0,7
7,744
27.0
43.1
13.6
7.1
11.1
2.0
Newton
0.8
0.2
7,858
25.6
43.1
14.2
7.0
10.5
2.6
0408
14.5
3.9
9,438
25.8
31.3
1-8.6
6.6
12.8
2.4
DeKalb
233
Rockdale
602
603
3.6
0.2
7.0
1.1
0.0
1.5
12,135
8,88]
26.1
25.7
16.0
33.0
25.9
17.2
8.3
5.6
15.6
12.6
2.4
2.4
Newton
3.7
1.2
9,438
25.6
43.1
14.2
7.0
10.5
2.6
0409
5.6
1.8
7.839
26.0
43.1
14.6
7.0
10.6
2.5
Walton
0.9
.3
7,744
27.0
43.1
16.6
7.1
11.1
2.0
Newton
Yellow
River S/B
4.7
80.3
1.5
8.9
7,858
9,656
25.8
25.6
43.1
31.0
14.2
20.8
7.0
7.0
10.5
12.7
2.6
2.2
Note: Values
SOURCE: U.S
for WQMU gained from averaging the data over each county's population share of the WQMU.
, Department of Commerce, Bureau of Cencus, 1970.
-------
The median family income of WQMU #0406 ($10,215) was the highest in
the Yellow River Sub-basin, along with the youngest median age,
25.6 years. The DeKalb County portion of the WQMU had the higher
median family income and the older median age, $12,135 and 26.1 years,
respectively. WQMU #0409 was at the other extreme; it had the least,
share of the Sub-basin population (7 percent) with 5,600 residents
and a population of 1,800 non-whites, approximately 32 percent of
the WQMU's population.
Portions of Newton and Walton Counties make up this WQMU's population
with the Newton County section having the larger portion (4,700 re-
sidents).
Both of the counties had similar percentages of non-whites, 32 and
33 percent, respectively. The median family income level of WQMU
#0409 was the lowest of the Yellow River, $7,839, but it had the oldest
median age, 26.0 years. The Walton County portion of the unit had the
lower median family income level and the older median age, $7,744 and
27 years, respectively. WQMU #0407 and #0408 population levels fell
between the other two units, 16,400 and 14,500 residents, respectively,
as was the percentage share, 20 and 18 percent, respectively. The non-
white population in the two units was 10 and 27 percent, respectively,
which was also in the middle range for the Yellow River. The median
family income level and the median age for WQMU #0407 and #0408 are fairly
similar, $9,143 and $9,438, 25.8 and 25.8 years, respectively, and were
also in the middle range for the Yellow River. WQMU #0406 seems to
have had the youngest and most wealthy portion of the Yellow River
Sub-basin population, while WQMU #04091s population was the oldest and
the poorest. WQMU #0409 median family income was below the U. S.level,
while its median age level was younger than the U. S. level, but was
equal to Georgia's median at 26 years.
Table 24 provides information relative to population shifts from
rural to urban as well as indicating percentage increases/decreases
in total, urban, and rural population for all counties within the
study area for the period between 1960 and 1970. Total population
increase above the state average occurred in seven counties, four of
which are part of the Yellow River Sub-basin, and had the second, third,
fourth and fifth highest growth rate for the period. Only Clayton
County exceeded these counties in percentage growth for this period.
Significant is DeKalb's 79.3 percent increase in urban population and
34.2 percent decrease in rural population combined with Gwinnett's
48.7 percent and 73.5 percent increase in urban and rural population,
respectively. These two counties alone accounted for 40 percent of the
ten-county area growth. Add to that the fact that Rockdale County,
with the major population center in the Yellow River Sub-basin, in-
creased its total population by 71.7 percent during the same period
and the impact on the Yellow River Sub-basin is brought into clearer focus.
-------
TABLE 24
TOTAL POPULATION AND DENSITIES BY URBAN AND RURAL AREAS, 1960-1970
Area Population 1960 Population 1970 % Change 1960-1970
County Sq.Mi. Total Density Urban Rural Total Density Urban Rural Total Urban Rural
Butts
185
8,976
48.5
2,545
6,431
10,560
57.1
3,778
6,782
17.6
48.4
5.5
Clayton
149
46,365
311.2
30,282
16,083
98,043
658.0
79,716
18,327
111.5
163.2
14.0
DeKalb
269
256,782
954.6
217,165
39,617
415,387
1,544.2
389,303
26,084
61.8
79.3
-34.2
Fulton
530
556,326
1,049.7
521,784
34,542
607,592
1,146.4
566,393
41,199
9.2
8.5
19.3
Gwinnett
437
43,541
99.6
12,863
30,678
72,349
165.6
19,132
53,217
66.2
48.7
73.5
Henry
331
17,619
53.2
-
17,619
23,724
71.7
2,675
21,049
34.7
-
19.5
Jasper
373
6,135
J6.4
-
6,135
5,760
15.4
-
5,760
-6.1
-
-6.1
Newton
271
20,999
77.5
8,167
12,832
26,282
97.0
10,267
16,015
25.2
25.7
24.8
Rockdale
128
10,572
82.6
2,881
7,691
18,152
141.8
4,890
13,262
71.7
69.7
72.4
Walton
330
20,481
62.1
6,826
13,655
23,404
70.9
8,071
15,333
14.3
18.2
12.3
Average for area: 40.6 46.2 20.1
-------
The development of transportation corridors such as 1-20 connecting
the Atlanta central city to Rockdale County, 1-285 around the cen-
tral city and 1-85 and U. S. 78 connecting the central city to
Gwinnett County has helped to spur this significant growth. It is
also significant to note that in almost every instance the increase
in urban populations closely paralleled the total growth. This
trend, experienced in the decade between 1960 and 1970, is anti-
cipated to continue.
Historic Employment Growth Trends
The history of economic growth within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
can be ascertained through analysis of employment sectoral changes
that have occurred within the Basin from 1960 to 1970, based on employ-
ment data from the Census. In considering the impact of long-term sec-
toral changes in employment, it is difficult to note and ascertain
the total pattern of change. It is, therefore, more convenient to
focus on the components of growth.
Growth in the Basin economy may occur because it has a favorable indus-
trial mix; that is, because there is an excessive amount of nationally
high growth industries in the Basin. Growth may also occur in spite
of an unfavorable industrial mix if the area is able to capture an
increasing share of the national employment gain in slow growth indus-
tries. This analysis of the components of sectoral employment changes
in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin economy will be characterized through
the use of shift-share analysis.
Shift-share analysis is a technique which allows comparisons between
the economic growth performance of a region with the performance of
the state and nation. It is a useful technique for both analyzing
past trends and for forecasting future trends. By directing all
comparisons to the national economy, the potential for bias results is
removed. The term shift is used to portray the relative change of any
one segment of the economy, i.e., manufacturing versus wholesale trade,
over time. The term share is used to indicate the portion of a single
employment category that is garnered by a region or state.
Overall employment change for any period can be divided into compon-
ents: the overall growthof the national economy, the industrial mix
effect, and the regional share effect. The regional share effect can
be subdivided further with respect to the share held by the State of
Georgia, Atlanta SMSA and Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
The principal standard of reference is the growth rate of the nation
as a whole, in terms of total employment and employment within the in-
dustrial sectors. The second element that effects a difference in the
growth rate of an area from that of the nation is the industrial mix
-------
effect; to the extent that an area's economy consists of a large pro-
portion of slow growth industries, employment will expand at a below
average rate if its share of the sector remains the same.
The rate of growth of a particular national industrial sector is
characterized as rapid or slow in terms of the growth rate of all
national industries combined over the same period. The rate of
growth of a region within a particular industrial sector may be rapid
or slow in terms of the growth rate of the industrial sector nation-
ally. Regional shift within an industrial sector may be rapid or
slow in terms of the growth rate of that particular sector nationally.
The sum of these sectoral regional shifts within a given area will
give rise to an overall regional share effect. Thus, an industry
that is growing faster in a given area than its counterparts within
the nation as a whole will add to the area's overall growth.
In this study, the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is not only compared
with the United States as a whole, but also with the Atlanta SMSA
and the State of Georgia. It should be kept in mind that while shift-
share analysis is analytically useful, it makes no attempt to explain
or assign degrees of significance to the ultimate causes for the rate
of employment change observed in industries within the Basin.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's share of the total covered non-agri-
cultural employment gained through the decade of the sixties (see
Table 25 ). During the sixties, increases occurred in all sectors
except manufactured non-durable goods and services, which was in
line with Atlanta's growth trends. This contrasted with the State of
Georgia's increased share of sector employment in the United States,
which increased in every industrial sector. Even though the non-dur-
ables and services sectors in Atlanta and the Basin declined, they
were more than compensated for by other industrial sectors, to show
a capture of a greater share of Georgia and the United States' employ-
ment pool.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's 1960 and 1970 employment is presented
in Table 26 , along with an analysis of employment changes in national
growth, industrial mix, and Georgia, Atlanta SMSA and Basin share com-
ponents. The rationale for the separation of the regional share ef-
fects into three separate -components is based on the need to analyze
the relative growth trends of the Basin in terms of larger regional
activities.
As an illustration of a change in a sector's contribution to employ-
ment in the Basin, examine the components that explain the net gain of
3,843 jobs in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin manufactured non-durable
goods sector during the sixties. The national growth components indi-
cate that, if the manufacture of non-durable goods in the Basin had
grown at the same rate as total employment in the United States, the
-------
TABLE 25
COMPARISON OF UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN'S SHARE OF GEORGIA EMPLOYMENT,
ATLANTA SMSA'S SHARE OF GEORGIA EMPLOYMENT, AND GEORGIA'S SHARE OF U.S. EMPLOYMENT
Major Industrial Sectors
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
Employment By Sector As A
Percentage of Georgia's
Employment By Sector
(selected years)
Atlanta SMSA Employment By
Sector As A Percentage of
Georgia's Employment By
Sector
(selected years)
Georgia Basic Employment
By Sector As A Percentage
of U.S.'s Employment By
Sector
(selected years)
1960
1970
1960
1970
1960
1970
Agriculture, Forestry &
Fisheries
— •-
_ _
3.2
2.3
2.9
2.9
Mining & Quarrying
--
9.1
13.3
0.8
0.9
Construction
16.8
18.7'
30.6
31.9
2.3
2.6
Manufacturi ng
Durable Goods
15.0
19.4
35.1
37.4
1.2
1.5
Nondurable Goods
11.5
10.5
18.3
16.9
3.2
3.7
Transportation,, Communi-
cation & Public- Utilities
21.7
25.9
41.8
47.6
1.9
2.4
Wholesale Trade
20.4
21.1
48.4
53.3
2.1
2.4
Retail Trade
14.5
17.3
31.2
36.9
2.1
2.2
Finance, Insurance &
Real Estate
--
49.2
54.3
1.8
2.1
Services
12.8
11.2
29.6
27.6
2.3
2.7
Public Administration
14.3
17.0
29.3
35.2
2.3
2.4
Industry not Reporting
10.9
13.3
19.6
--
1.5
—
Total Employment
13.9
15.7
28.5
33.6
2.1
2.3
-------
TABLE 26
COMPONENTS OF CHANGE IN THE UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN'S EMPLOYMENT
IN
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL
SECTORS,
1960 - 1970
SECTORS
1960
1970
NATIONAL
GROWTH
INDUSTRIAL
MIX
GEORGIA
SHARE
ATLANTA
SMSA
SHARE
BASIN
SHARE
TOTAL
REGIONAL
EFFECT
1960-197i
TOTAL
EMPLOYMEI
CHANGE
Construction
14,558
22,138
2,683.5
201.2
2,494.8
865.9
1,334.7
4,695.4
7,580.
Manufacturing
Durable Goods
18,346
33,693
3,381.7
189.7
4,036.7
1,704.3
6,034.7
11,775.7
15,347.
Nondurable
Goods
27,809
31,652
5,126.0
-3,639.9
5,359.9
-2,651.9
- 351.0
2,357.0
3,843.
Transportation,
Communications &
Public Utilities
18,818
31,613
3,468.7
- 399.9
4,605.9
3,707.5
1,412.8
9,726.2
12,795.
Wholesale Trade
9,358
15,985
1,725.0
2,165.4
2,226.0
1,571.0
-1,060.4
2,736.6
6,627.
Retai1 Trade
28,797
45,784
5,308.2
2,689.1
1,572.9
6,945.5
471.4
8,989.4
16,987.
Services
39,156
60,205
7,217.6
11,921.8
10,797.7
-4,706.2
-4,181.9
1,909.6
21,049.
Public Admin.
10,596
17,288
1,953.2
1,352.2
650.4
2,957.3
- 221.0
3,386.7
6,692.
Total Reported
167,438
258,358
30,863.9
14,479.6
31,744.3
10,393.4
3,439.3
45,577.0
90,920.
Sources: Employment Data Supplied by U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1960 and 1970.
were Computed by Stottler, Stagg and Associates.
Regional Share Changes
-------
Basin would have gained 5,126 jobs. This estimated increase is overly
optimistic, however, because non-durable goods manufacturing employ-
ment in the nation did not grow as rapidly as total employment. The
industrial mix effect shows that there would have been a loss of 3,640
jobs in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin if its rate of employment growth
had followed that of manufacturing non-durable goods throughout the
nation.
The share effect component shows what has happened to growth in the
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's non-durable goods sector relative to the
growth of non-durable manufacturing in Georgia and in the Atlanta
SMSA. The result is that there would have been an additional net gain
of 5,360 non-durable manufacturing jobs in the Basin, if the Basin had
grown at the same rate as Georgia. While the State grew in this sector,
Atlanta SMSA was growing at a slower rate than Georgia. If the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin's non-durable manufacturing sector had grown at
the same rate as the Atlanta SMSA, the Basin would have shown a net
loss of 2,652 jobs below the Georgia share. Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
non-durable goods section was growing at an even slower rate than the
State or Atlanta so that it lost 351 jobs when compared to the Atlanta
SMSA share.
The total regional share effect computed by adding the Georgia, Atlanta
and the Basin shares shows a net gain of 2,357 non-durable manufactur-
ing jobs in the Basin, because the Basin's growth rate in manufactured
non-durable goods employment was higher than the nation's. Thus during
the sixties the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's manufacturing non-durable
goods sector was growing faster than the nation, while lagging below
the State and Atlanta rates of growth. Finally, adding up all the
components of change along the non-durable goods row in Table 26 (nation-
al growth, industry mix, Georgia share, Atlanta SMSA share and Basin
share) yields the actual net gain of 3,843 jobs during the 1960-1970
period.
Looking at the growth in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin during the decade
of the sixties, the Basin realized an increase in non-agricultural em-
ployment of 54 percent. This increase was apportioned evenly across
the entire spectrum of the eight major industrial sectors with only the
manufacturing sectors showing any substantial deviation. Durable goods
had the highest increase while non-durable goods had the lowest; 83
and 14 percent, respectively. The remaining sectors all fell within
a range of increases of 52 to 71 percent.
As Table 26 indicates, the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin had a favorable
industrial mix effect; that is, the basin exhibited a high concentra-
tion of employment in industries that were characterized by above-aver-
age national rates of employment growth. There are some industries
that lagged during the sixties; the manufactured non-durable goods and
-------
transportation sectors' mix, which accounted for 17 and 11 percent,
respectively, of the Basin's employment for 1960, were growing na-
tionally at rates below the national rate of employment growth. At
the same time, wholesale and retail trade, services and finance, insur-
ance and real estate were growing rapidly, providing an impetus for
employment growth during the decade.
Along with the favorable industrial mix effect, the Georgia regional
share effect was also experiencing gains. All eight major industrial
sectors exhibited increases in employment, when compared with the rate
of growth of the sector's national employment. The favorable effects
of the Georgia regional share indicate that the State was enjoying a
competitive locational advantage and exerting a strong impetus for
area growth.
While the impact of the industrial mix and Georgia regional share
effect are strongly positive, a review of the Atlanta SMSA and Basin
regional shares effects shows that they are also positive, but with
some weak points in growth trends. The Atlanta SMSA regional share
appears to have gained in total non-agricultural employment as com-
pared to the State. Only two of the eight major industrial sectors
registered losses; the manufacturing non-durable goods and services
sectors lost employment during the period as compared to Georgia's re-
gional share in those sectors.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin's regional share effect was determined
by comparing the growth in its major sectors relative to the Atlanta
SMSA sectoral growth. The Basin showed gains in the construction,
manufacturing durable goods, transportation and retail trade sectors,
but the rest of the sectors showed a deterioration in their competitive
position to that of the Atlanta SMSA and the State. In other words,
the non-durable goods, wholesale trade, services and public administra-
tion sectors grew at a slow rate when compared to the State and Atlanta.
The total regional effect column, which compares the overall Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin share gains with the national sectoral employment,
showed that the Basin gained across the entire spectrum of the major
industrial sectors during the sixties. These show the characteristics
of a strong growth economy that has some problems in wholesale trade,
services and non-durable goods manufacturing.
A census of employment was done on a county-wide basis by the United
States Department of Commerce covering employment at places of work at
mid-year 1973, and is shown on Table 27 . The employment sectors have
been broken into 21 categories that recognize existing employment gen-
erators within the ten (10) counties that make up the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin. The retail trade sector was the largest generator of em-
ployment reported, with manufacturing being a close second; 119,046
and 114,375 employees, respectively. The furniture, lumber and wood
-------
I A L> l_ U £-/
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN COUNTY EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR
1973
SECTOR BUTTS
CLAYTON
DEKALB
FULTON
GWINNETT
HENRY
JASPER
NEWTON
ROCKDALE
WALTON
Agriculture
13
86
609
921
102
13
0
16
(D)
18
Mininq/Quarryinq
0
(D)
273
298
(D)
fDl
0
0
0
0
Construction
74
.2,667
13,389
23.886
2.599
264
?1
4?7
fi 7R
Manufacturi ng
704
3,560
20,362
71,014
6,131
1,885
1,005
3,208
2,794
3,712
Furni ture,Lumber
and Wood Products
0
535(D)
1,915
9,625
500
197
(D)
(D)
115
0
Metal Industries
0
861(D)
1,615
4,955
820(D)
0
0
0
0
(D)
Machinery except
Electrical•
0
179
1,029
3,034
0
(D)
0
0
0
0
Electrical Equip
0
0
2,152
1,122
(D)
(D)
0
0
(D)
0
Transport. Equip
0
0
(D)
9,785
0
0
0
0.
0
0
Mi seellaneous
0
482
1,093
4,392
118
0
0
0
135
0
Food and Kindred
0
488
2,445
7,688
(D)
0
0
0
0
(D)
Textile Products
704
(D)
(D)
9,097
377(D)
(D)
(D)
(D)
505
2,387
Printing/Publishing
0
0
1,347
7,137
256
0
0
0
0
0
Chemicals & Related
Products
0
0
1,967
4,468
(D)
0
0
(D)
(D)
(D)
Mi seellaneous
0
0
476
9,505
633
0
0 .
0
0
0
Transport,Communi-
cations & Utilities
71
1,562
6,477
47,253
545
121
38
378
237
236
Wholesale
73
2,242
12,270
56,664
746
14
7
112
321
237
Retail
509
3,726
28,449
80.165
2,758
684
188
963
727
877
Finance,Insurance &
Real Estate
141
792
6,590
44,645
606
101
45
131
119
196
Services
318
1,865
25,327
83,578
1,294
481
59
645
337
401
Unclassified
0
(D)
748
1,628
(D)
(D)
0
15
(D)
17
TOTAL* 1,
901
16,729 114,494
409,512
14,981
3,627
1,363
5,895
5,288
. 6,219.
*Not a summation of preceding data as figures withheld to avoid disclosure of operations of individual industries.
(D) Denotes figures withheld to avoid disclosure of operations of individual reporting units.
Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Social & Economic Statistics Adm, Bureau of Census bounty Business Patters,1973,Ga.
-------
products and textile products sectors are the most widely distributed
manufacturing employers within the counties as.well as the largest.
The Yellow River Sub-basin covers parts of DeKalb, Gwinnett, Newton,
Rockdale and Walton Counties whose major sectors, as they were in
the rest of the Basin, were the retail trade sector as the highest,
closely followed by the manufacturing sector; 33,774 and 32,495 em-
ployees, respectively. The textile products sector, of those reported,
was the highest employer within the manufacturing group at 3,269
reported workers. Manufacturing employment sectors that reported lar-
ger than 2,000 employees were furniture and wood products, metal
industries, electrical equipment, and food and kindred products.
Current Economic Conditions
The Atlanta region is composed of relatively affluent families. A
quarter of the families earn more than $15,000 annually. In the south-
east as a whole, only 13 percent earned $15,000 a year and the figure
for the total United States is 21 percent. At the other end of the
scale, that is, those families earning less than $3,000 annually, the
Atlanta region has a smaller percentage than the southeast or the
nation.*
Personal income is used in this study as a source for determining the
currency flows within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin and the export-
oriented industrial sectors that generate growth tendencies within
the region's economy. The personal incomes for the Atlanta Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area were used as the basis for this analysis
because over 90 percent of the residents in the Basin lived within the
SMSA as of the 1970 Census. Therefore, trends that could be estab-
lished for the SMSA would influence almost all of the Basin's currency
flows.
Personal income for the Atlanta SMSA are distributed into three (3)
major sources: labor and proprietors, income property, income and trans-
fer payments. Labor incomes include wage and salary disbursements,
which include personal income taxes, social security contributions, and
other personal contributions for social insurance. Proprietors' income
is income received by'owners of unincorporated businesses, which includes
farms, professional services and other businesses. Also included in the
labor and proprietor income source are other labor income, which con-
sists of supplementary income such as employer contributions to private
health plans, workmen's compensation, etc. Property income is rental
income of persons, dividends and interest income. Transfer payments
are comprised of income from social insurance funds, veteran pensions,
and private payments to individuals.
The total personal income between 1965 and 1974 for the Atlanta SMSA
reflects the income in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin and is shown on
Table 28 . The major source of income within the SMSA was labor and
proprietors' income, with an average of 82 percent of the total personal
*Source: United States Bureau of Census
-------
TABLE 28
Total Personal Income By Major Sources
ATLANTA SMSA
(Thousands of Dollars)
Personal Income 1965 1970 1974
ources INCOME PERCENTAGE INCOME PERCENTAGE INCOME PERCENTAGE
Labor and Proprietors
ncome
3,479,108
83.2
5,849,683
82.5
8,848,635
80.4
Farm, (Mining)
32,310
0.8
31,076
0.4
33,896
0.3
Nonfarm
Manufacturing
828,378
19.8
1,154,140
16.2
1,479,417
13.4
Transportation,
Communication
360,743
8.6
650,367
9.2
1 ,064,149
9.7
and Public Utilities
Local
1,819,789
43.5
3,177,392
44.8
5,019,746
45.6
State
226,545
5.4
448,655
6.3
771,964
7.0
Federal
211,343
5.1
388,053
5.5
479,463
4.4
Property Income
498,594
11.9
817,577
11.5
1,299,449
11.8
ransfer Payments
205,875
4.9
425,618
6.0
852,602
7.8
personal Income by
2/
Residence
3,996,913
6,648,062
10,188,383
3/
¦Ota! Income
4,183,578
100.0
7,092,878
100.0
11 ,000,686
100.0
/ Local Source included: contract construction, wholesale and retail trade, finance,
insurance, real estate, services and other industries.
1/ Incomes do not contain personal contributions for social insurance or an adjustment
for residences, so personal income is not a summation of the preceding data.
3/ Total income includes: total labor and proprietor's income by place of work, personal
contributions for social insurance, transfer payments and property income.
sources: Department of Commerce, Regional Economics Information System - BEA.
-------
income between 1965 and 1974. Local sources were shown to hold the
largest share of the labor and proprietors' income, which increased
its share from 43.5 percent in 1965 to 45.6 percent in 1974. Other
sources included in labor and proprietors' income that were improving
their share of total income were transportation, communications and
public utilities, and state government. Manufacturing, the second
largest contributor to labor and proprietors' income, reduced its share
of the total income from 19.8 percent in 1976 to 13.4 percent in 1974.
Other sources included in labor and proprietors' income that had their
share reduced were farm (mining) and federal employment income. The
whole of the labor and proprietors' income source reduced its share
of total income from 83.2 percent in 1965 to 80.4 percent in 1974.
Property incomes and transfer payments are the two remaining sources
of income. These sources can be considered not to produce any real
goods but do have an influence on the flow of money through the econo-
mic system. Property incomes are not as stable as the other sources
and tend to fluctuate from year to year. Property incomes share of
total income was reduced from 11.9 percent in 1965 to 11.5 in 1970,
but was found to rebound in 1974 to 11.8 percent. Transfer payments
are usually independent of local conditions, in that they don't follow
growth trends in economic conditions. Transfer payments have increas-
ingly captured a larger share of the total personal income from 4.9 per-
cent in 1965 to 7.8 percent in 1974.
The personal income of the Atlanta SMSA was growing at a 10.75 percent
average annual rate from 1967 to 1970, but as the national economy was
reducing its growth trends, the SMSA also reduced to a 9.5 percent aver-
age annual rate from 1970 to 1974. These figures do not reflect fully
the real income growth because the inflation factor has not been incor-
porated into the data, even though it does show consistent growth ten-
dencies.
By looking at the incomes derived from basic employment sectors in the
Atlanta SMSA, the effect on local supportive nonfarm sectors can be
determined. This effect of the basic employment sector on a local sup-
portive nonfarm sector is known as the "income multiplier," meaning, for
every dollar earned in the basic sector, there is a dollar plus effect
on the local sector's income. Changes in the multiplier will tend to
reflect growth patterns in the SMSA's total personal income; therefore,
growth in the basic sector industries will tend to accelerate growth
in the local sectors.
During the period 1965 to 1974, the Atlanta SMSA's personal income inc-
reased from approximately $4 billion to well over $10 billion. The
multiplier increased from 2.29 to 2.51, which shows that development
occurred in the basic sectors, local sectors and in their general inter-
relationship (see Figure 19 ). This increase showed a steady rise'after
-------
FIGURE 19
69
73
YEAR
ATLANTA SMSA ECONOMIC
BASE MULTIPLIER
-------
a stall between 1954 and 1967. If this trend continues, the Atlanta
SMSA will continue to capture a greater share of the State of Georgia's
growth.
Projected Population
Population growth is not a new phenomenon to the Atlanta region. Since
the turn of the century, the region has enjoyed a steady population
rowth. There are two components of population change; natural increase
births minus deaths) and net in-migration. The chief reason for-Atlanta1s
growth during the sixties and the seventies was net in-migration from
other parts of the country. During the decade of the 1960s, net in-mi-
gration accounted for more than half of the region's population growth
(54.7 percent), while natural increase accounted for the remaining
45.3 percent.
There is ample reason to believe that in-migration will continue to
be the chief contributor to the population increases in the Atlanta
region. The assumption is based on (1) zero population growth (ZPG)
and attitudes on family planning and (2) a continuing demand for
employees by industry.
The main purpose for projecting population figures is to make adequate
and constructive provisions for the needs and desires of the people,
at the present time and in the years ahead. The number of families
to be housed and to be served by various types of community services
such as stores, churches, recreation facilities; number of jobs required;
the amount of traffic to be generated; the amount of land needed for
housing, industries, commercial activities, public purposes, etc. are
related to the number of people, their characteristics and the economic
base of the area.
The 1970 Water Quality Management Unit Populations determined in the
previous section were used as a basis for population projections.
OBERS and 1975 Census updates for areas larger than the Basin were
collected and broken into average annual rates of growth. Employing
these growth rates within the WQMU base populations, the year 1980,
1990 and 2000 populations were determined for the WQMU as a comparison
analysis to the Atlanta Regional Conmission's Regional Development Plan
Population Projections.
The population projections for the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin were
also partially forecasted by the Atlanta Regional Commission in 1976,
in that the projections only cover the ARC Planning Area. The fore-
casts incorporate estimates of future employment, housing and land use
into a comprehensive analysis of population growth into the year 2000.
These arrays of forecasts were derived from "An Economic Base Study of the
Atlanta Region,1' published 1975. Three levels of population were developed
-------
based on numerous alternatives in a Regional Development Plan (RDP)
for alternative transportation and land use plans, which were allo-
cated with the assistance of the EMPIRIC - Activity Allocation Model,
and are: average RDP, alternative E and alternative W (see Table 29).
The average RDP (Cycle 2) projections were derived from the model pro-
gram and then averaged from a high, low and most likely forecasts, so
that it would not show a bias towards any RDP and does not relate back
to any potential policy. The alternative E population projections are
related to the final distribution associated with the adopted RDP.
The alternative W is based on the adopted RDP policies, the same as
alternative E, and assumes that the same forecasts for the year 1980,
but beyond that alternative W is associated with a low population
projection.
OBERS population projections were accomplished on a county-wide basis.
The projections displayed on Table 29 were based on the average annual
growth rate established from the OBERS projections in the ten (10) coun-
ties composing the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. These average annual
rates of growth were imposed on the 1970 Census of population for
Water Quality Management Units and census tracts within the Yellow
River Sub-basin, as shown on Table 30. In areas of the Basin outside
the ARC Planning Area these projections were used as an average annual
rate of growth imposed on the 1970 Census base.
To determine which projections are the most realistic, the most recent
United States Census update for 1975 was employed. The data was dis-
tributed on a county-wide basis, so an average annual rate of growth
was developed and imposed on the 1970 Census data.
As indicated in Table 29 , the population base of the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin is projected to expand rapidly to the year 2000. The
South River Sub-basin will continue to be the heaviest populated basin;
however, the rate of growth experienced in the Yellow River Sub-basin
is projected to be much greater than the South and Alcovy Sub-basins.
The growth rate of the Alcovy River Sub-basin, while smaller than that of
the Yellow, also is greater than that of the South River Sub-basin.
Some areas in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are expected to more than
triple by the year 2000. These areas of extreme rapid growth are mainly
located in the South and Yellow River Sub-basins. (Figures 20a,20b,and 20c
Population Densities by Census Tract for 1980, 1990 and 2000.)
Table 30, which shows a breakdown of the Yellow River Basin by census
tract as well as WQMU, provides a better insight as to the exact location
of this increased population.
The greatest amount of growth is located just over the Gwinnett County
line and in the portion of Rockdale County north of the Yellow River in
WQMU #0407, as indicated in Table
-------
Census tract 233 in WQMU #0406 in DeKalb County is expected to increase
approximately fivefold. The majority of this population is currently
centered around Lithonia, which will continue to be the most densely
populated area in this census tract in the year 2000.
The area located just over the DeKalb County line in Gwinnett County
(Census tract 504 - WQMU #0406) will also be a rapid growth area due
to the accessibility provided by 1-85 from Atlanta.
n>
V\ •
/O
¦i \ o
Y\n
c^>
bcT
3>
(V)
<4
cr
I"
Ac
-------
TABLE 29
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
POPULATION PROJECTIONS BY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT UNIT
(Population in Thousands)
WQMU
South River
0401
0402
0403
0404
0405
Yellow River
0406
0407
0408
0403
Alcovy River
0410
0411
0412
Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin
ARC ARC
Census ALT.E&W RDP OBERS ALT.E ALT.W RDP
1970 1975 1980 1980 1980 1990 1990 1990
OBERS ALT.E
1990 2000
ARC
ALT.W
2000
RDP
2000
425.1
316.4
56.5
30.6
9.9
11.7
80.3
43.8
16.4
14.5
5.6
27.0
16.9
9.2
0.9
532.4
^65?>>
541.8 536.6
346.6
371.5 378.4
61.9
75.4 67.8
33.5
52.6 52.4
10.9
21.5 22.1
12.8
20.8 15.9
1 n\
Icol
176.2 179.5
48.0
104.6 108.6
17.9
36.2 34.1
15.8
28.6 30.0
6.2
6.8 6.8
39.2 39.1
18.5
26.5 26.4
10.1
11.7 11.7
1.0
1.0 1.0
583.2
757.2 755.2
397.1
70.9
38.4
12.4
14.7
101.9
55.6
20.8
18.4
7.1
34.4
21.5
11.7
1.0
461.2
88.3
84.0
32.3
30.6
413.3
81.4
75.0
29.0
27.8
47.9
.265 3^ 240.0
133.4
53.0
lO-H'O
669.8 !^h§^ 917.7
to AH
-V * U A\
t
651.9
440.2
82.1
64.9
35.6
29.1
285.5
162.7
60.9
54.0
7.9
54.1
38.2
14.7
1.2
991.5
- jOi
670.7
499.2
89.1
48.3
15.6
18.5
127.7
69.6
26.1
23.1
8.9
42.9
27.0
14.7
1.2
845.3
515.0
106.8
130.8
48.6
44.1
385.8
212.8
91.9
72.0
9.1
69.6
52.8
15.4
1.4
715.5
444.6
92.0
102.8
39.7
36.4
310.2
168.2
74.1
58.8
9.1
62.1
45.3
15.4
1.4
811.7
493.6
102.0
96.8
77.5
41.8
421.3
236.4
96.8
79.0
9.1
71.5
54.7
15.4
1.4
OBERS
2000
T
"1-wg-
I 60^
(OC^
- -gfi
- 'Ofl fc
805.8
599.8
107.1
58.0
18.7
22.2
153.3
83.5
31.3
27.8
10.7
49.2
32.4
15.4
1.4
841.3 -130p>7^. 1087.8 1304.5 1008.3
~ — \m:o-
G-tV\
-
""lib
' ' 9
-------
County
Census
Tract WQMU
Gwi nnett
- 502
, 503
. 504
505
DeKalb
219
233
218.01
218.02
f)
T A B L E 30 ; T
YELLOW RIVER SUBBASIN
POPULATION PROJECTIONS BY CENSUS TRACTS AND WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT UNITj^
(Population in Thousands)
ARC
Census ALT.E&W RDP OBERS ALT.E
1970 1975 1980 1980 1980 1990
AfiC
ALT. W
1990
RDP
1990
OBERS
1990
ARC
ALT.E ALT.W
2000 2000
OBERS
3.1
2.9
17,9
9.6
4.7
0.4
0.8
4.4
0406 43.8 48.0 104.6 108.6 55.6 147.9 133.4 162.7 69.6 212.8 168.2 236.4
3.4
3.2
19,6
10.5
5.2
.4
.9
4.8
6.0
7.8
53.4
16.7
13.2
0.8
1.0
5.7
6.0
7.8
54.7
17.6
14.5
1.0
1.0
6.0
3.9
3.7
22.7
12.2
15.2
11.2
64.0
28.8
19.2
4.9/
4.6 ^
28.5 \
15.3
7.5
0.6
1.2
7.0
22.9
14.3
97.1
^41.1
22.1
2.6
1.4
11.3
18.3,
12.5
A
25.6
14.8
72.4\ 109.4
33.5
19.0
2.1
1.3
9.1
45.6
23.3
2.8
1.4
13.5
83.5
5.9
5.5
34.2
18.4
9.0
0.7
1.4
8.4
Gwinett
0407 16.4 17.9 36.2 34.1 20.8 59.2
53.0
60.9
26.1
91.9
74.1
96.8
31.3
505
4.2
4.6
10.0
10.6
5.3
17.2
15.2
18.8
6.7 |
24.6
20.1 ^
29.8
27.4
8.0
507
6.2
6.8
17.3
14.9
7.9
25.1
22.5
23.8
9.9
\37.47
36.4
11.9
Rockdale
601
2.9
3.1
5.3
5.0
3.7
13.0
11.4
14.4
4.6
25.6
19.9
28.7
5.5
Walton
2.3
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.8
3.6
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.3
Newton
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.6
-------
TP E (c ud(
0408 14.5
15.8
28.6
30.0
18.4
50.3
45.7
54.0
23.1
72.0
58.8
79.0
27.8
DeKalb
233
3.6
3.9
7.6
9.1
4.6
17.0
15.3
18.8
5.8
23.6
18.5
25.2
7.0
Rockdale
602
0.2
0.2
2.0
2.2
0.2
2.3
2.1
2.9
0.2
3.3
2.7
4.1
0.2
603
7.0
7.7
14.5
14.2
8.9
25.7
23.0
27.0
11.2
38.9
31.4
43.5
13.5
Newton
3.7
4.0
4.5
4.5
4.7
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.9
6.2
6.2
6.2
7.1
0409 5.6
6.2
6.8
6.8
7.1
7.9
7.9
7.9
8.9
9.1
9.1
9.1
10.7
Walton
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.4
1.2
1 .2
1.2
1 .7
Newton
4.7
5.2
5.8
5.8
6.0
6.8
6.8
6.8
7.5
7.9
7.9
7.9
9.0
Yellow
River
Subbasin
80.3 87,9 176.2 179.5 1Q1.9 265.3
"SI 27.7
385.8
L -
240.0
310.2
421.3
1'53.3
Source: u.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970, Census of Population and Housing; Atlanta, Georgia
SMSA PHC(1)-14; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Estimates of the Population of Georgia
Counties and Metropolitan Areas, July 1, 1974 and 1975; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Atlanta Regional
Commission Water Demand and Wastewater Report Averaged RDP Cycle 2, RDP Alternate EJ, and RDP Alternate W,
January 15, 1976; E.P.A. Atlanta, Georgia; Population By County Historic (1940-1970) and Projected (1980-2020)
Region IV, 1972.
-------
VIV.V.*.*JV.\V.'.\VV.V.W
¦siiii
¦ M^r* • «% a • a a • iV»Wri • « •
.W.V.V.%%V.%V.'.V.Vt%
VAVJTAVUW.'.V
1980 FORECAST
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
CENSUS TRACT
Z.OI - OVER g
1.01 -2.00
.51 - 1.00 g
LU
.50 a
POPULATION DENSITIES fff
LJ/ce
JACKSOM
FIGURE 20a
-------
mm
•V.V,
LOG^NV!
wnu
%v.v
V.V
w.y
«.v
vTtWLUWN
V RH/ER
1990 FORECAST
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
POPULATION DENSITIES BY
CENSUS TRACT
2.0 -OVER g
'-0/ -aoo
*'i* ~ -5' - <.00
LlI
_l
a.
O
UJ
a.
FIGURE 20b
LAKE
JACKSON
-------
K'XOvWrvX'XOSX^vX
.VJiV.V.V.W.V.'.
x-w-x-x-x-x+x-x-xv:
HV.V.^V A7«VMVA%SVi*iVi,iViWyi?i*l
•v,W»\-*VA,WAWwXwX«'X*«»y
LOG^NVILLE\
mmmzwm
/• walnut .
slJ^RSeV
0V1NGTQN
2000 FORECAST
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
POPULATION DENSITIES BY
CENSUS TRACT
2.01-OVER g
<
Hi '0,-2.00
;yeiXow'\
V RiyER\
]
Ui
.51 - 1.00 g
LU
0 — .50 Q.
-IGURE 20c
JACKSOft
-------
Projected Economic Conditions
The economy in the Atlanta Region will be shaped in part by past and
future growth trends in employment, income, population and such pro-
spective developments as the performance of the national economy, the
impact of technology and the law of supply and demand.
Projected economic conditions in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin were
obtained from the OBERS projections developed by the United States
Water Resources Council for the United States and the SMSAs. Economic
growth trends were expressed in constant dollars, based on the value
of the dollar in 1967. Through the use of personal income, the growth
of the purchasing power of the region and real growth can be projected,
leaving out inflation fluctuations that have a tendency to distort
real growth patterns.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is strongly influenced by income ten-
dencies of the Atlanta SMSA. Therefore, as in the analysis of past
currency flows, projected income trends for the SMSA will be assumed to
be the same for the Basin. As such, Table 31 was developed to show
the real growth in constant 1967 dollars for the Atlanta SMSA.
OBERS projections for the Atlanta region show a steady grov/th rate
from 1970 to 2000. The largest share of the total personal income in
1970 was in wholesale and retail trade at 21.9 percent; however, by
2000 it is projected that its share will be reduced to 18 percent.
Services are projected to gain a larger share of the incomes from 14
percent in 1970 to 18 percent in 2000. Other nonfarm industrial sec-
tors that are to improve their share are finance, insurance, real es-
tate, state and local government sources, while all the others will have
their shares reduced.
The average annual rate of growth of the Atlanta region industrial
sectors incomes is displayed in Table 32, which relates the rates to
United States and Georgia's rates of 1967 constant dollar income growth.
The Atlanta SMSA is projected by OBERS to outperform the State and the
United States in personal income and earnings from 1970 to 1990. For
the period from 1990 to 2000, Atlanta and Georgia are projected to
grow at equal rates, but still outperform the United States. Nonfarm
industrial sectors that are to outperform the State from 1970 to 1990
in the Atlanta SMSA are transportation, communications, utilities,
wholesale and retail trade, services and government. The construction
industry in the SMSA will grow faster than the State until 1980 when
it will slow to that of Georgia's average annual rate of income growth
in that sector. Finance, insurance, real estate and manufacturing are
to grow in close alignment with the State of Georgia projected income
growth trends to the year 2000.
-------
TABLE 31
PROJECTED EARNINGS BY INDUSTRIAL SECTORS
ATLANTA SMSA, 1970 - 2000
(Thousands of 1967 Dollars)
SECTOR 1970 1980 1990 2000
Agriculture, Forestry &
Fisheries
Mining & Quarrying
Construction
Manufacturing
Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Miscellaneous
Transportation, Communi-
cations & Utilities
Wholesale and Retail Trade 1,163,986
Finance, Insurance &
Real Estate
Services
Government
Federal
State and Local
Total Earnings
Total Personal Income
6,899
8,600^S ^
8,600^
9,500
3,919
7,700(s)
9,500(s)
11,700
280,693
502,400
744,000
1,058,300
988,225
1,453,500
2,080,800
2,870,800
—
739,000
1,058,300
1,457,300
—
588,300
818,400
1,111,000
—
125,400
203,300
301,800
559,949
956,800
1,456,100
2,128,800
163,986
1,856,900
2,709,000
3,878,100
367,700
657,800
1,066,400
1,693,300
723,834
1,339,800
2,314,500
3,785,100
330,207
423,100
634,300
902,600
375,067
645,600
1,074,500
1,694,900
803,628
7,852,700
12,098,100
18,033,600
319,106
8,719,900
13,790,600
21,013,800
(s)
(s)
Note: Data may not add to higher level totals due to rounding of figures,
(s) Denotes sector too small to project
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Natural Resources
Economics Division for the U.S. Water Resources Council, 1972 OBERS Projections,
Volume 5, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 1974.
-------
TABLE 32
PROJECTED AVERAGE ANNUAL RATES OF GROWTH'BY INDUSTRIAL SECTORS 1970 - 2000
(PERCENTAGE RATES OF 1967 CONSTANT DOLLAR INCOME GROWTH)
SECTOR 1970 - 1980 1980 - 1990 1990 - 2000
US
STATE
ATLANTA
SMSA
US
STATE
ATLANTA
SMSA
US STATE
ATLANTA
SMSA
Agriculture, For-
es try,Fi sheries
.75
1.75
2.00^s ^
.75
1.25
(s)
1.25
1.50
i.oo(s)
Mining/Quarrying
1.50
3.50
7.00(s)
1.25
2.50
2.00(S)
1.25
2.00
2.00^
Construction
4.00
5.50
6.00
3.00.
4.00
4.00
3.00
3.50
3.50
Transp, Communi-
cation,Utilities
4.00
5.00
5.50
3.00
4.00
4.50
3.50
4.00
4.00
Wholesale & Re-
tail Trade
3.50
4.50
5.00
3.00
3.50
4.00
3.00
3.50
3.50
Finance, Insurance
& Real Estate
5.50
6.00
6.00
4.00
5.00
5.00
4.00
4.50
4.50
Services
6.00
6.00
6.50
4.50
5.00
5.50
4.50
5.00
5.00
Government
4.00
3.50
4.00
4.00
4.50
5.00
4.00
4.00
4.50
Total Earnings
4.00
4.50
5.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
3.50
4.00
4.00
Total Personal
Income
4.00
4.50
5.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
3.50
4.00
4.00
(s) Denotes sector too small to project
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Natural Resources
Economics Division for the U.S. Water Resources Council, 1972 OBERS Projections, Volume
j, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, and Volume 4, States, 1974.
-------
B.2 LAND USE RESOURCES
Present General Land Use
This section deals with a description of existing land use within the
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin and the extent and effectiveness of current
land use planning in the Basin by all levels of government as well as
a description of the administrative and regulatory land use controls
currently in effect.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin contains approximately 1400 square
miles of which only nineteen percent is classified as developed. Of
the remaining eighty-one percent, seventy-seven percent is classified
as agricultural and forest land. The highest concentration of developed
land is to be found in the South River Sub-basin which also contains
the greatest amount of agricultural and forest lands. As can be ex-
pected, the greatest percentage of developed land in the South River
Sub-basin i:s found in WQMU #0401, closest to the Atlanta Core. In
terms of specific land uses, it can be noted from Table 33 that over
seventy-one percent of the Basin's industrial/commercial use is situ-
ated in the South River Sub-basin and again is concentrated in WQMU
#0401. The next highest concentration of developed land and industrial/
commercial land use occurs in the upper reaches of the Yellow River Sub-
basin, specifically in WQMU #0406. The existing land use pattern,
Figure 21 , is the result of historic growth pattern influences namely
utility and transportation availability as well as place of residence
related to the employment opportunities of the central city. Although
the latter still influences residential growth patterns, existing resi-
dential use within the Basin indicates that with improved transporta-
tion systems, place of residence is selected more in terms of socio-
economic characteristics of an area than close proximity to place of
work. The existing network of interstate and other highways within
the Basin has contributed to the increased development activity in the
Yellow and Alcovy River Sub-basins.
Within the Yellow River Sub-basin, the highest percentage of developed
land area occurs in WQMU #0406, in the northwest section of the Sub-
basin. However, high concentrations of developed areas are found in the
other WQMUs, which compose the remainder of the Sub-basin. Within
WQMU #0407, the Interstate 85 and U. S. 78 corridors have helped to
promote concentrations of growth in the communities of Lawrenceville,
Snellville and Loganville, while the Interstate 20 corridor has pro-
moted increased growth in WQMUs #0408 and #0409, specifically around
the communities of Lithonia, Conyers and Covington. As can be noted
from the materials presented pertaining to population trends, the
upper reaches of the Yellow River Sub-basin, namely those portions
of WQMUs #0406 and #0407 within Gwinnett County, have experienced
significant growth in terms of both residential and industrial/com-
mercial uses.
-------
TABLE 33
EXISTING LAND USE - RESPECTIVELY SOUTH, YELLOW AND ALCOVY RIVER SUB-BASINS
ACRES
SOUTH RIVER
Land Use Categories Water Quality Management Units
Type II, USGS 0401 0402 0403 0404 0405 Total
11 Residential
32,758.76
7,396.62
9,468.95
5,675.00
3,454.91
58,754.24
12 Commercial
6,232.93
2,407.09
1,912.92
430.41
1,312.99
12,296.34
13 Industrial
940.52
557.94
223.17
47.82
31.88
1,801.33
14 Tranp/Comm/Utility
1,896.98
669.52
1,307.16
781.11
1,153.58
5,808.35
15 Indust/Comm Complexes
3,044.73
621.70
31.88
79.71
-0-
3,778.02
16 Mixed Urban/Built-up Land
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
17 Other Urban/Built-up Land
3,889.60
860.81
478.23
637.64
207.23
6,073.51
Qateqory TOTAL
47,763.52
12,513.68
13,422.31
7,651.69
6,160.59
88,511.79
21 Cropland & Pasture
3,618.61
8,592.20
20,946.47
21,882.64
35,113.74
90,153.66
22 Orchard,Groves, Vinyards
15.94
-0-
812.99
-0-
701.40
1,530.33
23 Confined Feeding Operations
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
63.76
63.76
24 Other Agricultural Land
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
Cateqorv TOTAL
3.634.55
8,592.20
21.759.46
21.882.64
35.878.90
91,747,75
41 Deciduous Forest Land
3,953.37
7,029.20
14,617.90
7,556.03
14,190.58
47,347.86
42 Evergreen Forest Land
7,444.45
5,356.18
4,256.25
7,029.98
15,370.22
39,457.08
43 Mixed Forest Land
14,299.08
11,828.22
23,241.98
20,111.36
34,390.92
103,871.56
Cateqorv TOTAL
25.696.90
24.214.38
42.116.13
34.697.37
63.951.72
190.676.50
51 Streams & Canals
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
52 Lakes
31.88
79.91
15.94
15.94
31.88
175.35
53 Reservoirs
541.99
318.82
2,470.86
1 ,099.93
2,227.46
6,834,41
Cateqorv TOTAL
573.87
398.53
2.486.80
1.115.87
2.259.34
6.834.41
61 Forested Wetlands
-0-
-0-
111.59
-0-
2,147.75
2,259.34
62 Non-Forested Wetlands
-0-
-0-
95.65
-0-
111.59
207.24
Cateqorv Total
-0-
-0-
207.24
-0-
2.259.34
2.466.58
74 Bare Exposed Rock
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
75 Strip Mines,Quar/Gravel Pit
95.65
-0-
334.76
-0-
-0-
430.41
76 Transitional Areas
4,112.78
1,466.57
3,012.85
1,578.16
3,350.70
13,521.06
Cateqorv Total
4.208.43
1.466.57
3.347.61
1.578.16
3.350.70
13.951.47
SOUTH RIVER TOTAL (Acres)
82,877.27
47,185.36
83,339.55
66,925.73
113,860.59
394,188.50
(Sq.Miles)
129.50
73.73
130.22
104.57
177.91
615.93
-------
TABLE 33 (continued)
Page 2
YELLOW RIVER
Land Use Category Water Quality Management Units
Type II USGS 0406 0407 0408 0409 TOTAL
11 Residential
15,409.12
8,257.44
5,977.80
5,802.52
35,446.88
12 Commercial
1,163.69
828.93
765.17
749.70
3,507.49
13 Industrial
63.76
63.76
255.06
366.64
749.22
14 Transp/Comm/Utility
1,811.33
143.37
541.99
446.35
2,943.14
15 Indust/Comm Complexes
797.05
-0-
79.71
-0-
876.76
16 Mixed Urban/Built-up Land
31.88
-0-
-0-
-0-
31.88
17 Other Urban/Built-up Land
1,450.63
127.53
539.82
350.70
2,518.68
Cateqorv TOTAL
20,727.46
9,421 .13
8,209.55
7,782.91
46,134.08
21 Cropland & Pasture
11,286.23
33,348.57
9,739.95
11,766.64
66,141.39
22 Orchard,Grove,Vinyard
-0-
79.71
-0-
-0-
79.71
23 Confined Feeding Operations
79.71
95.65
-0-
47.82
223.18
24 Other Agricultural Land
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
Category TOTAL
11,365.94
33,523.93
9,739.95
11,814.46
66,444.28
41 Deciduous Forest Land
7,444.45
6,201.05
1,323.10
733.29
15,701.89
42 Evergreen Forest Land
17,348.09
13,135.38
5,611.23
7,428.51
43,523.21
43 Mixed Forest Land
29,745.91
39,007.63
16,371.41
16,313.12
101,438.07
Category TOTAL
54,538.45
58,344.06
23,305.74
24,474.92
160,663.17
51 Streams & Canals
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
52 Lakes
-0-
111.59
-0-
-0-
111 .59
53 Reservoirs
1,466.57
1,179.63
781.11
541.99
3,969.30
Category TOTAL
1,466.57
1,291.22
781.11
541.99
4,080.89
61 Forested Wetlands
-0-
286.94
-0-
223.17
510.11
62 Non-Forested Wetlands
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
Category TOTAL
-0-
286.94
-0-
223.17
510.11
74 Bare Exposed Rock
366.64
-0-
-0-
-0-
366.64
75 Strip Mines.Quar.Gravel Pits
446.35
31.88
-0-
-0-
478.23
76 Transitional Areas
3,076.61
3,251.96
908.64
876.76
8,113.97
Category TOTAL
3,889.60
3,283.84
908.64
876.76
8,958.84
YELLOW RIVER TOTAL (Acres) 91,988.02 106,151.12 42,944.99 45,707.21 286,791.34
(Sq? _Miles) 143.73 165.86 67.10 71.42 448.11
-------
Page 3
TABLE 33 (continued)
ALCOVY RIVER LAKE JACKSON SUB-BASIN
Land Use Category WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT UNITS
Type II, USGS 0410 0411 TOTAL 0412
11 Residential
4,490.40
2,570.93
6,980.33
1 ,286.94
12 Commercial
594.17
241.29
835.46
63.76
13 Industrial
311.00
15.94
326.94
15.94
14 Transp,Commerc,Util ity
279.00
336.94
615.94
143.47
15 Indust,Commercial Complex -0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
16 Mixed Urban/Built-up Land -0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
17 Other Urban/Built-up Land 679.17
-0-
679.17
-0-
Category TOTAL
6,272.74
3,165.10
9,437.84
1,510.00
21 Cropland & Pasture
43,763.58
7,357.01
51,120.59
5,522.96
22 Orchards,Groves,Vinyard
-0-
79.71
79.71
31 .88
23 Confined Feeding Operation -0-
143.47
143.47
63.76
24 Other Agricultural Land
-0-
63.76
63.76
15.94
Category TOTAL
43,763.58
7,643.95
51,407.53
5,634.54
41 Deciduous Forest Land
12,521.06
3,049.16
15,570.22
510.11
42 Evergreen Forest Land
32,735.79
2,287.76
35,023.55
2,817.27
43 Mixed Forest Land
38,596.22
21,327.59
59,923.81
7,260.53
Category TOTAL
83,853.07
26,664.51
110,517.58
10,587.91
51 Streams and Canals
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
52 Lakes
47.82
-0-
47.82
-0-
53 Reservoirs
789.82
2,183.99
2,973.81
7,099.50
Category TOTAL
837.64
2,183.99
3,021.63
7,099.50
61 Forested Wetlands
5,080.90
2,488.34
7,569.24
2,233.17
62 Non-Forested Wetlands
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
Category TOTAL
5,080.90
2,488.34
7,569.24
2,233.17
74 Bare Exposed Rock
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
75 Strip Mines,Quarry,Gravel
Pit
-0-
127.53
127.53
-0-
76 Transitional Areas
334.76
844.87
1,179.63
723.17
Category TOTAL
334.76
972.40
1,307.16
723.17
TOTAL (Acres) 140,142.69
43,118.29
183,260.98
27,788.40
("Sq. Miles)
218.98
67.37
286.34
43.42
-------
•i
N
/
,JACKSON
LAKE
W:
URBAN MIXED
DEVELOPING SUBURBS
RECREATIONAL
UNDEVELOPED
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
EXISTING LAND USE
FIGURE 21
-------
TABLE 33A
SUMMARY - EXISTING LAND USE - UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
TOTALS(acres) (%)
11 Residential 102,468.39
12 Commercial 16,703.05
13 Industrial 2,893.43
14 Transportation, Commercial
& Utilities 9,510.90
15 Industrial/Commercial Complexes 4,654.78
16 Mixed Urban/Built-up Land 31.88
17 Other Urban/Built-up Land 9,271.36
Urban TOTAL 145,593.79 (16.3%)
21 Cropland and Pasture 212,938.60
22 Orchard,Groves, Vineyard 1,721.63
23 Confined Feeding Operations 494.17
24 Other Agricultural Land 79.70
Agriculture TOTAL 215,234.10 (24.1%)
41 Deciduous Forest Land 79,130.08
42 Evergreen Forest Land 120,821.11
43 Mixed Forest Land 272,493.97
Forest TOTAL 472,444.66 (53%)
51 Streams and Canals -0-
52 Lakes 334.76
53 Reservoirs 20,701.67
Water TOTAL 21,036.43 (2.4%)
61 Forested Wetland 12,571.86
62 Non-Forested Wetland 207.24
Wetland TOTAL 12,779.10 (1.4%)
74 Bare Exposed Rock 366.64
75 Strip Mines, Quarries &
Gravel Pits 1,036.17
76 Transitional Areas 23,537.83
Exposed Land TOTAL 24,940.64 (2.8%)
GRAND TOTAL (Acres) 892,029.22 (100%)
(Sq.Mile) 1,393.80
Lake Jackson 7.42
1,400.22
-------
Within the South River Sub-basin, as previously mentioned, the highest
concentrations of development occurs in WQMU #0401 and #0402 in DeKalb
County. The growth influence of U.S. 41, U.S. 23, and 1-75 south from
Atlanta is readily visible in the corridor which includes the commun-
ities of Forest Park, Lake City, Morrow and Jonesboro in the westerly
portions of WQMUs #0402 and^0403 in DeKalb and Clayton Counties, respec-
tively. At the present time, the influence of the 1-75 corridor, which
continues to the south and east, has not generated significant growth
in the southern reaches of the South River Sub-basin, specifically
WQMU #0405. In addition, the 1-20 corridor, which forms the northerly
boundary of WQMU #0404, has not influenced additional growth in the
South River Sub-basin, since the communities of Lithonia and Conyers
are situated on the north side of Interstate 20 in the Yellow River
Sub-basin.
Within the Alcovy River Sub-basin, existing developed land uses are
concentrated in WQMU #0410 in the communities of Lawrenceville, Logan-
ville and Monroe, and in WQMU #0411 in the communities of Covington and
Mansfield.
Again, the influence of the existing transportation network is obvious
with U. S. 29 serving Lawrenceville and U. S. 78 serving Loganville and
Monroe. In addition, one of the few north-south highways in the Sub-
basin, Georgia 81, provides connection between Covington/Oxford and
Loganville where Georgia 20 continues to provide connection to Law-
renceville. Existing residential development, although not intense,
exists along this corridor in WQMU #0410. The majority of developed
land in #WQMU 0411 is found in East Covington and in the coiranunity of
Mansfield.
The pattern of existing land use within the Yellow River Sub-basin has
followed the historic influences of transportation system expansions
and improvements. Other influences, however, are also very evident
and relate to a large degree to the development policies of counties and
communities within the Sub-basin. Although future land use plans and
implementation regulatory systems such as zoning ordinances, sub-divi-
sion regulations and the like have been adopted within the Sub-basin,
the policy of allowing septic tank development on minimal sized lots
has encouraged a degree of residential land use sprawl. In addition,
the practice of water service extensions without regard for other ser-
vices or considerations further encourages scattered development.
Land Use Control Regulations
The Upper Ocmulgee Basin currently falls within the jurisdiction of
four Area Planning and Development Commissions: (1) the Atlanta Re-
gional Commission, (2) the Mcintosh Trail APDC, (3) Northeast Georgia
APDC, and (4) the Oconee APDC. Each of these APDCs maintains a perma-
nent staff for service to the local participating units of government.
-------
They are also charged with conducting planning and development ac-
tivities for all of their constituent governments and further, for
coordinating regional programs with state plans and activities. The
State of Georgia is unique in this regard as being one of the original
states to create Area Planning and Development Commission jurisdictions.
A survey of ten (10) counties and ten (10) selected incorporated ci-
ties indicates that the full range of basic planning and plan imple-
mentation systems are in existence and in use. All governmental units
surveyed have adopted new or revised land use plans including popula-
tion and economic analysis and thoroughfare plans. With two exceptions,
all county plans have been adopted within the past five years and one
plan is under consideration. In most cases,. Area Planning and Develop-
ment Conmissions (APDC) have provided basic plans for their participa-
ting counties. Incorporated cities, like the counties, have complete
planning documentation, all adopted within the past five years with only
three exceptions.
Not all municipalities or counties within the Basin provide full-time
staff for the conduct of planning activities. A few cities utilize
the services of consultant planners to meet their needs, while certain
of the counties provide for full-time professional personnel on a
continuing basis. More particularly, within the Yellow River Sub-
basin, planning assistance at the municipal level is typically con-
tracted to consultants or to the respective Planning and Development
Commissions under their local assistance programs. At the county
level, the counties of Fulton, Clayton, DeKalb and Gwinnett maintain
full-time professional staffs for their planning activities.
The range of services provided by these respective county planning
departments varies, as does their staffing, which is determined largely
by population. The counties of Fulton and DeKalb, comprising the
largest population levels, offer the most extensive planning services
and professional staff. The next tier of planning capabilities re-
sides in the counties of Clayton and Gwinnett, each of which maintains
a small staff for land use control regulations and for general planning
activities. Finally, the remaining counties rely on the services pro-
vided by the respective Area Planning and Development Commissions under
their local assistance programs to meet their planning needs.
As a general statement, Area Planning and Development Commissions
are typically supported by a combination of local funds and state and
federal grant programs. To a much lesser degree, county planning
activities are dependent upon federal or state grants and more heavily
dependent upon the general tax revenues for financing of their pro-
grams. City governments more-often rely upon general revenues to
support their full-time staffs, if available, or upon federal grant
programs such as HUD 701 or Community Development funding for the con-
duct of their planning activities.
-------
Whittle
<« ilker
CHMtoog* / Cordon
COQSA
rioyd
NOFTH p.
RGIA
FIGURE 22
GEORGIA
AREA PLANNING a DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSIONS
A. P. a D.C.
Stephens
• VAULEY
ptck«o* ¦
1
Foriyth J
ATLANTA
Cobb
Jacktoa \ Maditea
Of J* thorp*
WtLka* \ Lucola
'GEOtlGIA *
\ Gr«*o* | TaU*/*rro
CHATTA-
Juptr
Spaidiaf / Burt*
)OpHEE
FL NT
UMfN 1 lOMI
mid;
Wa#hlngiea
CENTRAL
I Burk*
"savannah
iLOWlER
Muicogt*
Ehattahoocheel Mario*
Hom*«o» r BUckUy
kll«r
cpmrm-
FLINT
Kas v
CUT
Dooly
P«lMkt >
VUcm
(EART OF
sGEORSU
miitoii
Bryu
MAHA
Calheua OMfiMfty
Early
GEORG
Miller
Jtff Dovi*
CoIf** ] BMM
Coiqum
Grady
COASTAL
Brook* 3 I nwadu
PLA(N
)UTHEj
war*
[ORGIA
Ofcym
-------
TABLE 34
FUNDING HISTORY - 701's - UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
z <_>
z
O i—'
<
z
>-< s:
CD LU
1
_i
LU
o
1— o
2: oo
ZZ
n_
oo
CD
»—i
< 2
l—l ZD
CD
LU
ZD
z:
OO
—I O
1—
13
C£.
•—<
1 t—<
zd o
l/"> Q
O
LU
ZD
Q
z
CQ >
D- LU
l—» Z
cr
en
1—
Z
o
zd i-h
o
X <
-
LU
>-
t—
i—i*
1— •
1 4
i—
~—I Q_
IT
¦—i
z o
:z>
_i
ZD _l
s:
i—i
•Si LU
2:
o
s: >
o
BUTTS
1973
R/76
1972
!
CLAYTON
1972
X
R
R/L
R
R
DE KALB
1972
X
R/L
R/L
R
R/L
FULTON
1972
X
R/L
R/L
R
R/L
GWINNETT
1972
X
R
R/L
R
R
HENRY
1973
1972
R
R/1974
1974
R
L/1974
1973
JASPER
1975
R/74
R/74
1970
NEWTON
1972
R 76
R/1975
ROCKDALE ,
?
R
R/L
R
R
WALTON
1973
1973
1967
1973
1973
1973
1974
1967
R/1976
1975
1973
R - Regional NOTE:
L - Local
Source: Georgia Bureau of Community Affairs
Table indicates 701 funding, not necessarily representative
of total planning programs.
-------
For those programs typically dependent upon federal or state grants
the funding source used most extensively in recent years has been
the Department of Housing and Urban Development 701 Funding for
Comprehensive Community Planning. Table 34 indicates the funding his-
tory of 701 funds for the respective communities within the Basin and
whether that activity was conducted by a local unit of government or
a regional planning agency such as an Area Planning and Development
Commission.
Land Use Regulatory Systems
In regard to implementation of regulatory systems, all units of gov-
ernment adopted zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations as part
of their total planning package. As in the case of land use plans,
most of the regulatory systems have been adopted in the past five
years. All governmental units have adopted the Southern Standard
Building Code and maintain same with current amendments. Generally,
only the more urban counties and cities have adopted Housing Codes,
although the communities of Conyers and Covington have Housing Codes
and Enforcement Programs.
Water and sewer plans are only barely evident, although most govern-
mental units report anticipated participation in 201 Facilities Programs.
Figure 23 delineates 201 facility program areas and Table 35 indicates
the status of present programs. Other plan implementation regulatory
systems such as Flood Control, Soil Conservation and Solid Waste Man-
agement exist in but a few units. Most units are awaiting specific
delineation of flood plains prior to adoption of regulations. Soil
Conservation, Sediment Control and similar ordinances are in process
in many units.
Most of the local units of governments, both municipal and county, of-
fer a standard range of land use regulations. This standard range may
be characterized as a package that includes the following:
1. Zoning
2. Subdivision Regulations
3. Building Codes
The degree and effectiveness of enforcement varies, primarily in rela-
tionship to the.number and professional qualification of enforcement
personnel. The larger county jurisdictions lying within the Basin,
such as Fulton, DeKalb, Clayton and Gwinnett counties, maintain pro-
fessional planning departments, and it is in these jurisdictions that
the second generation of land use controls are typically being applied.
This second generation of controls may be characterized as including
-------
I
$
_r "
/ H ©
©\
\
/
HcOow»nH
0
i JACKS ON
LAKE
\
1 YELLOW RIVER
2 SOUTH RIVER
3 ROCKDALE
4 COTTON INDIAN CREEK
5 NEWTON
6 LOGANVILLE
T MONROE
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
201 FACILITIES PLANS
FIGURE 23
-------
the following elements:
1. Drainage and storm water retention
2. Soil and sedimentation control
3. Natural features preservation
4. Site plan review and approval
While there are exceptions to this general aggregation, such as within
municipalities, this second generation of land use controls are most
commonly applied in the more urbanized counties within the Study Area.
For example, Gwinnett County was the first local unit of government in
Georgia and the fourth county aovernment in the United States to imple-
ment and formally establish a soil and sedimentation control program.
Subsequently, the more urbanized and adjacent counties of DeKalb, Clay-
ton and Fulton have placed such regulations into their inventory. De-
Kalb County was a leader in establishing storm water retention require-
ments for all new developments within its jurisdiction. Subsequently,
adjacent jurisdictions enacted similar requirements. Fulton County
was the leader within the Study Area for site plan review and condi-
tional zoning, allowing the local planning staffs to require extensive
detailing of proposed developments and their implication on adjacent
jurisdictions. This program has subsequently been duplicated in
other jurisdictions.
A third generation of land use controls has recently evolved in Geor-
gia through a greater urban consciousness on the part of the state
legislature. These controls concentrate on natural features and sig-
nificantly insert the broader jurisdictional control of state govern-
ment into local planning decisions. Included within this third gener-
ation of regulations are:
1. The designation of metropolitan transportation and
planning organizations with their attendant require-
ment to provide revolving five-year transportation
improvement programs.
2. Airport systems planning by regions of the State.
3. Basin-wide water resource planning under Public
Law 92-500 Section 303 (e).
4. State-wide soil and sedimentation control require-
ments authorizing local units of government to es-
tablish their own soil and sedimentation control
requirements consistent with state law, but in the ev-
ent that such ordinances are not adopted by local
units, the State assumes such power.
-------
REGULATUKY S'taitMS
TAI
in uPPLk
35
UlMUuull- R1
vct\ BAbin
Exi st
Land
Use
Future
Land
Use
Zoning
Ordn
Sub-
Div
Req
Thor-
Fare
Plan
Pop/
Econ
Plan
Growth
Mgmt
Plan
Bldg
Code
~
Hsng
Code
Water
Sewer
Plan **
Flood
Cntl
Ordn
Soil
Cons
Ordn
Solid
Waste
Plan
Water
Pollution
Proqram
Air
Pol 1 uti oi
Proqram
DeKalb
Y
• Y
/
Y
Y
~
Y
Y
Prop
Y
~
Y
Y
Atlanta
Y
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
Y'
*
Y
Y
V
Y
Lithonia
Y
No
Y
None
None
None
None
*
Y
Cty.
None
None
None
None
None
Fulton
Y
Prop
Y
Y
Y
Prop
*
Prop
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Atlanta
V
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
~
Y
Y
Y
Y
V
Y
Y
Gwinnett
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
*
None
**
Y'
Y
Y
Y
Y
Lawrencevi 1 le
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
¦k
None
None
None
None
Y
s
Newton
Y
Y.
Y
None
Y
Y
*
None
Y
None
None
Y
None
None
Covington
Y
Y
S
Y
Y
None
*
-------
5. Air quality control programs administrated by
state agencies through local health departments.
Within the county jurisdictions in the Upper Ocmulgee Basin there is
a basic consistency in density of ranges acceptable under existing
county regulations. Single family residential densities typically oc-
cur within a range of one to four dwelling units per acre. Multi-
family densities commonly occur within the range of ten to fourteen
dwelling units per acre. Commercial and industrial developments are
commonly encouraged within shopping centers or industrial parks,
respectively, but also are typically restricted to fifty percent lot
coverage regardless of the category involved. These density/inten-
sity patterns are uniquely low when compared to other metropolitan
areas of the nation. Inherent to this existing pattern is the local
appreciation of the limitations of terrain and soil, and a local
awareness of the problems engendered by developments that increase
densities.
In response to pressures for increased densities resulting largely
from rapidly escalating construction and land cost, most units of
local government have responded with planned unit development regula-
tions allowing for large complexes comprised of mixed land uses while
retaining a basic density/intensity constraint that is consistent
within the respective jurisdictions. Planned unit developments are
currently authorized in those counties within the Atlanta metropolitan
area, and in many ofthe cities falling within such counties. In sum-
mary, one could equate the level of sophistication in the application
of land use regulations with the degree of urbanization encountered
by the respective jurisdiction. Characteristically, those county
jurisdictions with higher population levels and increased urbanization
are more experienced in the application of sophisticated land use
techniques than are those more rural counties lying in outer reaches
of the Upper Ocmulgee Basin.
Through recent advances in state legislation, however, regulatory tools
are evolving that have application to the local level. Specific re-
cent examples include the Soil and Sedimentation Act, which is an act
of state-wide application authorizing state agencies to accept control
responsibility when local units of government choose to relinquish
such authority; state-wide transportation planning for all modes of
transportation; and continuing pressures for the adoption of state-wide
flood hazard regulations, which would severely restrict development
within flood hazard areas throughout the State. Whether the current
funding and staffing by state agencies to implement these new inroads
result in effective enforcement is a matter yet to be determined. To
date the only statewide regulatory program within the environmental
arena effectively being staffed and enforced are those activities of
the Georgia Environmental Protection Division of the Department of Na-
tural Resources dealing primarily with water quality and the enhance-
ment of flowing streams within the State.
-------
Due to the past few years of general economic depression and a rela-
tively slow home building industry, it is difficult to ascertain the
effectiveness of current plans and programs. However, it will become
more urgent for governmental units to update existing regulatory sy-
stems; specifically subdivision, flood plain, soil conservation and
similar ordinances dealing with protection of the natural environment
from adverse impacts of development, in light of the increasing con-
cern to protect the water quantity and quality within the Basin.
Table 35 indicates the types of regulatory systems prevalent in the
Basin and indicates which of the counties and selected incorporated
cities have adopted systems.
Trends in Land Use Control
Planned Unit Developments
In addition to the standard inventory of land use control devices
historically applied by local units of government, many of the metro-
politan jurisdictions have increased their capabilities through ini-
tiating new techniques to supplement and improve upon the historical
role of zoning and subdivision relations. Such techniques, which
have gained widespread acceptance from both the developing community
and citizens, are the concept of planned unit developments. These
techniques have been increasingly authorized by local units of govern-
ment with significant results.
The concept of a planned unit development is to allow greater flexi-
bility in site design and greater freedom to the developer to com-
bine building types and lotting patterns in rather unconventional con-
figurations so long as an acceptable plan is submitted and approved
by the local unit of government and the basic density parameters for
the total development do not exceed those that would otherwise be
acceptable. Typically, planned unit developments allow for a mixture
of land uses, including in some cases commercial or industrial acti-
vities. Within the residential spectrum, a mixture of densities of
the very low to mid range are also authorized so long as the overall
density remains consistent with conventional zoning patterns in the
vicinity. The amount of land devoted to open space, recreation and
other amenities becomes a significant feature of the total package.
The objective of such developments is to provide for a "totally planned"
community developed over an extended period of time on a phased basis.
Conditional Zoning
Some jurisdictions within the Basin have now had ten years of exper-
ience with conditional zoning. This practice, while once considered
suspect by the courts, has recently seen Georgia's Supreme Court up-
hold not only the concept, but its application.
-------
The significant aspect of conditional zoning is that the owner wish-
ing to rezone property will not only request a standard zoning classi-
fication but, in addition, will place further limiting restraints or
conditions on the uses and siting of development on the property.
The controlling device is typically a site plan buttressed by condi-
tioning statements frequently in the form of a letter of intent, which
is made a part of the record and becomes limiting on the eventual use
of the property. The City of Atlanta, Fulton County and DeKalb County
are currently employing this technique as well as many other munici-
palities within the Basin.
Impact Zoning
This type of zoning activity is founded on the premises that zoning
will be approved or disapproved based on the effects of the proposed
development on the community in which it would be located. Conven-
tional zoning is based on density restrictions and placement of struc-
tures on a lot, but has little to say of the potential impacts of the
new development upon public facilities or the environmental signifi-
cance of the area.
To implement impact zoning the local units of government must first
quantify through rather detailed procedures the relative ability of
many of the communities' infrastructures to accommodate growth. For
example, what is the unused carrying capacity of the abutting road
system and what percentage of that carrying capacity would be con-
sumed by the proposed development? Further, if the added increase
in traffic exceeds the remaining carrying capacity available, what
improvements must be made by the developer to abutting and distant
road networks so that the system does not become overloaded?
To date, there have been some fledgling attempts at impact zoning
within the Study Area. DeKalb County, for example, calls for a sum-
mary evaluation of the net effects of development as part of its
application procedures for development permits. Fulton County has
taken steps to establish computer evaluations designed to assess the
carrying capacity of its infrastructure by small geographic breakdowns,
to plot trends of development and to contrast trends with infrastruc-
ture assessment so that overload conditions can be anticipated. One
reason this technique has not been more fully implemented is the ob-
vious expense and the requirement for sophisticated inventories and
evaluations of numerous community facilitities.
Preservation Techniques
A variety of regulatory devices have been implemented by local units
of government designed to preserve environmentally significant aspects
of the respective jurisdictions. Preservation ordinances have become
a rather common requirement in many of the jurisdictions. DeKalb
-------
County has implemented its environmental control ordinance, which
includes tree preservation, historic preservation, soil and sedimen-
tation control and water retention requirements in a single coordin-
ated set of regulations. As mentioned earlier, Gwinnett County
has been the leader in the metropolitan area in utilizing soil sur-
vey data as a foundation for both flood hazard zoning and for the
implementation of soil and sedimentation controls. Flood plain zon-
ing has, in fact, become a common requirement throughout the Study Area.
The increased concern for the preservation of elements key to our her-
itage has been demonstrated in the creation of numerous historical
societies and renewed interest in submitting nominations for the
National Register of Historic Places. Archaeological work has
achieved a position of significance in the activities of local go-
vernments, largely through the enactment of Section 201 requirements.
Cobb and Fulton Counties have been supporting archaeological survey
and research for more than five years, and similar activities are
now being undertaken by other units of government, most recently Gwin-
nett County in its archaeological survey of the Yellow River corridor
in relation to its 201 planning.
Managed Growth Ordinances
While in recent years there has been a flurry of attention centered on
a few communities that have enacted "no growth" or "controlled growth"
regulations, such activities have not yet found a level of acceptance
within the Study Area.
The most renowned case of a controlled growth ordinance is that enacted
by the City of Ramapo, New York, which had as its foundation a preset
program for the provision of public services and required private de-
velopment to be in concert. In fact, aspects of development timing have
been historically applied, whereby an outlying development paid a pre-
mium through minimum lot sizes far in excess of those otherwise allowed
in areas with such services. Further, the general rule that has applied
throughout the metropolitan area of restricting the installation of
packaged sewage treatment plants has had the secondary effect of limit-
ing commercial and multi-family activities to those locations that have
public utility service. A positive inducement to manage growth patterns
has been the history of providing urban services such as garbage collec-
tion or fire protection through special districts. The establishment
of such districts provides a positive incentive through increased ser-
vice levels. The inability of more dispersed developments falling out-
side such districts to finance the creation of the district is inversely
an example of managed growth.
A true managed growth approach requires a substantial investment by local
governments and a more formal conmitment to phased extensions within
selected areas.
-------
Two historical facts remain; first, that no unit of government has yet
successfully provided an equivalent level of service throughout its
total jurisdiction at one point in time, and secondly, such approaches
require a coordinated effort of all public services working in a coor-
dinated fashion to make the system function. Moratoria, for whatever
reasons, have been applied within the Study Area but have met with
limited success. No one service or utility can in and of itself con-
trol growth.or growth rates. If any of the jurisdictions within the
Study Area make the political decision to enact managed growth techniques,
they should first assess the requirements of such a program in terms of
staffing and regulations. Next, the political consequences of concen-
trating major public expenditures and activities to preselected areas
while denying these same service levels to other areas within the same
jurisdiction must be evaluated.
The only balancing aspect to such a technique for managing growth is
the recently adopted amendment known as the Mulherin Amendment. This
amendment to the Georgia Constitution allows counties to create multi-
purpose service districts. Inherent in this approach is the proposi-
tion that property owners falling within such districts contribute
through district levies toward the provision of the services received.
In essence, this is a second level of taxation closely related to
user charges. This concept has many favorable aspects for developing
counties in that areas of concentrated development could be made to pay
through user charges for the urban level services they demand, while
the more rural portion of the county not included within such dis-
tricts only pay the base ad valorem tax rate. Unfortunately, the
amendment is still so recent as to have had limited application within
the State. With time and experience of application the creation of
multi-purpose districts could play an important role in the coordinated
growth of local governments.
Future State Initiatives
During the general elections of November 1976, a Constitutional Amend-
ment was offered and approved by the people of Georgia, revising and
updating the State Constitution. While this amendment was portrayed
as a codification and classification of the existing Constitution, it
did have the effect of shifting the basic authorization for planning
from the 1957 Act to the Home Rule provisions of the Constitution.
The ramifications of this basic shift in authority for planning are
currently vague and will require further clarification by the legis-
lature.
Significantly, the new Georgia Constitution authorized the General
Assembly:
. . to provide restrictions upon land use in order
to protect and preserve the natural resources and envir-
onmental areas of this State ..."
-------
Additionally, the legislature is empowered to enact laws regulating,
restricting, or limiting planning and zoning powers, but does not have
the authority to withdraw such power from local governments. Again,
legislative clarification is needed to set the boundaries between these
possibly conflicting provisions.
Future General Land Use
This section deals with projected future land use for the Upper Ocmul-
gee River Basin with particular attention paid to the Yellow River
Sub-basin. The Upper Ocmulgee Basin encompasses a large land area of
1400 square miles. The existing land use inventory as previously dis-
cussed portrayed the intense urban nature of the upper reaches of the
South River, the developing or suburban nature of the upper reaches
of the Yellow River and the currently rural characteristics of the Alco-
vy River Basin. As all three river systems flow toward Lake Jackson
the level of urban development decreases to the point of totally rural
activities for the southern half of the entire basin. This pattern
is broken only by the rural concentration associated with the Cities of
Lithonia, Conyers and Covington, all adjacent to the Interstate 20
transportation corridor.
Existing land uses have been documented according to U.S.G.C. Type II
classifications. These classifications result from a remote sense of
mapping and interpretation. The classification system used by U.S.G.S.
attempts to portray all uses of land but generally aggregates the more
urban classifications into a few categories. Conversely, most planning
activities undertaken by counties and municipalities utilize classifi-
cation systems more attuned to urban development and less attuned to
rural land uses. As a consequence, one should be aware that the ex-
isting and future land use sections of this environmental impact state-
ment are founded on two separate and distinctive base lines for classi-
fication. As such, comparison can only be drawn in a general fashion.
Procedure
Procedure utilized for projecting land uses is an extension of the system
utilized for disaggregating population. Since Atlanta Regional Commis-
sion 1990 Cycle II Land Use Projections are being utilized, efforts were
directed toward developing a compatible system to that employed by ARC
in projecting populations for the Atlanta Water Resources Study. Through
the cooperation of ARC and the AWRS the base line data and the procedures
utilized were obtained for the area of the basin falling within the ARC
jurisdiction. Finally, future land use plans for those counties and mun-
icipalities not covered by ARC were researched and discussions held
with appropriate planning officials to incorporate their future land use
plans in a manner compatible with the methodology employed by ARC.
This methodology also results in the basic distribution of land use con-
sistent with population disaggregations. The next setps were those of
evaluating trends of the Basin, particularly for the Yellow River Sub-basin
-------
and quantifying deyelopmentally unsuitable lands.
The following discussion deals with growth inducers and restraints
to determine modifications, if necessary, as well as land use disaggre-
gations to account for natural systems and historic trends.
Growth Inducers - Restraints
The City of Atlanta began as a surveyor's stake in the ground identify-
ing the end of a one-way road line and the point of junction with an-
other. From that stake and the railroad construction camp established
at that location, the City of Atlanta was born. Thus, it had its ear-
liest reason for existence founded on a transportation system. Trans-
portation continued to be the dominant force in the growth and develop-
ment of the Atlanta metropolitan area.
Employment centers, while not as dominant a locational incentive for
growth, create,, an inverse inducement for growth in that utility sy-
stems needed to serve industry are typically sized to the extent that
additional capacities are available for adjacent uses.
The existence of public facilities, when available, can be considered
an inducement for growth, particularly public water supply and more re-
cently the addition of sanitary sewage systems. While provision of
public water supply is a direct inducement to growth, lack of an ade-
quate sewage system causes that growth to be typically of a low density
(if restraints are placed on the installation of package treatment sy-
stems). Once public sewage systems are made available, the growth
induced offers a second tier of opportunities in that more intensive
land use can be accommodated.
Less direct, but still influential on growth directions, are a host of
other facilities offered by local units of government. Such subjective
evaluations as the quality of the school system and governmental atti-
tudes toward quality growth can play a role but are difficult to quan-
tify. Tax rates can be an incentive if one jurisdiction's rates are
substantially lower than adjacent jurisdictions. However, tax rates
are a relatively inelastic inducement for residential activity but can
show signs of elasticity for commercial and industrial activities.
Growth restraints involve a variety of natural and man-made features
that either individually or in combination make development difficult
if not prohibitive. Such restraints can include flood plains, land with-
in an approach zone to major airports, areas without basic utility ser-
vices, and a host of natural restraints including:
... High water table
... Steep slopes
... Publicly-held land
... Shallow depth to rock or exposed rock
... Swamps ... and
... Cultural or historic features scheduled for preservation.
-------
Such areas were identified prior to the forecasting of the land use and
aggregated into the category of lands unsuitable for development.
Terminology used is meant to indicate unsuitable in a relative sense
to other lands not suffering the problems inherent in developing lands
of the above characteristics. Factors inducing or restraining growth
in the Yellow River Sub-basin are shown in Figure 24.
Trends
The historic trend development within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin
portrayed associated preference for areas offering accessibility to the
remainder of the metropolitan area and employment opportunities. The
availability of public utilities (or community interest structures)
also offers a strong correlation to development trends.
The compositing of these major influences in development, transporta-
tion, employment center, and utility service areas strongly influences
existing development patterns, particularly in the Yellow River Sub-
basin. This compositing of growth inducement factors reinforces the
existing concentration of development along the U.S. 23/1-85 corridor
leading to Lawrenceville in the Upper Yellow River Sub-basin as well as
along the 1-20 corridor leading from 1-285 and servicing the commun-
ities of Lithonia, Conyers and Covington. Conversely, the absence of
such compositing effects south of U.S. 78 in Gwinnett County in the Al-
covy River Basin, and in the southern reaches of the South River Basin,
account for the rather sparse development.
As previously discussed under existing and projected population, many
of the counties within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin have experienced
some of the most rapid rates of increased population and changes in
land use in the entire State. These rates are reported as percentages
and one must be aware of the low base with which they originate. How-
ever, the relatively recent rapid increases in population in the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin can be directly related to the construction of 1-20
and the improved accessibility to the metropolitan core that it provided
counties such as Rockdale, Newton and southern DeKalb.
General Observations
In projecting land use one is Tirenediately struck with the magnitude of
the project area. The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin comprises 1400 square
miles or approximately 900,000 acres. Given such a large Study Area the
portrayal of land uses necessarily resorts to aggregations of numbers
for the total Basin with less emphasis on individual municipalities or
individual developments. However, a general portrayal of future land
use is shown in Figure 25,. and .disaggregated by WQMU and.-sub.-basin for
1980,1990,and 2000,(Table 36) and by WQMU and sub-drainage Sasin for 1980,
1990, and 2000,(Table 37).
-------
Z5
V
1
t I 0
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
GROWTH INDUCERS
EMPLOYMENT
URBAN SERVICES
ACCESSIBILITY
GROWTH RESTRAINTS
rwfViia
PUBLIC LANDS
FLOOD PLAIN
ROCK
FIGURE 24
uutt
JACXSO0
-------
South River Basin is characterized by a relatively stable 'and use
pattern over the forecast period while major redevelopment activities
are programmed to occur in WQMU #0401, resulting primarily from impact
of transit stations along the MARTA system leading toward Decatur.
The remainder of the Basin portrays a relatively stable patterns of
development with gradual increases for northern Henry County and north-
eastern Clayton County.
In the Yellow River, development pressure and forecasted land use offer
major changes from the current baseline. The majority of new develop-
ment is forecasted for the northern or headwaters area of the Basin
primarily in Gwinnett and secondarily in eastern-most DeKalb County.
Major transportation and industrial opportunities forms the foundation
for this rationale. Existence of the Southern and Seaboard Railways
at Peachtree - Industrial Boulevard and the presence of I-S5, U.S. 29 and
U.S. 78, in combination offer these areas of Gwinnett County the accessi-
bility to services, jobs, and cultural activities that are conducive
to residential development. It is within these same areas that there
are relatively few restraints on development from a man-made or natural
perspective. Within this river basin the exceptions to this pattern
generally occur south of U.S. 78 and particularly within the Big Haynes
Creek drainage basin, the latter indicating a recommended policy pro-
cedure of basin preservation for possible future use as an impoundment
location. The other exception to the pattern is the 1-20 corridor de-
velopment particularly in the Yellow River Sub-basin where it spans
the existing urban centers of Lithonia, Conyers and Covington. Sub-
stantial growth is projected within this corridor.
In the Alcovy River Basin only two areas bear mentioning in terms of
forecasted population increases and land use changes. One of those
areas is in northern Gwinnett County, generally north and east of Law-
renceville, which itself is situated on a basin divide. The other loca-
tion is again near 1-20 at Covington where the increased development of
that municipality will generate land use changes within the Alcovy Basin.
Since transportation has historically been the major motivation for
growth and amply demonstrates its dominant role within the Yellow River
Sub-basin, the discussion that follows addresses these major transpor-
tation corridors and their influences on development.
Interstate 75 Corridor
1-75 travels in a southeasterly direction from South Atlanta, through
WQMUs #0403 and #0405 in the South River Sub-basin. The counties af-
fected include Clayton (northeast corner) and Henry. This portion of
Clayton County (WQMU #0403) has already experienced rapid growth and
major land use changes are not anticipated. The 1-75 corridor's impact
on Henry County has not yet been experienced and will probably not be
-------
\
lit
/
\
/
.JACKSON
LAKE
mn
URBAN MIXED
DEVELOPING SUBURBS
RECREATIONAL
UNDEVELOPED
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
FUTURE LAND USE
FIGURE 2S
-------
felt to any great degree during the planning period, although the
future land use plan for Henry County delineates substantial growth in
the northern portion of the county.
Interstate 20 Corridor
1-20 travels in an easterly direction through WQMUs #0401 and #0404
in the South River Sub-basin, #0408 and #0409 in the Yellow River
Sub-basin and #0411 in the Alcovy River Sub-basin. The counties impacted
by this corridor include DeKalb, Rockdale and Newton. The impact on
DeKalb County will probably result in changes from less dense and dis-
persed uses to higher density and greater intensity uses combined with
an increase in non-residential uses. This shift will further impact
the growing residential suburbs as the population moves further away
from the central core.
The impact of Rockdale County is expected to be significant, but not
only because of the ease of access to the central core. A progressive
climate exists in the county, more particularly in the City of Conyers,
which is situated directly in the corridor. Rockdale County had the
highest percentage of growth in the period 1960 to 1970 and is projected
to continue in a growth direction. Conyers has an active planning and
development program, and has a full range of regulatory systems, water
and sewer plans and the like. The importance to this area of the 1-20
corridor is the impact on both the Yellow and South River Sub-basins
since Conyers is situated almost directly on the dividing line for
WQMUs #0406 and #0404.
The impact on Newton County will be similar to that on Rockdale County
in that both the county and its major incorporated center, the City of
Covington, maintain active programs. The City of Covington, like Conyers,
has active planning and plan implementation programs and its growth
will have an impact on the Yellow and Alcovy River Sub-basins. Although
Newton County's growth rate from 1960 to 1970 was below the regional aver-
age, it was concentrated in and around the City of Covington. This pat-
tern should continue during the planning period.
U. S. 78 Corridor
U. S. 78 travels from northeast Atlanta through WQMUs #0406, #0407 and
#0410 in the Yellow and Alcovy River Sub-basins, primarily in Gwinnett
and Walton Counties. The portion of the corridor in WQMU #0401 in
DeKalb County will witness similar changes in land use as in the case
of 1-20 in DeKalb County. The Stone Mountain area presently has con-
siderable industrial uses which will, in most cases, continue to expand
due to ease of highway access to regional, state and national markets.
The remainder of the corridor through Snellville, Loganville and Mon-
roe, once U. S. 78 is improved to four lanes, will induce significant
growth depending on the availability of water and sewer services.
-------
TABLE 36
PROJECTED FUTURE LAND USE BY WQMU & SUB-BASIN
LAND USE
Single
Family
Multl-
Farrrily
Conrier-
clal
Indus-
trial
Public
Parks
SOUTH RIVER
WQMU#0401
1980
17,802
3,735
1,863
1,376
3,162
3,460
1990
18,472
5,419
2,312
1,965
3,251
3,499
2000
17,818
6,257
2,999
2,434
3,400
3,638
WQMU#0402
1980
8,187
2,041
1,592
1,879
10
110
1990
8,617
3,125
2,027
2,084
816
1,443
2000
8,675
4,102
2,483
2,443
1,051
1,746
WQMU10403
1930
11,033
617
476
577
223
519
1990
14,433
1,681
839
854
495
1,046
2000
18,073
3,918
1,312
1,174
623
1,205
WQMU10404
1980
4,820
174
258
530
116
491
1990
6,845
503
507
705
239
662
2000
9,150
1,308
899
938
314
873
WQMU#0405
1980
2,603
5
944
9
156
204
1990
4,319
9
9
21
289
325
2000
5,089
19
26
45
397
433
SOUTH RIVER TOTALS
1980
44,445
6,572
5,133
4,371
3,667
4,784
1990
52,686
10,737
5,694
5,629
5,090
6,975
2000
58,805
15,604
7,719
7,034
5,785
7,895
YELLOW RIVER
WQMU#0406
1980
1990
11,533
14,296
577
1,383
629
1,213
1,734
2,213
414
764
3,699
4,104
- 1980, 1990 & 2000
Trans- Agrl- Silva Unsuitable TOTAL
portatlon culture
9,337 3,259 26,114 4,293 74,401
9,694 2,790 22,707 4,293 74,402
9,865 1,228 22,469 4,293 74,401
58 9,517 26,830 2,065 52,289
2,269 4,936 24,906 2,065 52,288
4,727 ' 4,303 20,696 2,065 52,291
2,594 20,830 37,160 5,786 79,815
3,248 18,221 33,209 5,786 79,812
3,895 14,613 29,210 5,786 79,809
1,406 22,311 35,370 2,750 68,226
1,856 20,312 33,856 2,750 68,235
2,061 18,729 31,215 2,750 68,237
782 36,691 70,557 8,310 120,261
1,179 35,513 70,292 8,310 120,266
1,443 34,479 70,015 8,310 120,256
14,177 92,608 196,031 23,204 394,992
18,246 81,772 184,970 23,200 395,003
21,991 73,352 173,605 23,204 394,994
3,726 11,372 52,970 5,355 92,009
5,392 10,296 46,999 5,355 92,015
-------
YELLOW RIVER(cont.)
NQMU#0406
2000
WQMU#0407
1980
1990
2000
WQMU#0408
1980
1990
2000
WQMU#0409
1980
1990
2000
YELLOW RIVER TOTALS
1980
1990
2000
Single
Faml 1y
17,404
5,828
7,629
9,804
3,121
4,547
5,888
2,581
3,467
4,238
23,063
29,939
37,334
Multl-
Famlly
TABLE 36
PROJECTED FUTURE LAND USE BY WQMU & SUB-BASIN - - 1980, 1990 & 2000(cont1nued)
LAND USE
Public
Commer-
cial
Indus-
trial
Parks
Trans-
portation
Agri-
culture
Sllva Unsuitable
2,823
126
373
730
83
281
607
345
537
749
1,131
2,574
4,909
2,021
214
488
848
147
310
492
334
522
673
1,324
2,533
4,034
3,921
273
437
729
651
757
965
250
401
564
2.908
3,808
5,179
948
340
435
478
294
359
467
1,137
1,357
1,549
2,185
2,915
3,442
4,444
902
1,624
1,890
376
748
903
146
169
196
5,123
6,645
7,433
6,137
1,741
2,622
3,928
1,284
1,400
1,582
461
525
685
7,212
9,939
12,332
9,937
33,528
32,074
30,248
12,106
10,598
8,869
12,242
11,708
11,484
69,248
64,676
60,538
40,015
58,351
55,622
52,650
23,455
22,513
21,740
26,545
25,352
23,900
161,321
150,486
138,305
5,355
4,863
4,863
4,863
1,703
1,703
1,703
1,640
1,640
1,640
13,561
13,561
13,561
Page 2
TOTAL
92,005
106.166
106.167
106.168
43,220
43,216
43,216
45,681
45,678
45,678
287,076
287,076
287,068
ALCOVY RIVER
WQMU#0410
1980
3,826
42
28
14
911
1,009
378
43,835
83,846
6,250
140,139
1990
5,353
56
42
28
1,009
1,009
448
42,617
83,327
6,250
140,139
2000
in l
7,175
70
56
42
1,093
1,009
448
41,215
82,781
6,250
140,139
J4 1 I
1980
1,777
4
4
4
125
99
505
7,645
27,312
5,644
43,119
1990
2,083
22
9
4
134
181
617
7,563
26,864
5,644
43,121
2000
2,264
39
13
9
138
198
845
7,537
26,433
5,644
43,120
-------
TABLE 36 Page 3
PROJECTED FUTURE LAND USE BY WQMU & SUB-BASIN - - 1980, 1990 & 2000
LAND USE
Single Multl- Commer- Indus- Public Parks Trans- Agrl- Sllva Unsuitable TOTAL
Family Family clal trial portatlon culture
LAKE JACKSON
WQMU0O412
1980
625
3
6
3
217
364
600
5,636
10,288
10,057
27,799
1990
725
3
6
3
225
403
648
5,522
10,199
10,057
27,791
2000
786
6
8
3
258
422
709
5,489
10,052
10,057
27,790
' RIVER TOTALS
1980
6,228
49
38
21
1,253
1,472
1,483
57,116
121,446
21,951
211,057
1990
8,161
81
57
35
1,368
1,593
1,713
55,702
120,390
21,951
211,051
2000
10,225
115
77
54
1,489
1,629
2,002
54,241
119,266
21,951
211,049
Note: all figures are In acres.
-------
TABLE 37
YELLOW RIVER -- PROJECTED FUTURE LAND USE BY RI
1980. 1990 & 2000
[ Rounded J"
Acres Square Miles Acres
WQHU * 0406
Stone Mt. Creek
0406B
Jackson Creek
Bromolow Creek
Sweetwater Creek
0406A
Omi t
Sub-Total
18,969.79
11,461.58
12,602.10
14,490.37
14,936.72
18,156.86
1,386.87
92,004.23
29.64
17.91
19.69
22.64
23.34
28.38
2.17
143.77
18,970
11,460
12,600
14,490
14,940
18,160
1,390
92,010
HQMU § 0407
No Business Creek
0407A
0407B
Big Haynes Creek
Sub-Total
8,656.96
30,511.07
13,335.38
53,673.35
106,176.76
13.53
47.67
20.83
83.86
165.89
8,660
30,510
13,330
53,670
106,170
WQKU it 0408
0408B
0408A
0408C
04080
Sub-Total
5,414.11
19,213.19
7,938.62
10,664.52
43,230.44
8.45
30.02
12.41
16.66
67.54
5,410
19,210
7,940
10,660
43,220
WQMU § 0409
04O9A
Gun Creek
Dried Indian Creek
0409B
Sub-Total
GRAND TOTAL
5,898.17
19,520.35
9,855.82
10,397.82
45,672.16
287,083.59
9.22
30.50
15.41
16.25
71.38
448.56
5,900
19,520
9,860
10,400
45,680
287,080
, WQMU & SUB-DRAINAGE BASIN
1980
Single
Multi=
Commer-
Indus-
Open
Family
Family
cial
trial
1,910
129
118
499
16,312
2,303
28
42
49
9,037
2,633
180
134
281
9,372
1,975
172
187
514
11,643
1,123
33
64
254
13,464
1,415
25
74
120
16,526
174
10
10
17
1,180
11,533
577
629
1,734
77,534
GRAND TOTAL 92,007
378
5
10
8
8,259
2,435
70
116
122
27,767
589
3
13
68
12,656
2,426
48
75
75
51,046
5,828
126
214
273
99,728
GRAND TOTAL
106,169
487
18
32
233
4,640
2,061
60
111
415
16,563
248
3
2
2
7,684
325
2
2
1
10,330
3,121
83
147
651
39,217
GRAND TOTAL
43,219
493
55
62
463
10
12
1,307
279
258
318
1
2
2,581
345
334
23,063
1,131
1,324
57 5,233
16 19,020
176 7,839
1 10,079
250 42,171
GRAND TOTAL 45,681 GRAND TOTAL
2,908 2505Q 287,076.
-------
TABLE 37
YELLOW RIVER -- PROJECTED FUTURE LAND USE BY RIVER, WQMU & SUB-DRAINAGE BASIN
1980, 1990 & 2000
Page
1990 2000
Single Multl Comner- Indus- Open Single Multi Commer- Indus- Open
Family Family cial trial Family Family cial trial
WQHU # 0406
Stone Mt. Creek
2,546
319
249
486
15,373
3,291
605
391
637
14,045
0406B
2,417
113
103
97
8,728
2,450
174
176
163
8,494
Jackson Creek
2,781
333
222
379
8,887
3.048
673
315
479
8,084
Brorolow Creek
2,402
354
317
659
10,756
2,839
732
478
804
9,637
Sweetwater Creek
1,851
142
148
375
12,424
2,531
350
291
498
11,271
0406A
2,092
104
156
191
15,618
2,989 "
251
340
305
14,274
0ml t
207
18
18
26
1,122
256
38
30
35
1,031
Sub-Total
14,296
1,383
1,213
2,213
72,908
17,404
2,823
2,021
2,921
66,836
GRAND TOTAL
92,013
92,005
WQMU § 0407
No Business Creek
474
18
26
17
8,125
611
35
62
43
7,908
0407A
3,097
150
247
207
26,809
3,991
272
430
363
25,451
0407B
849
55
33
84
12,309
1,177
171
88
135
11,760
Big Haynes Creek
3,209
150
182
129
49,999
4,025
252
268
188
48,936
Sub-Total
7,629
373
488
437
97,242
9,804
730
848
729
94,055
GRAND TOTAL
106,169
106,166
WQMU # 0408
0408B
866
63
78
260
4,143
1,195
128
111
333
3,643
0408A
3,041
209
225
492
15,241
4,005
467
371
624
13,741
0408C
299
6
4
3
7,628
326
8
6
5
7,595
0408D
341
3
3
2
10,310
362
4
4
3
10.286
Sub-Total
4,547
281
310
757
37,322
5,888
607
492
965
35.265
GRAND TOTAL
43,217
43,217
WQMU S 0409
0409A
765
178
173
110
4,675
990
193
214
126
4,376
Gun Creek
560
20
25
31
18,884
695
29
45
68
18,683
Dried Indian Creek
1,822
337
320
258
7,122
2,343
524
409
367
6,218
0409B
320
2
4
2
10,071
210
3
5
3
10,178
Sub-Total
3,467
537
522
401
40,752
4,238
749
673
564
39,455
GRAND TOTAL
45,679
45,679
GRAND TOTALS
29,939
2,574
2,533
3,787
248.234
37.334
4,909
4,034
5,179
235,611
GRAND TOTAL
287,067
-------
Gwinnett County, with the second highest percentage of growth in the
Region will continue to grow. However, significant growth for Logan-
ville and Monroe is not anticipated for some time, due in part to their
distance from the Atlanta Core, smaller employment opportunities, and
general economic situation.
Interstate 85 Corridor
The 1-85 corridor that travels northwest through the upper reaches of
WQMU #0406 in Gwinnett County combined with Georgia 316 has had signi-
ficant impact on the area. Georgia 316, built to interstate standards
to a point just west of Lawrenceville, is proposed for extension to the
east side of Lawrenceville. This corridor provides connection to an
area of heavy concentration of commercial/industrial activity in and
around the 1-285 belt in the north portion of DeKalb County. The most
significant growth in the Basin is projected to occur in this corridor.
Yellow River Sub-Basin Future Land Use
The future land use map for the Yellow River Sub-basin (Figure 26 ) de-
lineates community centers (incorporated places with mixed land uses),
suburban (low to medium density areas with service, commercial, and
recreational uses), industrial (heavy concentrations of industrial
including quarries), and recreational (major camp sites, parks, etc.).
For the purposes of developing future land uses in the Sub-basin, the
ARC Land Use Forecast was used where applicable. Forecast District
Allocations were assigned to WQMUs and Drainage Sub-basins and then
mapped based on transportation corridor, economic and population pro-
jection and environmental considerations. For county areas and incor-
porated places outside ARC jurisdictions, analysis of previously
prepared plans and implementation programs served as part of the basis
for land use map delineations.
The combination of quantified land use numbers and growth-inducing or
deterring factors such as flood plains, prime agricultural lands, lack
of water and sewer service programs and population and economic projec-
tions was the primary basis for land use mapping.
An analysis of zoning trends for Gwinnett County, ARC 1976, indicates
a surge towards non-residential rezonings, wherein non-residential
and residential rezoned acres are almost identical. Recognizing that
the rural population for Gwinnett County increased 73.5 percent com-
pared to the urban population (Table 24), the historic growth pattern
of the exodus from the western, more industrial/commercial portion of
the county to the suburbs is evident. The transportation corridors
previously discussed, U.S. 78 and 1-85, are probably more responsible
for this shift than any other factor. What has been commonly called
the urban fringe of Atlanta will continue to expand over the planning
-------
period. However, it is not anticipated that this fringe and the Law-
renceville fringe will meet.
The City of Snellville is anticipated to accept a portion of new growth
in the Sub-basin due in part to an improved U.S. 78, while the Logan-
vine area, further east, should not increase in any category to any
major extent. The latter premise is based primarily on considerations
of economic and available services. Both WQMUs #0406 and #0407 are
targets for careful considerations relative to increased growth
proposals.
The southeasterly portion of DeKalb County and the north portion of
Rockdale County fall within WQMU #0408. Due to the previously men-
tioned impact of the 1-20 corridor, this portion of WQMU #0408 is sub-
ject to tremendous growth in residential, conriercial and industrial
usage. Industrial growth in this area is supported by not only the
impact of 1-20, but also the Georgia Railroad and availability of
water. Rockdale County had the highest percentage of population growth
in the Yellow River Sub-basin (71.7 percent) between 1960 and 1970
of all of the Study Area counties. This trend is expected to continue.
The City of Covington in Newton County, which is situated in WQMU #0409
can be compared directly with the City of Conyers, both lying within
the 1-20 and Georgia Railroad corridors. Expansion of this area will
occur to the west along the corridor and, in all probability, will
join the easterly expansion of the City of Conyers. The effect of
this corridor influence could become overpowering. There is no rea-
son to doubt the eventuality of this suburban mixed use spine in part
due to the frontage/service road feature of 1-20, which parallels the
route for almost the entire length. The community of Porterdale will
also feel the impact of this growth although not as quickly.
Residential Growth
High-density growth within the Yellow River Sub-basin will occur in and
around the existing city core, but not to the extent of its growth
within the urban fringe. WQMU #0406, in both DeKalb and Gwinnett
Counties, will become the environment for higher density residential
uses as the suburban exodus continues and the area becomes more and
more urban with increased industrial/commercial growth.
Low-density development will find its way throughout the Sub-basin but
will still be influenced by convenient transportation, places of work,
shopping and entertainment. Location of residential growth will also
be affected by water and sewer policies of governmental units. Greater
restrictions on use of septic tanks will slow development, while in-
creased sanitary sewer service will tend to reduce lot sizes and in-
crease densities.
-------
Commercial
Commercial growth will continue in the incorporated areas and in the
more urban portions of the Sub-basin. Increased residential densities
and improved transportation systems will generate more retail and
wholesale commercial activity. Proper planning and development controls
should keep the transportation corridors clear of major "strip commer-
cial" developments. As previously mentioned, the 1-20 corridor is a
prime target for this type of development. The future land use plan is
based on the recognition of more sophisticated approaches to develop-
ment and, therefore, does not anticipate a "strip commercial" character.
Industrial
Industrial growth, like commercial growth, will occur along the major
transportation corridors in and around the urban fringe and estab-
lished cities. The heaviest concentration of industrial land use is
expected to continue to be in WQMU #0406 with a lighter growth in
WQMU #0408, although all are desirous of attracting new industries.
The continued extension of the industrial/warehouse activity associated
with the I-85/Peachtree-Industrial spine is perhaps the most meaningful
development influence in the Basin. While this development occurs in
the extreme northern reaches of the Yellow River Basin, the employ-
ment opportunities combined with its unparalleled accessibility account
for the greatest development increases portrayed in the headwater areas
of the basin. The Future Land Use Plan, Figure 26, for the Yellow River
does not anticipate any new major industrial growth in the outlying
WQMUs #0407 and #0409.
Recreation
Two major recreational areas are proposed in the Yellow River Sub-basin.
One on the Yellow River in DeKalb County in WQMU #0407 and another in
Rockdale County at the Walton County line, also in WQMU #0407. Of
course, one of the major benefits of a Water Quality Management Program
and possibly one of the results of this effort will be the return of
portions of the Yellow River and its contiguous land area to recreational
use. Once accomplished, the Yellow River will be the major recreational
land use in the Sub-basin.
Existing major facilities include Stone Mountain Memorial State Park and
Julian Harris Park, both in WQMU #0406.
-------
B.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL, HISTORIC AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
In the same sense that water, air and earth are nonrenewable natural
resources whose abuse and pollution can endanger the physical exis-
tence of man, the historical and archaeological remnants of human ex-
istence are nonrenewable man-made resources whose destruction can threat-
en the social and spiritual culture of humankind. In the same manner
in which a legal framework has been established in recent years on the
national level to protect the natural environment, a similar frame-
work has been established to provide a measure of protection to the
nation's cultural resources. Governmental agencies at both the state
and federal level have been charged with implementing legislation de-
signed to protect the natural and cultural environment.
As early as 1909, the Congress enacted legislation which placed upon
federal agencies the responsibility for protecting the nation's cul-
tural resources. However, it was not until the last decade that this
responsibility was broadened to include not only federal projects but
also all federally assisted and licensed projects. Since municipal
governments must often apply for federal assistance to undertake neces-
sary planning and capital improvements, it is these latest federal
requirements that are most applicable:
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Public Law 89-665 (80 Stat. 915) provides for an expanded National
Register of Historic Places to register districts, sites, buildings,
structures and objects significant in American history, architecture,
or local significance. This act further provides the funding for
the State Historic Preservation Officer and his staff to conduct his-
torical surveys and comprehensive preservation planning.
Of particular importance to municipalities is Section 106 of this
Act. Section 106 requires that federal agencies having direct or
indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal, federally assisted, or
federally licensed undertaking prior to approval of the expenditure of
funds or the issuance of a license, take into account the effect of
the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object
included in the National Register. They must then afford the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment
with regard to the undertaking. The Advisory Council, created by this
Act, is appointed by the President and has implemented procedures to
facilitate compliance with this provision.
Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the
Cultural Environment 16 U.S.C. 470 (Supp. 1, 1971)
This Executive Order requires federal agencies to take a leadership
role in the preservation of the nation's cultural resources. This is
to be accomplished through two principal sources. First, for all pro-
perty under federal jurisdiction or control, federal agencies must
survey and nominate all properties of cultural significance to the Na-
tional Register while at the same time maintaining and preserving them.
-------
Second, and most important, for every action funded, licensed, or
executed by the federal government, the agency involved must deter-
mine if any property in the impacted area is eligible for the National
Register. In short, the National Register criteria must be applied
to every such project in order to take into account any item hereto-
fore unidentified as being eligible for inclusion on the National Re-
gister. The Executive Order then, in conjunction with the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, requires federal agencies to address
both properties on the National Register and also those eligible for in-
clusion on the National Register. This is further clarified below in
the discussion of the Advisory Council's procedures.
The criteria of eligibility have been specifically defined and codified
(36 CFR 60) as follows:
The quality of significance in .American history, architecture, archaeo-
logy, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures,
and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, mater-
ials, workmanship, feel and association, and:
A. that are associated with events that have make a
significant contribution to the broad patterns
of our history; or
B. that are associated with the lives of persons signi-
ficant in our past; or
C. that embody the distinctive characteristics of a,
type, period, or method of construction, or that
represent the work of a master, or that possess
high artistic values, or that represent a signi-
ficant and distinquishable entity whose components
may lack individual distinction; or
D. that have yielded or may be likely to yield, infor-
mation important to prehistory or history.
Generally, cemeteries, birthplaces or graves of historic figures, pro-
perties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes,
structures moved from their original locations, reconstructed buildings,
properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties less than
fifty years old are not eligible for inclusion unless they form an inte-
gral part of a district.
National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law 91-190 42
U.S.C. 4321 Et. Seq. (1970)
This legislation obligates federal agencies to prepare an environmental
impact statement for every major federal action affecting the natural
and man-made environment in order that they might exercise their res-
ponsibility:
-------
to use all practicable means, consistent with other essen-
tial considerations of national policy, to improve and co-
ordinate federal plans, functions, programs, and resources
to the end that the nation may . . . preserve important
historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national
heritage . . . (Section 101 (b) (4) ).
The federal government further reinforces this position in its codi-
fication of "Council on Environmental Quality Guidelines for the
Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements" (40 CRF Part 1500).
The environmental impact statements must include the comments of the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation as Section 1500.9 directs
federal agencies to combine, to the extent possible, statements or
findings concerning environmental impact required by other authori-
ties such as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and Executive Order 11593.
Procedures for the Protection of Historic and
Cultural Properties (36 CFR 800)
In accordance with the requirements placed on federal action by the
above referenced mandates, the Advisory Council, an independent agency
of the Executive Branch, has promulgated procedures which must be
followed in order to insure compliance with these authorities. Ac-
cording to these procedures, the responsible agency official must
take several steps. First, at the earliest state of planning or
consideration of a proposed undertaking -- "as early as possible and
in all cases prior to agency decision concerning an undertaking" --
the agency official shall identify properties in the area of impact
that are included in or are eligible for inclusion in the National
Register. In order to identify properties already listed, the National
Register and monthly supplements can be consulted. To identify pro-
perties eligible for the National Register, it is often necessary to
conduct a professional cultural resource investigation of the project
area.
For properties identified as a result of this investigation, the agency
official must be in consultation with the State Historic Preservation
Office to apply the National Register criteria. If a property appears
to meet the criteria, or it is questionable whether the criteria is
met, a formal determination of eligibility must be sought in writing
from the Secretary of the Interior.
For those properties in the project area that are in or found to be
eligible for inclusion in the National Register, the agency official
must proceed to the second step in the Advisory Council's procedures --
determination of effect. For those properties the agency official,
in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, must
determine if the project will have an effect on the properties, and if
so, whether the effect is adverse or not. According to Section 800.9:
-------
Generally, adverse effects occur under conditions that include
but are not limited to:
(a) destruction or alteration to all or part of a
property;
(b) isolation from or alteration of its surrounding
environment;
(c) introduction of visual, audible, or atmospheric
elements that are out of character with the pro-
perty or alter its setting . . . (and) . . .
(d) neglect of a property resulting in its deteriora-
tion or destruction.
If it is found that project plans will have an adverse effect to pro-
perties on or eligible for the National Register, the agency official
must then complete the Advisory Council's procedures. This consists
primarily of a consultation process between the agency official, the
State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council designed
to investigate "feasible and prudent alternatives to satisfactorily
avoid or mitigate the adverse effect." It should be emphasized that
the National Register, as interpreted by the Advisory Council's pro-
cedures, is a planning tool. Final project decision rests with the
agency official -- not with the Advisory Council nor the State Histor-
ic Preservation Officer. Compliance with these procedures, however,
does insure that valuable cultural resources do receive the attention
they warrant during the project planning stages.
Historic Sites
The following list (Table 38 ) includes historical sites that are on the
National Register of Historic Sites or are proposed by Georgia Historic
Trust to be included on the National Register.
In Atlanta, much of the early architecture was destroyed by Sherman's
March to the Sea. The majority of sites, therefore, date in the 1800s
and early 1900s. Many anti-bellum homes are included in Table 38,
most of which are located outside the present Atlanta metro area. Other
notable sites on the register include Cyclorama Museum, the State Capitol
and the Old Seminary Building in Lawrenceville.
While not included on the Historic Register, there are several mill sites
that are considered important historical sites. During the 1800s and
1900s much of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin relied on agriculture and
agricultural related business as the major source of revenue. These
businesses, including lumber cutting, cabinet making, etc., all created
demands on mill operations. Today none of the mills are in operating
condition, but several foundations are still in existence.
-------
TABLE 38
COUNTY
Butts
Clayton
DeKalb
Clayton
Fulton
Gwinnett
Henry
Jasper
Newton
Roeksdale
FACILITY
Jackson Lake
Stone Mountain
Memorial Park
Soap Stone Ridge
Big Cotton Indian
Creek
Yellow River
Corridor
Green Valley
Golf Course
Jackson Lake
Burt Adams Boy
Scout Camp
Salem Campground
Poterdale Golf
Course
Ulcoufahatchee
Natural Area
Alcovy River
State FFA and
FHA Camp
Berry's Boat Dock
Panola Mountain
State Park
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
RECREATION FACILITIES
USE
AREA 1/
(acres)
Water Resources
Existing
4,059
Active Recreation 5,407
Archeological Preserve
Archeological & Nature
Preserve
Nature Preserve
Golf
Water Resources
Active Recreation
Active Recreation
Golf
N ature
Preserve
Active Recreation
Active Recreation
Active Recreation
TOTAL
200
4,059
1,850
80
246
200
273
50
Proposed
3,893
243
825
403
12,365
536
5,900
1/ Parks facilities described are 50 acres or larger
-------
TABLE 33
HISTORICAL SITES IN THE UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
1. Cyclorama, Grant Park, Cherokee Ave., Atlanta, Fulton Co.
2. State Capitol, Capitol Square, Atlanta, Fulton Co.
3. Old Seminary Building, Perry St., Lawrenceville, Gwinnett Co.
4. Jonesboro Historic District, Jonesboro, Clayton Co.
5. Orna Villa, 1008 North Emory St., Oxford, Newton Co.
6. Soapstone Ridge, Atlanta, DeKalb Co.
7. The Texas, Cyclorama Museum, Grant Park, Atlanta, Fulton Co.
8. Staff Row and Old Post Area, Ft. McPherson, Atlanta, Fulton Co.
9. Floyd Street Historic District, Covington, Newton Co.
10. Oxford Historic District, Oxford, Newton Co.
11. Atlanta & West Point Railroad Freight Depot, Atlanta, Fulton Co.
12. Craig House, Gwinnett Co.
13. Billue Homeplace, Gwinnett Co.
14. Webb House, Gwinnett Co.
15. Sawyer House, Gwinnett Co.
16. Cooper Homeplace, Gwinnett Co.
17. Upshow Store, Gwinnett Co.
18. Rockbridge Baptist Church, Gwinnett Co.
19. Maguire House, Gwinnett Co.
20. Armstrong Bridge, Gwinnett Co.
21. Wynn House, Gwinnett Co.
22. Pentecost House, Gwinnett Co.
23. Old Masonic Lodge, Gwinnett Co.
24. Old Poorhouse Site, Gwinnett Co.
Note: Refer to location on Figure 24.
-------
T A B L E 38 (continued) Page 2
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN THE UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
SITE
NO. SITE TYPE MATERIALS OR ARTIFACTS
1.
Village &
campsite
Stamped, sherds, stone tools
2.
V i11 age
Ceramic collection
3.
Campsite
4.
Campsite
Worked stone
5.
Campsite
Quartz lithics
6.
Campsite
Quartz lithics
7.
Campsite
Quartz & chert lithics
8.
Campsite
Quartz lithics
9.
Village &
campsite
Lithics & ceramics
10.
Village &
campsite
Lithics & ceramics
11.
Campsite
Quartz lithics
12.
Village &
campsite
Potsherds & lithics
13.
Campsite
Quartz lithics
14.
Village
Quartz bifaces, beryl & quartz crystals, chert
& quartz flakes
15.
Campsite
Quartz & chert bifaces, chert flakes, quartz
debitage, glass & porcelain fragments, steatite &
sand tempered plain sherd
16.
Campsite,
Lithic Station
Napier Complicated Stamped, diabase hoe & spalls,
patinated flint end-scraper & flakes, quartz biface
quartz & quartzite debitage
17.
Campsite
Stemmed projectile points
18.
Campsite
Quartz biface fragments, quartz & chert flakes, re-
touched quartz & chert flakes, quartz unifacial
side scraper
19.
Campsite
Quartz triangular knife, uni-facial tool fragment,
chert projectile point, bifaces, flakes, steatite
bowl fragment
20.
Campsite
Quartz bifaces, quart spokeshave, quartz retouched
flake, chert utilized flake, chert & quartz flakes,
basalt fragment
21.
Campsite
Chert flakes & tools, quartz flakes, sand tempered
pottery, Savannah River projectile point base
22.
Campsite
Quartz & chert bifaces, quartz & chert & diabase
flakes, ground diabase fragment
23.
Campsite
Quartz lithics
24.
Campsite
Quartz tools & flakes, chert tools & flakes
25.
Campsite
Cartersville check stamped pottery, steatite sherd,
chert, quartz tools & flakes
26.
Campsite
Quartz tools & flakes (Quartz biface fragments,
unifacial scraper)
27.
Village &
campsite
Artifacts
28.
Campsite
Material found on small hill
29.
"Shepard"
2 sections of grist mill & other material found in
creek
30.
Site destroyed
31.
Village
32.
Campsite
Quartz chips & partial projectile points
33.
Soapstone Quarry
34.
Village
-------
TABLE 38 (conctuded)
Page 3
35. Campsite Reconstructable steatite bowl fragment
36. Village
37. Lithonia (Village)
38. Village
39. Village Site destroyed
40. Village Stamped and punctated sherds
41. Village
42. Duncan site
43. Campsite Large quantity of workable quartz, bifacially
flaked quartz artifacts
44. Troup-Hurt House
45. Campsite
46. Battle of Atlanta Area 2 bullts, belt buckle, shell casing
47. Village Redeposited fill dirt
48. Noah's Arch Meth. Church
49. Allen-Carnes Plantation House
50. Dorsey Plantation
51. Rex Mill
52. Civil War Trench
53. Orr Site
54. Civil War Trench
55. Pates Creek - Village Sparse lithic and ceramic remains
56. Village Scattered lithic debris & potsherds
57. Neal Site Campsite Quartz chips and chert flakes
58. Village Quartz chips
59. Front Road Site Chert flake & numerous pieces of chert-like
material
60. Campsite Potsherd and lithic material
61. Campsite Quartz lithic material
62. Campsite Quartz and lithic materials
63. Campsite Flints, quartz lithic debris
64. Campsite Quartz lithic material
65. Campsite
66. Campsite
67. Campsite 1 chipped stone projectile point
68. Campsite Workable quartz
69. Workshop & Quarry Large bowl collection
70. Campsite Artifacts, abundance of workable quartz
71. Campsite Workable quartz
Note: Refer to location on Figure 24.
-------
There is still a great deal that remains to be done in relation to
historic preservation in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin. While a
great effort has been made in many areas of the Basin to identify
and research historic sites, many of these important sites have not
been included on the National Register of Historic Sites, and a great
deal of consideration should be given these areas when developers or
the State propose any type of extensive change in the land use. Addi-
tional historic sites will be included when they are provided by the
Georgia State Historic Preservation Office.
Archaeological Sites
Included in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is Soapstone Ridge, one of
the largest and best preserved aboriginal steatite quarries in the
southeastern United States and the only archaeological site on the Na-
tional Register in the Basin. Aboriginal remains found on Soapstone
date to the Archaic Period (3000 B.C. - 1500 B.C.). Other remains
date to the more recent Woodland Period (1000 B.D. - 700 A.D.). The
significance of this area is in the soapstone rock that was used to
make bowls, tools, carvings, pipes and gorgets.
The majority of the sites listed at the Archaeology Laboratory of the
University of Georgia are campsites and villages. Campsites and vil-
lages are sites where human habitation occurred on a temporary to
seasonal basis. Campsites are distinguished by finds of quartz pro-
jectiles, which are commonly known.as spear and arrowheads and pots-
herds, which are pottery fragments. Villages contain projectiles
as well as pottery remains.
Much of the archaeological sites are located on or near water. The
importance of locating near water wasn't only to have a source of pota-
ble drinking water, but to have a source of food. It is suggested that
fish dams were located along streams in the Study Area, but none have
been positively identified.
Locations of existing known sites are shown on Figure 27 . Even though
there are a considerable number of sites recognized, the lack of funding
and personnel to search and survey have prevented a thorough evaluation
of archaeological sites.
During September 1972 the Georgia Department of Natural Resources placed
the Yellow River Basin on the Heritage Trust list of historic, scenic,
and recreational areas. This recognition requires that notice be gi-
ven when a known historic or natural feature is to be destroyed to per-
mit evaluation of preservation alternatives. This designation to the
Heritage Trust list does not prevent ultimate destruction and to date
has not purchased any sites for preservation.
-------
Federal law is specific with respect to archaeological resources.
Federal projects must meet the Standards of Antiquity Act of 1906
(P.L. 59-209), the Historic Preservation Act of 1969 (P.L. 88-665),
the National Environmental Policy Act (P.L. 91-190), and the Executive
Order 11593. Public Law 93-291 provides federal funding to under-
take the recovery, protection and preservation of significant sci-
entific, prehistoric or archaeological resources associated with
any federal construction project. These funds are available for such
items as preliminary surveys or other investigations as necessary,
but must not exceed one percent of the total project cost.
As noted earlier, there is only one archaeological site in the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin on the Historic Register. Efforts are being
made by the State Archaeologists as well as other prominent archaeolo-
gists in the State, however, to have other important sites preserved
in this matter.
Source: Yellow River Basin and Its Environment and Land Use, prepared
by DeKalb County Planning Department, Gwinnett County Upper
Yellow River Step II Grant Application, Environmental Assess-
ments of Historic and Archaeological Resources Policy and Pro-
cedures of the Georgia State Historic Preservation Office,
Historic Preservation Section DNR.
-------
Recreation Facilities
Recreation facilities within the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin are scat-
tered throughout the Basin and range from semi-wilderness areas to
golf courses. The distribution of the facilities by county are dis-
played on Table 38 , which also describes the area size and character
of its development. Areas discussed were limited to recreational fa-
cilities of fifty acres or more. Because of this restriction, Clay-
ton and Fulton Counties are shown as not having any recreational areas
within the Basin. The total acres of the facilities surveyed is
12,365 existing and 5,900 projected for acquisition.
The types of recreational development have been aggregated into general
categories of recreational activity. This approach was employed be-
cause of the scale of the Basin and the weight of the importance of
recreation within the scope of the study. Categories used include
water resources, active recreation, passive recreation, nature pre-
serves, archaeological preserves and golf courses. Butts and Jasper
Counties adjoin the shore line of Jackson Lake, a water resource of the
Basin. Active recreation areas are found at Stone Mountain Memorial
Park, DeKalb County, Burt Adams Boy Scout Camp, Salem Campgrounds,
Georgia State FFA and FHA Camp and Berry's Boat Dock in Newton County.
Panola Mountain State Park is proposed to provide active recreation in
Rockdale County. Archaeological and nature preserves are proposed
for Soapstone Ridge and Big Cotton Indian Creek in Clayton County,
and Yellow River Corridor in Gwinnett County. A nature preserve now
exists at Ulcoufahatchee Nature Area, Alcovy River in Newton County.
Public golf courses are located at Green Valley in Henry County and Por-
terdale in Newton County. The location for these recreational
facilities are displayed on the accompanying Figure 27
Source: Georgia Department of Natural Resources Division of Planning
and Research, Narrative Plan Volume II Regional Analysis,
Georgia State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, 1972;
Atlanta Regional Council, ARC Staff Recommended Nature Pre-
serve Sites, First arid Second Priority Nature Preserve (ac-
quisition prior to 1980), October 1976.
-------
B.4 TRANSPORTATION
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin includes three APDCs (Area Planning
and Development Commissions) including Northeast Georgia, Atlanta
Regional Commission, Mcintosh Trail and a small section of the Oconee
APDC.
The interrelationship between transportation and growth in an area is
important due to the fact that once a mode of transportation is pro-
vided or significantly improved, growth generally follows at a propor-
tionately higher rate than the transportation facilities. It is ne-
cessary to recognize growth patterns and enforce a land use plan
that will enable transportation facilities to support the planned
growth rather than trying to provide for urban sprawl.
Highways
Despite the construction and continual improvement of highways to accom-
modate increased demand, peak hour congestion continues to be a major
problem. It now appears that constructing facilities to relieve con-
gestion results in a vicious cycle of stimulating the growth which
causes congestion on the very facilities designed to relieve the
problem.
Highways are a man-made part of our environment and the pollution asso-
ciated with their use is a concern. Transportation planners are stri-
ving to avoid scenic encroachments and minimize the effect of air and
noise pollution. In all of DOT's activities, it must strike a realis-
tic balance between environmental protection and the requirements for
a functional efficient highway system.
Append.39 indicates the ingress and egree patterns as well as the intra-
county commuting patterns for counties located in the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin for the years 1960 and 1970.
The pattern of commuting of Append 39 shows that the only counties in
the Basin area with a positive net commuting figure (more cars entered
than left) are Fulton and DeKalb. This would indicate that these coun-
ties will experience a less desirable air quality than the counties
farther from Atlanta and more' urbanized.areas.
There are four major highways serving the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin:
1-20: This interstate highway runs east to west across the entire Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin and connects Atlanta with Columbia, South Carolina
to the east and Birmingham, Alabama to the west. There has been consid-
eragle growth along this corridor as seen in the population tables
(Table 24).
1-75: The most extensive interstate routing through Georgia is Inter-
state 75, connecting Chattanooga with Florida near Valdosta. The inter-
state runs through the westernmost tip of the South River Basin through
-------
TABLE 39
Commuting Patterns for Counties Located in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, 1960-1970
1960 1970
INTRA OUT IN NET NOT COMM. INTRA OUT ~7N NET NOT COMM.
COUNTY
COUNTY
COMMUTING
COMMUTING
COMMUTING
REPORTED
RATE
COUNTY
COMMUTING
COMMUTING
COMMUTING REPORTED RATEK
Butts
235>
-646
87
-559
88
-23,0%
2159
-1111
374
-737
356
-29.18
Clayton
477?
-11205
4541
-6664
364
-71.6%
11566
-25522
9836
-15686
2171
-75.3%
DeKalfa-
Fulton
284579
-15048
50460
35412
18197
10.5% 262420
-123782
205603
81821
35650
17.4%
Gwinnett
7094
-7578
1154
-6424
393
-77.9%
9400
-17476
4503
-12973
1750
-93.4%
Henry
2907
-2578
470
-2108
120
-62.5%
3026
-4425
1510
-2915
980
-64.3%
Jasper
1672
-293
42
-256
31
-15.0%
1173
-718
190
-528
195
-38.8%
Newton
6182
-1559
438
-1121
158
-17.0%
6227
-2911
958
-1953
842
-27.2%
Rockdale
2452
-1155
662
-493
118
-15.9%
2834
-3325
1487
-1838
674
-42.6%
Walton
6362
-1304
551
-753
272
-10.9%
5841
-2490
848
-1642
1062
-24.6%
-------
APPENDIX 39
PROPOSED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE YELLOW RIVER SUB-BASIN
DEKALB
oPnjfCT NUMBER LCC*L_MM£ LIMITS — — pROJECT_DAIA ANTICl*.-_
COUNTY A«JTH. DATE
Itfm R
•E -I«5-1-1 CCVTKGTQN HIGHWAY FRQM-PANOL A_JQAJ) TY PFrHDPlinrV IOEN C RECONSTRUCT ?«= 027J_
rEKAlfl LENGTH 3.*MI »OW 0177
720'70 PE« RF -_0*6-l-_J};r TO-STATF POUTFa24_SW__ CONG.OI ST.-O* P®10*!TY .SCCRE___6J.OO
Fpo«Ul« US-278 SR- 12 OF LITHQNTA STATUS PRE-CONSTRUCTWN STAGE 0578
RF- = -l«J5-l-2 COVINGTON HIGHWAY FROM-PEPI METER HWYII-2851 TYP«=-WORK—Wl OEN t RECONSTRUCT Pc 0676
PFxAlft 20271 Pf« RF - 0*6-1-15- Tfl-PANOLA RCAO O/lNr,.DIST.-O* PRIORITY SCO°= 66.00 POW 0677
'PifULI ___ US- 2 78 S*- 1?_ _ STATUS PR e"C CNSTRUCTI ON STAG*.. 117.8 »QW 0677_
F-195-1-3 COVINGTON HWY,SH 12 FROM-M^ORI AL CUVt^ TYPP-WORK—Pf CONS T«UCT ION . Pc_.0676__
CEK4LP iViS MLP l?(l*l IFNOTH J.flMl ROW 0677
120712 Pf?« f= 046-1-1*- TQ-t-285 _„__ CCNr,.OlST.-0* t>PlP»|TY SC1PC 66.00
Fr,a«ULA US-278 SR- 12 STATUS PR E-CCNSTRllCT ION STAGE 1177
1-20-2-71 CT.li AUGUSTA FWY FROM-I-28J IN DEKALB CO. TYPE-WORK—WIOEN ONLY PS 027T
OcKAlI _ IFNf.TH 8.7M| CST FY7B
711290 PE» I - 20-2-71- TO-W.OF TURNER MILL RD CCNG.OIST.-O*
NOK-FCRKUU _ SR.-*02 1 (ACQ LAN£S|MED.BAR) STATUS ADVANCE PLANNING .STAGf
i-l.-20-2-_7L__ JLT,? I AUGUST4_£WJf FRQH-W.OF TURNER HIU RQ TYPg-WCRK—Wl PEW CNLV : CST frit
\OEkALB it RCCKOALE CO) LENGTH 6.8MI
T 7112S1 PE«_l - 20- 2-71- TO-EAST OF SR 1^8 CCNG.OIST.-O*
NGN-ECRMULA SR-*02 (A 00 LANE-MEO BARR) STATUS AOVANCF PLANNING STAGE
RF-07B-1-2 ?PL-12*(6I_DEKAL3 ERQar3_L0CATJDMS_Qft_JSR124_JtPE-HQRK=rf»ASSIN(LLA5UE5 ?5_.0576,
PFk/LB -PASSING LANES- LFNGTH 2.1MI pnw 1176
720**0 .... P*« RS -123*5- - 9- .TO-NORTH .0B. LITHONIA CONG.OIST.-O* . PRIORJTy..SCORE ..57.00 LCST 0577.
POR-UIA SR-12* STATUS pRE-CCNSTRUCTION STAGE 0277
FE-010-2-17 CT.'-MTN INOUSTRIAL FRC-BRI0G6 OVER SEA60ARC TyPE-WORK—PAIL°OAD SEPARATION CST 1176~
CF*AIP ; BLVf) COASTLlNE__R.MlB.QAQ LENGTH—" 0.1>M CST. 1176.
*20230 PE* FF - 010-2-16- / TO- CNO.DIST.-O* PPI^ojxy SC0»E 63.00 F/A 0776
FQOKUL* ... . _ ST»TUS UNCE0 CONSTRUCTION _
CONTR« 1-f R SNCLL • C nflTAC Tf»R» INC
FFC-010-2-15 "TN. INDUSTRIAL 8LV0 FR0M-RAILR0AD XING a HUGH TYPE-M0RK—FLASH LIGHTS,BCLLS.GATFS F/A 0577
0£KAL• _ HCWELL RD_ _ LENGTH _ _
720*30 PE• FeG- 010-2-17- TO- CONO.OIST.-O*
. f-jomulA STATUS ADVANCE PLANNING STAGE
FF-010-2-17 CT.l-MTN INDUSTRIAL _FROM-HUGH HOWELL RO.TO CC TYPE-WORK—GRACE C PAVE P® 127*
D'KAlB BLVD LINELEXCEPT GRAOING LENGTH l.*3HI POW 0675
770030 Rf# Fc - 010-2-16- TOrON ROYAL AU.DEVELOP—CONO.OIST.-O* . . P"IC».1IY_ SCORE 73.00 f ST. 0676.
FORMULA RENT CCPP C RR BR. STATUS UNOER CONSTRUCTION F/A 1176
-------
APPENDIX 39 (continued)
Page 2
U-013-1-3* PUFORO HMY PRQH-0,5 MILE SOUTH OF TYPE-WORK— ROW 1174
... CFKALB "IP-13 <26)»E GWINNETT CO. LINE LENGTH 0.6*1 RnM 0376
760*00 P? « - - TO-JUST NORTH OF COUNTY CONG.01 ST.-04 POW 0176
FORMULA US- 23 SR.r-.l3 ,. .. LINE. STATUS CONTRACT AWARDED^ R?W 10"»5
CST 0776
GWINNETT
F-013-1 - BUCQPO HWY FRQM-QEKALB CQ. LINE IYP£r_W9.Rifcr=>tIii£N £ PFCQflSIAUCI ?£_EXJ9L.
GWINNETT LeNGTH
170160 : :_J TO-MTN. .IN0USIRML_8lV0__C0NG.DIST«-09
' FCRMUH , US- ?3 SR- 13 STATUS ADVANCE PLANNING ST AGE
RF-108-1-* LAWO=NCEVlLLe BYPASS FROM-i M1.W.LAW~R£NCEVILL? TYPE-WORK—GRADE £ BRIDGES PE 1060
GWINN'TT ___
-------
3
APPENDIX 39 (continued)
FF-OlO-2-18 1TN INDUSTRIAL BLVD. FROM-DEKALB COUNTY LI.lF TYPF-wORK—NEW CCNSTRtJCTION PE 0675
GWJNNCTT t _POfKBR IDGE ROAD LENGTH 2.7*1 CST 0775
,720*50 PE# FF - 010-2-18- TO-A POINT NEAR t0NG.0IST.-09 " F/A 0875
FrtSMULA _. OAKMOOD CIRCLE ... STATUS CONTRACT AWARDED
* C0KPLETE-080
U-013-1-35 RU^ORD HWY ISP.-13I FROM-DFKALB COUNTY LINE TVPE-WORK--WICEN C RECONSTRUCT" " pc 0576
GmINNFTT IL'S_23.1 NE . _ LENGTH 1.9MI _ CST_Q77fc
1500A0 TO-PROPOSFO POUhTAIN CONG.01ST.-0% PRIORITY SCOPE 66.00
cnnMULA ... SR-11 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD. STATUS CONTRACT AWAOOEO ...
X C0"PLETE-022
NEWTON
F-1&3-1-2
KFMTCN
2201S0
f:'*UL A
HNS-0«57--5
KFW'CN
240690
FCR«UL »
WASHINGTON ST
FROM-FLAT SHOALS RO
0F« JF -163-1- 2-
Tn-EHQRY_ ST
SR- 81
. TV PF-WORK—RECONSTRUCT ION
LENGTH 1.3MI
CONG.D1ST.—10
SR-212
_FROM-SR 212 AT SR 81 _
APPROX.0.75 MILE N.
TQ-OF HENRY-NEMTON CC«_
L INF
STATUS ADVANCE PLANNING STAGE
.TYPE-WORK—PVT MARKING!.
LENGTH
_CPNG.OIST.-I0 _ _
STATllS-
_?f_ P67f
ROW FY79
C?T FY80
_PE _C276_
CST 0876
-UNDER CONSTRUCTION
«»PS-5
-------
Page 4
APPENDIX 39 (concluded)
at-2584" 1 ' ' WEST Ave IN COITER? F«C*-8!»IDGE 6 APPROACHES TYPE-WORK—BRIDGE WIOFNING . PE 0*75
; TRrCK0«L5 _..:OVE* l-.20._. LFNGTH—--- CSJ OMT.
730710 PE« RS -1*16- - 2- TO- CONG.01 $T»-0* PRIORITY SCORE 67*00
POP"UtA . . . STATUS r-PRE-CONSTRUCTIQN JTAGf. . 0577 —
CA 1-20-2-1 AUGLSTA HWY PROM-DEKALB COUNTY LINE TJPR.-j«QRKn_-JIGH_»»£MriVftl. J P£_05.74_
ROCKCUE LENGTH 8.SHI ROW 057*
770000 __°E« CM- 20-2-_ I- T0-N5WT0N.COUNTYJLINE CONG.OIST.-O* :
NCN-cO*MULA SR-402 STATUS PRE-CCNSTRUCTION STAGE 0178
WALTON
I-ocI -?0-2-66 AUGUSTA FHY ICMQRGANI EACH-EAST. OF. SR. 12 INTER-.. .TYPE-WORK-tP EC CNSTRUCXtDN J>E_ 0575 _
W4LT0N CHANGE IN M4LT0N CO. LENGTH I2.6HI CST 0775
220250 . ?c« RFI-. 20-2-66- TD-EAST OF SR 83 INTER-.. CONG.DIST.-10 . . CST 0T75_
FORMULA SR-*02 CHANGE IN MORGAN CO. STATUS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
_ . .. . . .X C0MPLET5-073 _
CONTR.l-SHEPHERO CCNSTRUCTICN CO, INC
C-0M-1-39 ATLANTA-ATHENS HWY FROM-*-LANE IN MONROE TYP«=-HORK—PRFLIMINARY ENGINF^P ING PE FY78
WALTfN . _ LENGTH 9.2MI .
120330 PE« e - 061-1-39- TO-GMINNETT CO. LINE CONG.DIST.-IO PRIORITY SCORE 36.00
FObvulA ... US- 78. . SR- 10 .: ... STATUS ADVANCE PLANNING STAGE
Source. Georgia Department of Transportation. Construction Work Program for Fiscal Years 1977-1982. February 1977.
-------
Atlanta. 1-75 has caused considerable development pressures within
Atlanta, but has had less impact on the Basin.
1-85: Located in the northwest portions of DeKalb and Gwinnett counties,
1-85 crosses only the Yellow River Sub-basin. Due to the convenient
access to Atlanta and other major cities in the southeast region of
the United States, industrial development has increased significantly
in the past ten years along this corridor. The largest industry to
locate along the 1-85 corridor in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is
Western Electric, located in Gwinnett County.
285: This highway circumferences the Atlanta metro area. The portion
of 285 located in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is in Fulton and
DeKalb Counties. 285 provides the Basin with access to other portions
of the Atlanta metro area. The DOT is currently increasing the highway
to eight lanes in the northern section of Atlanta.
U.S. 78: This highway provides access from Atlanta to the South, Yellow
and Alcovy River Sub-basins. While the highway is not a four-lane in
Snellville, DOT plans to expand it to a four-lane highway with limited
access from Snellville to Athens.
Rail
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is served by numerous rail,companies,
the largest being Southern Railway. Even though Southern amd AMTRAK
made efforts to upgrade equipment and services, both are losing money
on passenger operation, although ridership has increased on both lines.
Rail freight lines, however, have been instrumental to the industrial
and economic growth in the Basin region. The freight lines are employing
modern management principles and freight handling techniques, such as
piggyback and container; therefore, they are able to operate at a pro-
fit. In fact, the Basin's largest railroad, Southern Railway, is one
of the most profitable in the country.
Mass Transit
Atlanta is operating a rapid transit system (MARTA) consisting of
buses that mainly serve DeKalb and Fulton Counties. Larger bus compan-
ies, such as Greyhound, serve other areas of the Basin with a limited
number of scheduled trips.
Air Transportation
Although there is not a major airport located in the Upper Ocmulgee
River Basin, Hartsfield International Airport is located only a few
miles from the Basin boundary in Hapeville in Clayton County and Fulton
County.
-------
There are several small airports located in the Basin that provide
services principally to business and private individuals in the general
vicinity.
A public system airport located in Covington in Newton County has an
existing airport capacity of 183,000 and a runway length of 3,000 feet.
(Airport capacity is. the number of operations an airport can handle in
one year, i.e., takeoffs and landings.) In 1978 the demand is expected
to drop to 93,000 operations and the length of the runway is projected
to be 3,400 feet. There are also two additional proposed air facili-
ties in the Mcintosh Frail APDC portion of the Upper Ocmulgee River
Basin. The first, to be located in Covington, is proposed for 1983
and will have a capacity of 114,000 and 265,000 in 1993.
The second proposed airport is in Henry County, in the City of McDonough.
The estimated capacity will be 110,000 in 1978, 155,000 in 1983 and
586,000 in 1993. This increase is due to the rapid growth rate of pop-
ulation as well as industry in the area. In 1978 and 1983 the proposed
runway length is 5,900 feet and in 1993 the proposed length extends to
7,600 feet.
No major airports are located in the Northeast Georgia APDC portion of
the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
Transportation in the Yellow River Sub-Basin
The Yellow River Sub-basin is composed of a five-county region including
parts of DeKalb, Gwinnett, Walton, Rockdale and Newton Counties. These
counties are located in three APDCs: Northeast Georgia (Walton),
Mcintosh Trail (Newton), Atlanta Regional Comnission (DeKalb, Gwinnett
and Rockdale).
Table 40 shows the section ID numbers as obtained from DOT's traffic
survey maps, the average daily travel (ADT), the section length of road
that the data includes, the estimated daily vehicle miles, the projec-
tions for the last two figures in the year 2000.
The projected figures were derived by using the state growth formula
1+SxL where S, a constant, equals .55 and the L is the factor for each
individual county shown below:
DeKalb 1.18. Rockdale 1.92
Gwinnett 1.89 Henry 1.34
Newton 1.25 Butts 1.17
Walton 1.20 Clayton 1.60
-------
1-20: Located in the South, Yellow and Alcovy River Sub-basins, In-
terstate 20 provides easy access to the Yellow River Sub-basin from
the City of Atlanta. 1-20 when completed to Birmingham and its inter-
state connection, should increase the patronage of this facility.
1-20 traverses Fulton, DeKalb, Rockdale and Newton Counties. Rock-
dale and Newton Counties, however, are the only ones served in the
Yellow River Sub-basin. U.S. 278 is contiguous with 1-20 through Rock-
dale County and is the only interstate highway serving the county.
The portion of the highway in Rockdale County extends from the Newton
County line west for 1.69 miles. The ADT is approximately 9,736 with
an estimated daily vehicle mile figure of 24,708.
1-20 extends through Newton County and passes directly through the
City of Covington. This interstate provides excellent access to
Atlanta from the city and surrounding areas. This easy accessibility
has created increased development pressure in the area. The projected
ADT and daily vehicle miles as shown on Table 40is indicative of the
increased population for the Covington metro area.
Georgia Highway 162: This highway outlines the western boundary of
the Yellow River Sub-basin from the Rockdale County line southward until
it intersects with Georgia Highway 36 near Lake Jackson. The ADT in-
creases steadily from the outer section of Highway 36, as shown on
Figure 28 until the ADT reaches an estimated 3,429 at the Newton-Rock-
dale County line.
The projected ADT figures for Georgia Highway 162 shown on Table 28
indicate that the highest ADT occurs southeast of Covington and con-
tinues to Rockdale County line. The projected vehicle miles figure
is the greatest at the same location; the projected daily vehicle miles
increase gradually until the highway approaches the outskirts of Porter-
dale, where the figure almost triples to 8,709. The count increases to
9,633 at the Newton-Rockdale County lines.
Georgia Highway 36: This state route delineates the eastern boundary
of the Yellow River Sub-basin in Newton County and is one of the princi-
pal routes to Jackson Lake. The highway section with the highest ADT,
as indicated on Table 40 , is located inside the Covington city limits
just south of the CBD. ADT decreases significantly as the highway con-
tinues southward towards Lake Jackson and diminishes to approximately
1,305 at the lake.
The estimated daily vehicle miles is greatest in the 1.93 mile length
of highway south of Covington city limits, but decreases significantly
until the highway approaches the intersection of Highway 36 and Georgia
Highway 212, and then decreases significantly near the intersection of
Georgia Highway 162 and Georgia Highway 36 near Lake Jackson.
-------
Lawrwieaviil*
V
7
1
f
K
Covinqton
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
EXISTING ANNUAL AVERAGE 24-HR.
TRAFFIC ALL TYPES OF MOTOR VEHICLES
2,000
'¦jl0,000
J 20,000
30,000 FIGURE 28
la/re
JACKSON
-------
1-85: This expressway, which is the major highway that connects
Gwinnett County with downtown Atlanta, enters the county between Nor-
cross and Lilburn, the two largest populated areas in the county.
At the point of entry, the estimated ADT is 62,336, but it drops sig-
nificantly to an estimated average of 28,434 at Beaver Ruin Road and
continues to drop until it reaches an average of 13,774 at the nor-
tern portion of the Yellow River Sub-basin.
The projected ADT for the year 2000, as shown on Table 40 , indi-
cates an increasing use of this highway due to the increased popu-
lation growth in Gwinnett County from the metro Atlanta area, which
will locate in Norcross, Lilburn, Lawrenceville and other towns
located off 1-85.
The estimated daily vehicle miles, also shown on Table 40 , indicate
the same results as the projected ADT for the portion of 1-85 from the
DeKalb County line; the estimated daily vehicle miles continue to
decrease northward to the northern boundary of the Yellow River Sub-
basin.
Georgia Highway 23: Georgia 23 serves the northern portion of the Yel-
low River Sub-basin and runs parallel to 1-85 in Gwinnett County. Bu-
ford Highway (23) provides another link from Atlanta to the Yellow
River Sub-basin. While the highway is extremely congested closer to
the city, the portion of the highway in the Yellow River Sub-basin
has an estimated ADT of 10,000 and under, except in the city limits
of Norcross and at the DeKalb County line where the estimated ADT
is between 10,000 and 20,000. The estimated daily vehicle miles are
shown as over 30,000 when the highway enters Gwinnett from DeKalb
County. The figure drops as many vehicles proceed north on 1-85
via Norcross-Tucker Road or take 141 into North Fulton County. As
Gwinnett County grows, there will be an increased demand on the portion
of Georgia 23 indicated on Table 40 . Both the projected ADT and
estimated vehicle miles increase significantly at the point of entry
to Gwinnett County. This excessive congestion is due to increased us-
age of 1-85, which creates a need to find alternative routes to Atlanta.
Georgia Highway 124: This corridor extends from Lithonia in DeKalb
County northward into Gwinnett County through the center of Snellville
and Lawrenceville. The greatest ADT in this area is located in Lithon-
ia (12,351). The ADT was not counted for Lawrenceville in 1976; how-
ever, a count will be available in 1977. The estimated vehicle mile
figure is varied for Georgia 124. Table 40 indicates, however, that
the greatest use of the highway during 1976 was between Lawrenceville
and Snellville.
The projected ADT and daily vehicle miles increase around the three ma-
jor developed areas of the highway: Lithonia, Snellville and Lawrence-
ville. The increased amount of traffic may require improvements in
these specific locations but will probably not require major expansions.
-------
Georgia Highway 20: This highway originates north of the Yellow River
Sub-basin and runs southward through Lawrenceville, then proceeds
southeastward through Grayson into Walton, Rockdale, Newton and Henry
Counties. Georgia Highway 20 is a major interchange off Interstate 85,
in the northern portion of the Yellow River Sub-basin in Gwinnett
County. Georgia Highway 20 also serves as an important link to 1-20
in the southern portion of the Yellow River Sub-basin in Rockdale
County.
The estimated ADT and estimated daily vehicle miles are greatest approx-
imately one mile north of the Lawrenceville city limits. There are
no permanent county stations located in Lawrenceville at the present
time.
The cities of Lawrenceville, Loganville, and Conyers will be most
affected by the increased traffic in the year 2000.- Georgia 20 has
already been widened in Lawrenceville but, due to projected increases
in ADT and estimated daily travel, improvements may be necessary in
other locations.
Georgia Highway 138: Georgia 138 spans five counties in the Upper Oc-
mulgee River Basin including Walton, Newton, Rockdale, Henry and Clayton
Counties. Portions of the highway in the Yellow River Sub-basin are
located in Walton, Rockdale, and Newton Counties.
Highway 138 runs southeastward from Walnut Grove in Walton County
231 miles to the Newton County line, then 1.76 miles through the nor-
thernmost tip of Newton County. The largest portion of Georgia Highway
138 is located in Rockdale County where the highway intersects with
1-20 just east of Conyers.
The estimated ADT is significantly higher in the three-mile area sur-
rounding the 1-20 interchange (see Table 40 ). The increase in projected
ADT and estimated daily vehicle miles is indicative of the increased pop-
ulation that the Conyers area will experience by the year 2000.
U. S. Highway 278: U.S. 278 is contiguous with 1-20 in portions of Rock-
dale and Newton Counties as indicated on Figure 28. This highway extends
through the Study Area from DeKalb County, Rockdale County and Newton
County, then into the Alcovy River Sub-basin.
The major artery provides easy accessibility for the cities of Covington
and Conyers through the southern portion of the Yellow River Sub-basin
to the City of Atlanta. This highway along with 1-20 will be one of the
major causes of expansion to the areas they serve by the year 2000. The
estimated ADT increases from under 2,000 at the Newton-Rockdale line to
the 2,000 and over category when the highway approaches and enters Coving-
ton and extends to the end of the Yellow River Sub-basin.
-------
U.S. Highway 29: U.S. 29, which runs in a northeast direction across
from DeKalb County through Gwinnett County, was the major east-west
route until the construction of 1-85. Even though the interstate has
taken much of the pressure off Highway 29, numerous commercial and light
industrial developments continue to occur along this corridor due to
its convenient location.
The current estimated ADT at the DeKalb-Gwinnett County line is 13,073.
This figure decreases steadily with the exception of the portion from
Lilburn to the Lawrenceville city limits. (No count will be completed
for Lawrenceville until 1977.) It is assumed that the ADT increases
in Lawrenceville are due to the fact that the post office, the county
courthouse, and the downtown shopping areas are located in U.S. Highway
29. The estimated ADT decreases through the remaining portion of Gwin-
nett County with a slight increase near Dacula.
The estimated daily vehicle miles generally follow the same pattern
as the ADT with the exception of the portion of Highway 29 to the
northeast of Lilburn. This area has a high estimated Daily Vehicle
Mile count due to the new shopping center in that area.
It is projected that the section of Highway 29 with the greatest ADT
is that in Tucker in DeKalb County, which is one of the major growth
areas. The area with the greatest number of projected daily vehicle
miles is that section of U.S. Highway 29 near the DeKalb-Gwinnett County
line, which would indicate an influx of consumers as well as an increased
number of residents in this area.
U.S. Highway 78: This transportation system spans counties in the Upper
Ocmulgee River Basin (Fulton, DeKalb, Gwinnett and Walton) and provides
direct access from downtown Atlanta to Stone Mountain Park in DeKalb
County, Snellville in Gwinnett County, Loganville in Walton County
and then to Athens. The significance of this highway has been discussed
in the previous section.
The ADT and estimated daily vehicle miles is the greatest in the vicinity
of Stone Mountain Park, followed closely by the westernmost portion of
Highway 78 in the Yellow River Sub-basin. The Lake Lucerne area of
U.S. 78 has an estimated ADT of 20,134, which is the largest number for
U.S. 78 in Gwinnett County. The ADT for the City of Snellville is
19,013 and 14,570 (see Table 40 ). The ADT decreases significantly
outside Snellville until it reaches 4,436 at the Gwinnett-Walton County
1 ine.
Highway 78 is the only direct route from the Yellow River Sub-basin
portion of Walton County to the City of Atlanta to the west and Athens
to the east. The planned expansion of U.S. 78 will make downtown Atlanta
and Athens easily accessible for people living in all portions of the
Sub-basin.
-------
Georgia Highway 81: Walton and Newton are the two counties in the Yel-
low River Sub-basin served by Georgia Highway 81. Highway 81, which
is contiguous with the eastern boundary of the Yellow River Sub-basin,
extends from the Alcovy River Sub-basin through Loganville and Walnut
Grove in Walton County, through Covington in Newton County and then to
Jackson Lake. Highway 81 also serves Henry County, which is located
in the South River Sub-basin.. This highway provides access to Inter-
state 20 at Covington, which affords commuters easy accessibility to
Atlanta. The estimated ADT and daily vehicle miles traveled for
Highway 81 (both current and projected) can be seen in Table 28 .
Proposed Transportation Facilities for the Yellow River Sub-basin
The majority of the Yellow River Sub-basin is located in the ARC APDC.
Included in this Study Area are DeKalb, Rockdale and Gwinnett Coun-
ties. The ARC APDC is not only the largest portion of the Yellow
River Sub-basin but is also the most densely populated. This situation
requires extensive planning in the areas of improving existing road
facilities, new construction of highways and the completion of the
mass transportation system (MARTA)that includes both bus and rail
service. The goals for this region dictate that transportation fa-
cilities should be used to encourage desirable development patterns
while respecting the integrity of correnunities and natural areas
through which they pass.
The major highway projects planned for the Yellow River Sub-basin accord-
ing to ARC'S 1976 Regional Development Plan are as follows:
Lawrenceville Bypass: Extending from one mile west of Lawrenceville
to U.S. 29 one mile west of Dacula, this project will complete a bypass
around Lawrenceville business district for eastbound traffic moving
from the Lawrenceville Connector to Atlanta. At present, traffic must
pass through the downtown square of Lawrenceville.
Interstate 420: This limited access project extends eastward from the
existing Lakewood Freeway near 1-75 to 1-20 in DeKalb County. Construc-
tion of 1-420 will provide direct access for vehicles traveling east-
west south of the Central Business District and will relieve present
travel along 1-20, 1-285 and congested surface streets.
Interstate 675 and Southeast Connector: These projects are complementa-
ry, and along with 1-420 provide additional accessibility in the south-
eastern section of the Atlanta Region. 1-675 begins at 1-75 near Stock-
bridge and extends northward to 1-285 near Moreland Avenue. The South-
east Connector continues northward to 1-420 at 1-20 and includes provi-
sion for access to 1-20 westbound, facilitating travel to downtown.
1-75 South is expected to become congested beyond tolerable limits by
the year 2000 without the availability of alternate routes. The 1-675
system will provide this alternative and reduce future 1-75 congestion.
In addition, 1-675 will provide a link with 1-285 to provide a continuous
route from the northeast to the south, thus separating this movement from
-------
the congested 1-285/75 interchange. Construction of new highways must
be in conjunction with the construction of new arteries and collector
streets. While 675 is not in the Yellow River Sub-basin, it will
have a great impact on its growth and development.
With the development of new and improved expressway systems, in con-
junction with improved travel conditions on access roads, the number
of miles traveled on these highways will increase much larger in
proportion to the increased improvements.
Table 40 lists highway improvements proposed for the remaining
portion of the Yellow River Sub-basin. These priorities and figures
are revised annually.
Proposed Airports
As noted on Figure 3 , this region of the Yellow River Sub-basin
has one existing airport and there are three new locations proposed
for future sites. There is also the continuation of development at
the Hartsfield Airport to accommodate a larger amount of traffic, as well
as discussion of building a new airport in either the southern por-
tion of this Study Area or northwest of the Yellow River Sub-basin
in Paulding County.
The Gwinnett County area has been designated by ARC as a New General
Aviation Airport search area; a specific location, however, has not
been determined.
Rail
Rail transportation in the Yellow River Sub-basin provides adequate
service for all major development areas. There are no major changes
proposed in the Yellow River Sub-basin.
Rapid Transit (MARTA)
Since the beginning of publicly operated mass transportation for the
region in 1972, transit ridership has increased over 25 percent, re-
versing a history of decline. This has been accomplished through the
use of a bus system operating almost exclusively in a two-county area.
Recent analysis in the Regional Development Plan process shows that such
a system is needed and that the transit system should be extended to
provide service to areas that are expected to experience significant
future growth to aid in the shaping of that growth. Transit, therefore,
becomes not only an important mode of transportation, but a shaper of
development as well, by providing a real alternative to the use of the
automobile.
-------
The only extension to the MARTA rail transit service affecting the
Basin that is not shown in the MARTA Engineering Report dated
September 1971, is the extension of the northeast line to Norcross.
This extension is shown in the RDP to meet forecasted development,
but requires Gwinnett County to officially join the MARTA taxing
district (previously defeated in a referendum) and possibly to "buy-
in" to the system (to establish parity) if voter approval is obtained
at some future date.
Bus System Expansion
The expanded rail transit system will, by the year 2000, require a
seven-county feeder bus system. The full seven-county system is
needed to provide an intra-regional alternative to the automobile to
reduce auto congestion and to feed the recommended rail system. Such
a system would include approximately 2000 miles of surface bus routes.
Specific routes and schedules for this system cannot be identified at
this time. As the rail system evolves and development patterns change,
the busy system will be expanded to meet transportation needs. Because
of the flexibility of buses, quick and frequent changes can be made as
the region grows.
The only county in the Yellow P.iver Basin currently served by MARTA is
DeKalb. The expanded service recommended in the Atlanta RDP is also con-
tingent upon voter approval, as discussed above.
-------
I M B L C 40
ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILTY TRAVEL / DAILY VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IN
YELLOW RIVER SUB-BASIN (CURRENT AND PROJECTED)
COVINGTON METRO AREA
ESTIMATED ADT
SECTION LENGTH
IN MILES
ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES
PROJECTED
ADT
PROJECTED
ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES
9863
10544
20467
9087
4744
13831
4922
6146
11067
,16413
6163
11577
.35
.20
,10
2,23
1.143
2,766
1,107
25,816
19,109.56
20,429.
39,538.56
17,606.06
9,191.5
26,797.56
9,536.37
11,907.87
21442,31
12,425.19
11,940.81
22,430.44
13822.12
5359.12
2144.81
56018.5
5225
8014
8381
6606
7508
8745
8909
7418
7826
.44
.73
.31
.24
.06
.41
.06
.49
.68
2,299
5,851
2,598
1,605
451
3,586
535
3,635
5,322
10,123.44
15,527.12
16,238.19
12,954.12
14,546.75
16,943.44
17,261.19
14,372.37
15,162.87
4454.31
11336.31
5033.62
3109.69
873.81
6947.87
1036.56
7042.81
10330.75
-------
T"A B L E 40 (continued)
Page 2
0328
0331
6106
5286
,53
.40
3,236
2,107
11,830,37
10,241,62
6261,75
4082,31
1-278 IN COVINGTON (SEE 1-20):
0901
0904
0907
7169
6971
1410
7210
6880
14090
8874
7499
16373
.80
.20
.29
11,312
2,818
4.748
13.889.94
13.506.31
2,731.87
13.969.32
13,330.
27,299.37
17.193.37
14,429.31
31,722.60
21917
5459.87
999.25
0909
0910
0913
0916
0919
7851
7176
5027
9895
9647
19542
6470
5584
12053
3875
3658
7533
4362
3740
8102
,15
36
.61
19
.20
2,254
7,035
7,353
1,431
1,620
15,211.31
13.903.5
29,114.81
19,171.56
18.691.06
37,862.62
12,535.62
10,819.
23,352.68
7.507.37
7,087.37
14,595.19
8,451.37
7;246.25
15,697.62
4367.12
13630.12
14246.44
2772,56
3138.75
-------
. n B . . 40 Vv,v,.iti
0922
0101
0104
0107
0110
GA. 124:
2316
2313
2310
2307
2304
3507
3505
3503
2216
2213
6025
5654
8158
3897
3076
3265
3995
4077
6228
6699
1264
3611
12351
9955
12013
SECTION ID #
US. 278;( 1^20)
0801
2301
2304
2307
1501
1504
ESTIMATED APT
10005
2428
1957
2384
2641
5608
2158
,21
1.07
.31
.23
.15
1.07
1.06
1.86
.89
.62
.43
.67
.23
. .20
.65
NEWTON COUNTY
SECTION LENGTH
IN MILES
2.15
2.11
1.13
.94
2.09
2.77
-) ge
1,265 11,673.44 2450.94
6,050 10.954.62 11721.87
2.529 15.806.12 4899.94
896 7.550.44 1736
461 5,959.75 893.19
3494 5971.68 6390.53
4235 7366.85 7745.81
7583 7456.83 13869.31
5543 11391.01 10138.15
4153 12252.47 7595.84
543 2311.86 993.15
2419 6604.52 4424.35
2841 22589.98 5196.19
1991 18207.69 3641.54
7808 21971.78 14280.83
PROJECTED
ESTIMATED DAILY PROJECTED ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES APT VEHICLE MILES
19,390
43,941 4,724 8507
4,130 3,826 8002
2,694 4,619 5220
2.482 5,117 4809
11 .721 10,865 22710
5,978 4,181 11582
-------
1510
1511
GA. ;
0501
0504
0601
0604
mi
0610
GA. t
0422
1410
1407
0419
0416
0413
2403
0410
0407
0404
0401
6950
4229
4830
5078
15550
15145
12040
5504
4801
9693
7380
3284
9594
7552
6578
7696
409
TABLE 40 (continued)
605
579
2.01
1.00
1,216
579
1,172
1,122
1448
2399
1290
1330
2564
4885
2.47
.91
1.93
1 - 97
3.11
1.60
3,578
2.183
2,493
2,621
7,974
7.817
2,805
4,649
2,499
2,577
4,968
9,465
2557
1334
1770
3014
3809
5649
3961
3143
1536
1100
917
2.43
2.13
1.40
1.66
1.00
.30
1.25
1.24
2.21
3.61
.23
6,214
2,841
2,478
5.003
3,809
1,695
4,952
3,898
3,395
3,972
211
4,954
2,585
3.429
5,840
7,380
10,945
7.674
6,089
2,976
2,131
1.177
-------
TABLE 40 (continued)
GA. 36:
0219
4559
1.93
0216
3588
1.29
0213
2478
1.64
0210
1912
3.05
0207
1898
2.20
0204
1665
2.93
0201
GA. 162;
1305
.78
2701
940
.75
0701
2581
1.37
0704
2506
1.64
0707
3425
.53
0710
3429
1.45
0301
562
4,53
0304
773
2.41
0307
1221
3.68
0310
2235
1.44
0801
10430
10008
20428
2.15
2301
1957
2.11
2304
2384
1.13
2307
2641
.94
8,800
4,629
4,064
5,831
4,176
4,880
1.018
705
3,536
4,110
1,815
4,972
2 j, 547
1,863
4,495
3,218
4r394
4,130
2,694
2,482
Page 5
8.833
6,95?
4,801
3.677
3.677
3,226
2.528
1,821.
5.001
4,855
6,636
6,644
1,089
1,498
2,366
4,330
20.,208.1?
19,390.5
39,598.62
3,826
4,619
5,117
17050
8968.69
7874
11297.56
8091
9455
1972.37
1366
6851
7963
3516
9633
4935
3609
8709
6235
85135,69
8002
5220
4809
-------
0807
0810
0813
sect:
0101
0104
0107
0110
GA.
0116
0113
0107
0401
0101
SECTK
GA. 21
0701
TABLE 40 (continued)
Page 6
6572
6365
12937
6664
6441
13105
5529
. 5303
10832
.90
4.30
3.00
11,643
56,351
32,496
2,733
12,332
25,065
12,911
12,479
25391
107.587
10,274
20,987
22558
109180
62961
COVINGTON
ESTIMATED APT
5654
8158
3897
3076
SECTION LENGTH
IN MILES
1.07
.31
.23
.15
ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES
6050
2529
896
461
PROJECTED
APT
10954.62
15806.12
7550.44
5959.75
PROJECTED
ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES
11721.87
4899.94
1736
893.19
1449
1234
1232
754
1213
2.10
3,52
3,28
4,42
1,88
ROCKDALE
3,044
4,345
4,043
3,334
2,281
2,807
2,391
2,387
1,461
2.350
6460
ESTIMATED ADT
SECTION LENGTH
IN MILES
ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES
PROJECTED
ADT
PROJECTED
ESTIMATED DAILY
VEHICLE MILES
17444
18533
35978
1.00
35,978
51,913.34
55,154.21 107070.52
lOjgsf-.sass
-------
T L L
1701
0704
0707
2004
0710
0713
GA. 20:
1622
1619
1616
1613
1937
1935
1933
1604
1601
3276 .91
15365
16472 2.00
31837
14549
13027 .30
27575
1962 2.07
12376
12468 2.07
24845
1 7195
•7425
14620
2472
1067
1823
3760
5126
5369
6920
6757
5678
1.69
.68
2.08
2.14
2.31
.44
.53
.28
3.15
2.50
"agr ""
2,981
63.673
8,273
4,062
51,429
24,708
1.681
2,219
3,901
8,687
2,256
2,846
1,938
21,285
14,196
9,749.38
8871.46
45,726.24
49,020.67
94,746.91
189490.84
43,297.82
38,768.35
82,063.2
5,838.91
24620.45
12088.51
36,830.976
37,104.768 153052.7
73.938.72
21.412.32
22^96,8
43,509.12
7 s 356-67
3,175.39
5,425.25
11 ;189.76
15,254.98
15,978.14
20,593.92
20,108.83
16,897.73
7^531.01
5002.66
6603.74
11609.38
25852.51
6713.86
8469.70
5767.49
63344.16
42247.30
-------
1501
1504
1931
1929
GA. 2
0110
0108
1007
0104
0101
GA. 1
0201
0204
0207
0210
0213
1923
0216
0219
0222
0225
TABLE 40 (continued)
4790 1.65 7,903 14,255.04
7731 .44 3,402 23,007.46
5128 .44 2,256
4479 .38 1,702
1871 1.52 2,843 5,568.10
2232 .39 871 6,642.43
1927 2.23 4,297 5,734.75
1869 2.24 4mk86 5,642.50
1735 1,73 3,002 5,163.36
1261 2,88 3,632 3,752.74
1734 2.12 3,677 5,160.38
1585 2.54 4,026 4,716.96
1950 1.83 3,586 5,803.2
7334 1.00 7,334 21,825.98
2625 .89 2.337 7,812
8430 .85 7,165 25,087.68
6423 1.55 9,955 19.114.848
5747 3.62 20f803 17,103.07
4906 1,12 5,495 14,600.26
-------
6A.
2097
3000
3003
1901
1904
1907
5905
5907
1910
1-85
0341
0343
1404
1407
1410
1413
T / E (c nut
bWlNNE I I I-GUN I T oUPrmricNT
SECTION LENGTH ESTIMATED DAILY PROJECTED
ESTIMATED ADT IN MILES VEHICLE MILES ADT
15307
2.08
31,839
44,841.86
13081
.72
9,418
38,320.79
17126
1.18
20,209
50,170.62
9801
1.87
18,327
28,712.03
8788
1.53
13,886
25,744.45
9431
.85
8016
27,628.11
10254
.66
6768
30,039.09
5844
.73
4266
17,120.00
(17119.998)
3183 2.42 7703 9324.60
62366 2.22 138,453 182,701.(19)
61119 1.75 106,958 179,048.(11)
29341 85.954.46
28311 1.09 62,841 82,937.07
57652 168,891.53
33680 99,665.86
24181 1.99 115,144 70,838.24
57861 169.503.79
20587 60,309.62
19486 2.16 86,558 57,084.24
40075 117,393.85
17621 60,309.72
15744 .78 26,024 46,122.05
33364 97,739.84
-------
TABLE 40 (continued)
1416
U.S. 29:
1731
1734
5807
1110
1113
1116
1119
6315
6317
6319
1122
1125
1128
6205
6207
U.S. 78:
0373
6504
0507
1.88
3.13
1.92
1.03
.86
1.83
1,32
1.43
1.88
.52
2.06
1.25
.70
.61
.95
1.66
1.25
15778
15155
30933
13073
12811
14943
10622
9015
7094
5653
8610
6677
7024
5706
3829
11352
11850
23202
20134
12372
Page 10
58,153
40,917'
24,597
15.392
9.135
16,498
9.364
8., 084
11,952
4,477
13,755
8,780
3,994
2,336
22,042
33,422
15,465
46,221.65
44,396.57
90.618.22
38,297.35
37.529.82
43.775.52
31.117.15
26.409.44
20,781.87
16,560.46
18.622.83
170359.21
119866.35
72056.91
45090.86
26760.98
48330.89
27431.84
23682.08
35013.38
19,759.95
15,323.71
16,120.08
13,095.27
9,017.05
33,255.68
34,714.57
67.970.26
58,982.55
36,243.77
10274.71
31567.72
20150.1
9166.23
5361.12
64572.04
97909.75
45304.72
-------
1510
5705
5707
0513
0516
0519
5601
GA.
3519
3516
3513
6305
6303
3510
3507
6403
6401
3504
3501
5603
GA. 1
6311
6309
6307
i m B L t 40 ^cuntinutjil)
11697 2,16 25,266 34,266.36
19013 1.00 19,013 55,698.58
14570 1.01 14,716 42,682.81
7384 .45 3,323 21,631.43
5989 1.98 11,851 17,544.77
4436 2.58 11,445 12,995.26
5264 2.92
4902 2.13
10090 1.02
15,371 15,420.89
10,442 14,360.41
10.291 29,558.65
4746
3336
4246
3256
2507
2225
2783
1.26
1.23
.50
.56
1.99
1.65
.38
5,980
4,103
2,123
1,823
4,989
3,672
1,057
13,903.41
9,772.81
12,438.66
9,538.45
7,344.26
6,518.14
8,152.80
-------
0216
0213
5703
5701
0210
0207
0204
0201
ga. ;
0373
0370
0367
1647
1644
GA. ;
0801
0804
0007
TABLE 40 (continued)
4383
5150
7.176
5128
3169
3520
3745
3262
1.88
1.85
.99
1.02
2.41
.63
2.27
.74
8,239
9,528
7,105
5,231
7,367
2,218
8., 501
2.414
12,840
15,086.93
21,022.09
15,022.48
9,283.59
10,311.84
10,970.98
9,556.03
11352
11850
23202
17061
16999
43060
7799
8981
16780
9358
7793
17150
16909
20140
37049
1820
1900
1872
.95
1.22
.94
2.18
1.35
.89
3.00
22042
41553
15774
37388
2.13 78914
WALTON COUNTY
2,457
1,691
5,615
20762.81
21673.65
42436.46
31204.57
31091.17
78756.74
14264.37
16426.25
30690.62
17115.78
14253.39
31367.35
30926.56
36836.06
67762.62
3,385.(2)
3,534
3.481.(92)
-------
3201
3203
3217
GA. I
3213
3215
0513
0510
0507
0504
0501
U.S.
3205
3207
3209
3211
1201
1204
1207
1210
1213
T A B LE 40 (continued)
2517 .88 2,215 4,681.(62)
2209 .48 1,061
3343 .40 1,337
1034 .48 496
1672 .76 1,271
2996 3.90 11,685 5,572.(56)
3227 .48 1,549 6,002.(22)
2318 2.40 5,562 4,311.(48)
2815 1.28 3.604 5,235.(9)
1981 1.40 2,774 3,684.(66)
7809 .35 2,733 14,524.(34)
6045 .19 1,149 11,243.(7)
7213 .86 6,204 13,416.(18)
9307 .27 2.513 17,311.(02)
5264 .19 1,000 9,791.(04)
4911 2.42 11,885
4665 2.05 9,563
4471 .86 3,845
5506 2.70 14,867
-------
TABLE
GA. 138:
0701
0704
0707
0710
1-20:
2901
3846
3572
3648
4559
3753
3127
6880
2.31
2.26
2.80
2.34
1.51
(concluded)
8.883 7,153.56
8.072
10.216
=10,669
Page 14
16522.(38)
10,388
-------
B.5 NATURAL RESOURCE USE
Electricity
Except for hydroelectric generation, Georgia is a 100 percent importer
of energy — coal, oil, gas and uranium. Therefore, Georgia's energy
position is almost totally dependent on the national energy picture.
Electricity is a derivative form of energy. It cannot be generated
without the use of other fuels. The fuels used are coal, oil, natural
gas, uranium and falling water. Georgia Power, which serves the ma-
jority of this area, uses coal for 80 percent of the power generated,
oil for 5 percent, hydropower for 5 percent and nuclear power for
10 percent.
Electric energy supply depends upon two basic considerations -- fuel
supply and generating capacity. Time frames are the present (two
or three years), the mid-range future (until about 1985), and time
beyond.
Georgia has much at stake in national fuel supply questions because
of all of our fuel being imported from other states.
Coal is the nation's most plentiful energy source. In 1976, 80 per-
cent of Georgia's electric power was coal fueled. However, present
air quality control regulations, principally relating to the sulfur
content of fuel, restrict the use of available domestic coal as a
basic fuel.
The air quality standards are a desirable goal. Their establishment
has severely tested existing technology, and the time required to
achieve them from a practical, technological standpoint. To meet these
standards, the electric power industry must expend large amounts of
money for removing sulfur and other contaminants. The alternative
is to use less available, more expensive, low-suTfur coal that also
has a lower heat value and more ash. This is currently the practice
locally.
There are always trade-offs. In the present and immediate future,
the availability of power may test our concern for the auality of our
air. In the longer range, a balance of the optimal conditions for
both power and environmental quality can be achieved through research
and development.
Proven reserves of natural gas have rapidly diminished in recent years
and are no longer used in the production of electric power. Hydro-
power is an important ingredient in the overall availability of elec-
tric service. Its availability in a system provides flexibility for
meeting peak demand and enhances reliability.
Nuclear power, like hydropower, requires long planning and construc-
tion lead times. Solar power is still in its embryonic form and not
-------
yet sufficiently advanced technologically to promise near term re-
sults for power production. Nuclear power is an available techno-
logy but is currently a subject of public debate. Base load nuclear
generating units can replace significant amounts of other fuels and
reduce air pollutants. However, the current controversy regarding
public acceptability of nuclear power must be resolved.
Power Distributors
The system of distribution for Georgia involves power produced by
generating plants located throughout the entire state. The power
is then transferred into the state grid and is automatically sent
to areas that need the power. The Georgia grid is also connected
to those operated in Alabama, Mississippi and the Florida panhandle.
A computer system determines where the demand is and the location
that can produce the power most efficiently.
Production of power in the Basin occurs at three levels: Base Load,
Intermediate, and Peak facilities. The computers that automatically
control the flow of power also control which of these plants are to
be used. The Base Load plants are considered to be most efficient.
This classification (most efficient) changes during different times
of the day and in different weather conditions. Intermediate plans,
which operate at a higher cost, are only operated when needed. This
is true for Peak facilities as well, which mainly operate in the
summer months (Georgia's peaking period). These Peak facilities
also operate when a Base or Intermediate plant is down or being
repaired.
The Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is served by the following types of
systems*: one investor-owned system (Georgia Power), four Electric
Membership Corporations, and four municipally owned systems. Georgia
Power is the major supplier of electricity for the region. Various
EMCs and municipalities listed below also play an important role
in distributing electric power:
The EMCs of Georgia have joined together under Oglethorpe EMC in
order to purchase power at wholesale rates. The municipal systems
have also formed an organization known as Municipal Electric Autho-
ity of Georgia. The purpose of these organizations has expanded in
recent years to purchasing portions of the new power plants and trans-
mission lines built by Georgia Power. Oglethorpe EMC predicts that
EMCs
Municipal Systems
Jackson EMC
Walton EMC
Snapping Shoals
Central Georgia
Lawrenceville
Monroe
Covington
College Park
East Point
Information on actual usage to be provided.
-------
they will be totally self-sufficient by the year 1985. The MEGA
predicts that they will become self-sufficient in 1990.
Plant Location in Basin
The only power plant located in the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin is
Lloyd Shoals which is located in Jackson, Georgia, and which forms
Lake Jackson. There are six generators located at this hydroelectric
plant, which have a combined capacity of 14,400 kw. According to
the Georgia Public Service Commission, no power plant sites are pro-
posed for the area in the near future.
Natural Gas
Because of increased consumption of natural gas and a decline in
proven reserves, annual sales continue to exceed additions to
proven reserves. Environmental considerations and economic factors
have delayed development of potential gas sources, and exploratory
drilling for new wells has reached its lowest level in a quarter
century. Consequently, the Federal Power Commission has directed
some gas suppliers to file gas curtailment plans.
The natural gas supply situation in Georgia varies from company to
company and from town to town. In general, it appears that gas supply
is sufficient to serve the existing residential and commercial custo-
mers, but will not be sufficient for all new customers in the near
future. Less gas will be available for industry, and all gas will
be more expensive.
Since the problems of the Atlanta Gas Light Company are typical of
natural gas suppliers in Georgia, a brief description will be given
of their operations. The Atlanta Gas Light Company has long-term
contracts with two natural gas pipeline suppliers in the Upper Ocmul-
gee Basin including Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation and
South Georgia Natural Gas Company.
Southern Georgia Natural Gas Company provides natural gas to the me-
tropolitan Atlanta area where it is distributed to DeKalb, Fulton,
Clayton, Henry, and portions of Newton Counties by the Atlanta Gas
Light Company.
Transcontinental Pipeline Corporation provides gas to Rockdale, portions
of Walton, Gwinnett and portions of Henry County.
Municipal Gas systems including Covington, Jackson, Lawrenceville,
Monroe and Social Circle purchase natural gas directed from Trans-
continental Gas Pipeline. Atlanta Gas Light, however, is the largest
distributor for the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin.
-------
The Company's pipeline suppliers have filed curtailment plans with the
FPC for the stated purpose of protecting to the extent possible gas
supplies to residential and firm commercial customers. The Company's
sales of interruptible gas to certain of its industrial customers
have been adversely affected by the implementation of these plans.
There can be no assurance that limitations on interruptible service
will not continue or even increase, or that restrictions will not be
imposed limiting the addition of interruptible or firm customers.
There are no plans to increase the number of pipelines to the Basin
in the near future.
Natural Resource Users
At present there are no manufacturing operations that use natural
resources as part of their production system. The only extraction
industry operation in the Basin are granite quarries (6) and extremely
small sand dredging operations.
Source: The Energy Problem and Its Implication for Georgia,
Georgia Center for Technology Forecasts and Assessment.
-------
B.6 WATER PROGRAMS
This discussion of water programs involves a. Review of work currently
being concluded for a major portion of the Study Area under the aus-
pices of the Urban Studies Program, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
In addition, similar discussions describe the activities of the State
of Georgia, Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection
Division in the area of wastewater collection and treatment systems,
stream classification and wasteload allocations established by the
Georgia Water Basin Management Plan. Finally, the correlation of
the work done for the majority of the Study Area under the Urban Stu-
dies Program and the work performed by the Georgia Environmental Pro-
tection Division are discussed as a means of balancing both water
supply and wastewater treatment.
Existing Water Programs
The Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study was authorized at the
request of Senator Herman Talmadge of Georgia by resolution adopted
March 1972 by the Public Works Committee of the U. S. Senate. The
study encompasses the jurisdiction of the Atlanta Regional Commission
and portions of abutting counties. It was undertaken as a three and
one-half year effort and financed by a $1.3 million authorization of
federal fundings matched by one quarter million dollars of effort by
local and state governments. The study was undertaken on a cooperative
basis by the principle parties identified below:
... Atlanta Regional Commission
... Georgia Department of Natural Resources
... U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
... U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
... Assistance and cooperation by other federal,
state and local agencies
The purpose of the study was to evaluate existing water resources, cur-
rent and future needs, and to recommend methods of meeting those
needs. The primary objective was to develop a comprehensive water
resources plan for the Atlanta Region.
While the Study Area was expanded during the course of the work to
include contiguous counties of the Atlanta Regional Commission area
of jurisdiction, it did not involve itself with Newton, Walton, Butts
and Jasper Counties, which are included in the Study Area of this
environmental impact statement. However, the vast majority of the
population, which consumes water with its attendant needs 'for treatment,
were included within the Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study.
Existing Water Systems
Approximately 90 percent of the population within the Upper Ocmulgee
Study Area is dependent upon the Chattahoochee River in conjunction
with Lake Lanier for water supply. In excess of 80 percent of the
total water supply used to meet the needs of the metropolitan Atlanta
-------
TABLE 41
EXISTING WATER SOURCES
Jurisdiction
Clayton County
DeKalb County
Fulton County/Atlanta
Gwinnett County
Gwinnett County
City of Buford
City of Grayson
City of Lawrenceville
Henry County
City of McDonough
Newton County
City of Covington
City of Porterdale
Rockdale County
City of Conyers
City of Conyers
Jm.
Impoundment
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Wells
Wells
Surface
Surface
Surface
Surface
Wells
Source
Cotton Indian Creek
Chattahoochee River
Chattahoochee River
Chattahoochee River
Lake Lanier
Chattahoochee River
Groundwater
Groundwater
Walnut Creek
Alcovy River
Yellow River
Yellow River
Groundwater
-------
TABLE 42
POTENTIAL NEW WATER SUPPLY RESERVOIRS
Maximum
Sustained Yield Surface Area
(MGD) (Acres.)
Big Haynes Creek 13 460
Big Cotton Indian Creek 30 514
Shoal Creek 6 303
Yellow River 124 2,850
Alcovy River NA NA
(Cornish and Big Flat Creeks)
Source: Atlanta Water Resources Study & USDA,
Watershed Development in Georgia, Status Report, Sept, 1976,
-------
GWINNETT
CHATTAHOOCHEE R.
BUFFORD
GWINNETT
LANIER
DEKALB CO.
%
ATLAH
y
Olittle
INDIAN
ATLANTA 8
FULTON CO.
to O Km.
1
Ml.
0
V
"X Hi/
\/ S Coi/IN^TONf >
/
sgr \( / /,
* A^(
•JACKSON
LAKE
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
EXISTING WATER SUPPLY
FIGURE 29
-------
population is drawn from the Chattahoochee River and Lake Sidney
Lanier. The remaining 20 percent is drawn from a combination of
smaller impoundments, wells, or other river systems. Within the Upper
Ocmulgee Basin, Gwinnett County presently has a 12 MGD intake struc-
ture on the Chattahoochee River and is completing construction of a
40 MGD intake structure within Lake Lanier. DeKalb and Fulton Counties
are totally dependent upon the Chattahoochee River for their source.
The Clayton County Water and Sewer Authority maintains impoundments
in adjacent Henry County on Big and Little Cotton Indian Creeks.
The Conyers-Rockdale County system uses a combination of wells and a
water intake structure on the Yellow River at Mil stead. The Covington-
Newton County System is dependent upon the Alcovy River for its source
of supply. Figure 29 shows existing sources of water supply and major
points of withdrawal within the Upper Ocmulgee Basin.
Potable Water Systems
The Atlanta Water Resources Study identified all major surface and
ground water sources of water supply within their Study Area. The
only additional water supply sources not identified by the AWRS are
those of the Covington-Newton system and for the City of McDonough
within the Upper Ocmulgee Basin. The following table, Table 41 ,
identifies these major sources of water supply by source and juris-
dictions served. This table shows the heavy reliance of the metropol-
itan area upon the Chattahoochee River and Lake Lanier for its
source of water.
The AWRS study also evaluated potential new sources of water supply,
typically in the form of reservoir development. Table 42 identifies
these potential new water supply reservoirs within the AWRS Study
Area. It should be noted that in adjacent jurisdictions falling within
the Upper Ocmulgee Basin there have been additional local initiatives
toward the creation of new water supply impoundments by Walton and
Newton Counties on Big Flat Creek and Cornish Creek, which are tribu-
taries to the Alcovy River. Big Haynes Creek has been investigated
by Gwinnett and Rockdale Counties, and Clayton County has investi-
gated Shoal and Big Cotton Indian Creeks. Table 43 , Present and
Projected Potable Water Use, is extracted from the 303 Basin Plan.
While this table identifies potential withdrawals on a forecasted basis
from numerous tributaries as well as main stems of rivers within the
Basin, it is a general assessment based on population projections not
fully contrasted with sustainable yields from the respective sources.
Specifically, in the AWRS study some of these same tributary and
main stem segments are addressed as to their future desiraoility as
a source of water supply. In many of these tributaries as well as
in the upper regions of the Yellow and the Alcovy Rivers problems
exist that place doubt on their future suitability as a water supply
or source.
-------
TABLE 43
UPPER OCMULGEE RIVER BASIN
PRESENT AND PROJECTED
POTABLE WATER USE
MINOR BASINS
1970
1980
1990
2000
2020
GPCPD
GPCPD
MGD
GPCPD
MGD
GPCPD
MGD
GPCPD
MGD
GPCPD
MGD
1.
Shoal Creek
115
3.25
115
3.62
120
4.08
135
4.72
150
6.38
155
8.06
2.
Intrenchment Creek
160
9.52
160
9.32
165
9.90
170
10.8
175
11.6
175
12.6
3.
East Point
160
14.8
160
15.2
165
16.7
170
18.1
175
20.6
175
28.7
4.
Above Snapflnger Creek
115
14.3
115
16.3
120
27.6
135
38.3
150
48.6
155
58.9
5.
Above Cotton-Indian Creek
115
1.67
115
1.64
115
2.93
120
5.01
120
6.24
125
8.75
6.
Cotton-Indian Creek
115
2.44
115
3.05
115
4.43
120
5.82
120
8.52
125
17.6
7.
Walnut Creek
115
0.83
115
0.92
115
1.58
120
2.52
120
3.18
125
3.59
8.
Lower South River
115
0.52
115
0.55
115
0.70
120
0.88
120
1.02
125
1.37
9.
Upper Yellow River
100
4.60
100
5.40
110
9.57
115
15.9
120
24.7
125
59.8
TO.
Lower Yellow River
100
1.36
100
1.45
110
1.83
115
2.17
120
2.55
125
3.19
11.
Upper Alcovy River
100
0.35
100
0.40
100
0.52
105
0.71
110
0.96
120
1.74
12.
Lower Alcovy River
100
2.60
100
2.70
100
3.08
105
3.62
110
4.18
115
4.94
TOTAL FLOWS
56.24
60.55
82.92
108.55
138.53
209.24
1 6PCPD = Gallons Per Capita Per Day
2 MGD = Million Gallons Per Day
-------
Since the upper reaches of the Yellow and Alcovy Rivers, as well as many
of the tributaries thereto, are headwater areas, they experience great
fluctuation in flow. In addition, it is in these same areas that much
of the new development is anticipated, thus injecting the problem of
maintaining water quality in addition to dependable flow. As a conse-
quence of these two concerns, the AWRS study, while identifying some
of these tributaries as potential new water supply sources, is equally
concerned with maintenance of water quality in these stream basins in
the face of non-point pollution emanating from new urban activities.
Interbasin Transfer
Water supply systems within the Atlanta metropolitan area have his-
torically used the most abundant, high quality water that was most
reasonably available. For most of the water supply system, this
has meant the Chattahoochee River as the source of supply.
i
Since domestic water supplies are distributed under pressure, the dis-
tribution system need not be restrained by the rolling terrain of the
area. Consequently, the source of supply in one basin frequently
found its point of use in another basin.
As the area grew in population, the water supply systems grew to meet
the demands carrying Chattahoochee water to users in the South, Flint,
Yellow and Alcovy Basins. Table 44 provides a rough balance sheet
on the interbasin transfers of water that are occurring within the At-
lanta region. Both the Chattahoochee and the Etowah have their head-
waters in the mountains of north Georgia; thus, as they approach the
vicinity of the Atlanta metropolitan area, they are of good quality
and ample flow. Conversely, the waters of the Flint, South, Yellow and
Alcovy Rivers originate within the Atlanta metropolitan area, have mini-
mal or highly variable rates of flow and are not dependable sources
for public water supply unless impounded.
Table 44 also highlights a second significant aspect of interbasin
transfer. The waters taken from the Chattahoochee and the Etowah
.and eventually placed into the Flint, South, Yellow or Alcovy Rivers
reach those rivers in the form of treated wastewater. In the South
River, where this condition is most prevalent, there are recorded in-
stances during periods of low flow when the discharge of wastewater
exceeds the natural flow of the river. This condition, obviously com-
pounds efforts toward improving the water quality of the South River.
Interbasin transfer has not gained great public attention, yet histor-
ically has been a practice widely employed throughout the State of
Georgia. As emphasized in the Atlanta Water Resources Study, the lo-
cal supply of water, particularly from the Chattahoochee system, is
reaching its limit and, without concerted planning and public actions,
could become a restricted source of supply after the year 2000.
-------
TABLE 44
MAJOR RIVER BASIN WATER TRANSFERS IN THE ATLANTA REGION
(million gallons per day, average day)
RIVER BASIN
Year
Chattahoochee
Etowah
Flint
South
Yellow
Total
1970
Water Supply Withdrawal
179
12
0
10
2
203 Consumed: 35
Wastewater Discharge (1)
112
5
9
35
7
168 Transferred: 39
Difference
- 67
-7
+9
+25
+5
-35
Amount Transferred (2)
- 35
-4
+9
+26
+4
39
2000
Water Supply Withdrawal
461
27
4
10
0
492 Consumed: 93
Wastewater Discharge (1)
263
8
25 (3)
75
28
399 Transferred: 117
Difference
-198
-9
+21
+65
+28
-93
Amount Transferred (2)
-111
-6
+22
+67
+28
117
Notes: 1. Does not include inflow/infiltration
2. Calculated as follows: (Wastewater flow - Water supply + percentage of water supply
that is consumed).
3. Applied to a land treatment site within the basin; not discharged directly to the river.
Source: Atlanta Water Resources Study.
-------
This study has been instrumental in bringing attention to the question
of interbasin transfers and the problems that have resulted from them.
As a consequence, the study has advanced concepts of rediversions back
to the basin from which the water was originally withdrawn.
Numerous recommendations have been made regarding rediversion, but the
largest rediversion recomnended would involve placing the discharges
from Atlanta's Flint River, Intrenchment Creek and South River waste-
water treatment facilities into a major interceptor and diverting these
discharges from the current receiving streams, the Flint and South Rivers,
to the Chattahoochee River. Rediversion has also been advanced and is
now being implemented in Clayton County, where treated wastewater flows
back to the South River Basin for ultimate land spray disposal. An
additional rediversion project is advanced for Gwinnett and DeKalb
Counties, taking flow which would otherwise discharge to the Yellow
River and diverting it to the South River.
The purpose of these proposed rediversions is only secondarily related
to an attempt to balance water withdrawal and wastewater discharges in
the same basin. The primary focus is to maintain stream water quality
standards within individual river systems and to protect downstream
users who must use these streams as their source of water supply. Even
in the proposed year 2000 plan the disparity between withdrawals and
discharges is proposed to continue and the AWRS study estimates diver-
sion increasing from its current level of 39 million gallons per day in
1970 to a possible 117 million gallons per day in the year 2000 without
implementation of rediversion projects.
System Expansions
As one would expect with a growing metropolitan area, water supply sy-
stems are faced with the problem of meeting anticipated population growth
and their attendant water supply requirements. Within the Upper Ocmul-
gee Basin, the three major water supply systems are the City of Atlanta
system, the DeKalb County system, and the Gwinnett County system. Each
of these major systems, as well as the smaller systems of Clayton County,
Conyers-Rockdale and Covington-Newton, plans expansion to their systems,
both in production capacity and ^distribution extensions. The three
major systems have all taken steps to increase their supply through new
or expanded intake structures on the Chattahoochee River system. The
largest of these is the proposed 40 MGD intake structure within Lake
Sidney Lanier now being constructed by the Gwinnett County water system.
Similarly, DeKalb County is proposing to finance an increased intake ca-
pability to service a new mid-county treatment facility in an attempt
to meet projected demands and to balance pressure requirements in the
southern half of the county. These new intake structures, the Lake Lan-
ier intake in Gwinnett County, a new intake of DeKalb County in the Chat-
tahoochee, and a proposed new intake structure for the City, of Atlanta/
Fulton County system on the Chattahoochee, are programmed to withdraw
60 MGD, 96 MGD, and 235 MGD, respectively, in the year 2000.
-------
T A B L E 45
COMPARISON OF ATLANTA VERSUS AVERAGE U.S. CAPITA WATER USE
AVERAGE U.S. CITY
GALLONS PER CAPITA
PER DAY
PERCENT
ATLANTA REGION
TYPE OF
USE
GALLONS PER
CAPITA PER DAY
PFRCENT
Residential
74
52
74
47
Commercial
28
20
28
18
Industrial
20
14
37
23
Public/
Unaccounted
20
14
20
12
TOTAL: 142 100 159 100
Note: Average per capita water use in the Atlanta Region versus average per capita water
use in an average U.S. City, 1970. Qate for average U.S. city taken from Water Resources Council,
The Nation's Water.Resources,.1968. p.4-1-2
-------
The smaller water systems of the southern tier of counties are also
programming and installing system expansions. Due to their limited
source of supply, however, intra-governmental agreements have been
reached with many of the systems so that they are interconnected in
the event of an emergency or can provide back-up service for extended
periods of time. Such agreements are common throughout the metro-
politan Atlanta area, and within the Basin such agreements exist
between the DeKalb County and Gwinnett County systems, between
DeKalb, Gwinnett, and Rockdale and between cities and their respec-
tive county systems.
Water Conservation
A growing realization of the conservation ethic is challenging many of
the old concepts for continually expanding systems and encouraging
increased consumption. While the trends leading toward our present
energy crisis have been apparent for many years, an oil embargo im-
posed by a foreign cartel was required to bring the true magnitude of
the situation to the understanding of the American people. The national
program to clean our nation's streams has brought home the cost of
wastewater treatment services to the average taxpayer. The Atlanta
Water Resources Study has made public the fact that despite its location
in a region with an abundance of water, the Atlanta region can now
chart the upper limits of its water supplies.
Due to the direct relationship between water supply and wastewater re-
quirements, any program that results in reduced consumption of water
supply will have a direct reduction in the requirement for wastewater
treatment.
The residential consumer currently accounts for approximately 50 percent
of all water consumption based on a national average as well as within
the Atlanta region. Table 45 contrasts the Atlanta region with an
average U. S. city. While total annual consumption is somewhat reduced
from the average American city, the comparisons by the type of use are
quite similar. The correlation between water consumption and the
requirement for wastewater treatment is demonstrated in Figure 30
A more detailed look at the water-using activities within a household
demonstrates that more than half of the total household consumption
can be attributed to personal bathing and toilet flushing. Currently,
the average water closet or toilet tank utilizes approximately five
gallons of treated water per flush. In contrast, water conserving ap-
pliances are currently on the market that perform the same function
just as adequately utilizing only 3k gallons per flush. Showering
accounts for approximately 60 percent of all water used for personal
bathing. The combination of toilet flushing and personal bathing,
whether a tub bath or a shower, accounts for approximately 80 percent
of the per capita use of treated water in the average household. Here
again, water-saving shower devices are commercially available that
can reduce rates of consumption.
-------
FIGURE 30
Population
(Millions)
Mill ions
Gallons
Per Day
(MGD)
1970 1980 1990 2000
YEAR
Population, water demand, and
wastewater generation in the
Atlanta Region, 1970 to 2000.
-------
If residential consumers account for more than half the total daily
water consumption and, further, if 80 percent of that residential
consumption can be attributed to toilet flushing and bathing, concentra-
tion on these two areas of water conservation can make a meaningful
impact on production demands for treated water and in a direct fash-
ion on system expansions required in wastewater treatment. If a
conservation effort were launched to reduce water consumption, logi-
cally the largest water consuming use (residential) and, further,
the major water-consuming devices within the house (toilets and
showers) offer two avenues for attacking the problem. A basic program
would first correct plumbing codes to require the installation of
water-saving toilets and shower heads, both for new construction and
for replacement construction and, secondly, a public information campaign
directed toward increased awareness would be undertaken.
The Atlanta Regional Corrmission has performed a conservation evaluation
based on two projected year 2000 scenarios. The following table (Table 46
represents the effect of these two scenarios on both water consumption
and wastewater flows. The almost one-to-one relationship between re-
duced water consumption and reduced wastewater flows is demonstrated
by this table.
An educational appeal to the public can also result in meaningful con-
servation practices. During the severe water shortage experienced by
the New York metropolitan area in the early 1960s such a program was
undertaken and records kept of the results. While the public appeal
was buttressed with mandatory restrictions on water-consuming activities
like watering lawns and using water for cleaning buildings, the results
were indeed impressive (see Table 47 ).
Since water consumption for personal hygiene is not a major factor
with most commercial and industrial activities, other avenues must be
pursued to address water conservation techniques for these types of
uses. Rate structures offer the greatest promise for encouraging con-
servation by commercial and industrial enterprises. It is now a stan-
dard practice for water supply systems to meter consumption and to bill
accordingly. It is also common practice for such utilities to estab-
lish their rate structures on the basis of descending block rates.
This means that with greater levels of consumption per unit cost is
reduced, thus encouraging consumption by high water users. Such basis
for rate structures are now being reevaluated by many systems in an
effort to encourage conservation.
An important element in this reevaluation are the requirements of
the Federal EPA. As part of their grant programs for pollution-control
projects, rate structures must be reviewed and meet acceptable stan-
dards as a condition for receiving grants. These requirements provide
that grant applicants must adopt user charges as a means of assuring
that each user contributes his fair share toward operating and capital
costs. As a result, the once common practice of assigning flat rates
-------
T A B L E - 46
WATER CONSERVATION
Residential Commercial Industrial
Public &
Unaccounted
Total
Water
Use, 1975
129
48
34
33
244
Water
(No
Use, 2000
Conservation)
281
97
69
56
503
Water
Saved, 2000 A*
34 (12%)
-
-
-
34
(7%)
Water
Saved, 2000 B**
50 (20%)
11 (11%)
-
6 (11%)
67
(13%)
*2000 A - Conservation in new residential construction. Assume all increases in population after 1975
are served with water-conserving appliances in the residences.
**2000 B - Conservation in new construction and replacements in residential, commercial and public. Assume
all increases in population after 1975 and half of the 1975 population are served with new
appliances. Assume the percentage of total water demand used by toilets is 41 percent of
residential use and'50% of both commercial and public and unaccounted uses (arbitrary). Assume
that 22% of residential demand is used by showers, and 0% of commercial and public and unaccountec.
Waste Flows, 1975
Waste Flows, 2000
(No Conservation)
Flow Reduction, 2000 A*
Flow Reduction, 2000 B**
WASTFWATER CONSERVATION
Residential Commercial Industrial
90
197
24 (13%)
35 (18%)
46
92
10 (11%)
32
66
Public &
Unaccounted
30
50
6 (12%)
Total
198
405
24 (6%)
51 (13%)
*2000 A - Conservation in new residential construction.
**2000 B - Conservation in new and replacement residential, commercial, and public construction.
Source: ARC Staff Working Paper, Possibilities for Water Conservation in Atlanta Region, ARC, March 1976.
-------
T A. B-L E -47
WATER USE IN THE NEW YORK METROPOLITAN AREA
NONINDUSTRIAL USE
INDUSTRIAL USE
TOTAL
USE
YEAR
GPCPD
% CHANGE
MGD
% CHANGE
MGD
% CHANGE
1960
118
-
282
-
1157
-
1961
119
+ 0.8
289
+ 2.5
1167
+ 0.9
1962
118
0.0
280
- 0.7
1151
- 0.5
1963
118
0.0
285
+ 1.8
1158
+ 0.0
1964
114
- 3.4
280
- 0.7
1132
- 2.4
1965
97
-17.8
281
- 0.4
994
-14.1
1966
95
-19.5
283
+ 0.4
987
-14.7
1967
110
-6.8
252
-10.5
1076
- 7.0
Note: The effect of public education and use restrictions on water demand in
New York City. (Fron Temporary State Commission on the Water Needs
of S.E. New York, Measures to Reduce Water Consumption in S.E. New York,
1973, Albany, N.YTJ.
1. Lawn sprinkling in municipal parks and golf courses was stopped.
2. Street cleaning by flushing with water was stopped.
3. Hydrant harnesses were installed and laws against illegal hydrant
openings were strictly enforced.
4. Water use for cleaning subway cars and buses was reduced.
5. A ban on using water to clean buildings and other structures was
instituted.
6. Ornamental fountains were shut down.
7. Water use for lawns and gar-ens was banned.
8. Restrictions on water use for air conditioners were imposed.
Source: ARC Staff Working Paper, Possibilities for Water Conservation in the
Atlanta Region, ARC, March 1976.
-------
for sewage service is rapidly evolving into more equitable systems
frequently based on water consumption.
A further and equally significant aspect of federal requirements for
rate structures requires that any water consumer, such as an industrial
process whose sewage effluent inflicts a greater treatment cost on the
system relative to the average, is required to pay higher rates or to
pretreat their effluent before discharging to the public system.
While it has been shown that rate structures are relatively inelastic
for the residential consumer, they are much more elastic for the large
water consumer. Due to the combination of EPA grant requirements and
generally increasing rates resulting from reevaluation of rate struc-
tures, industries or commercial activities -- that are considered high
water users — have investigated and instituted water-saving practices
such as cycling, modification of industrial processes, and the pre-
treatment of industrial discharges.
The improvement of system efficiency is another area in which conser-
vation practices are being implemented. Many of the major systems
within the Atlanta metropolitan area maintain monitoring equipment
or conduct periodic surveys to determine the losses within their system
resulting from breaks, seals, non-metered or illegal connections. In
an effort to improve the efficiency of wastewater collection and treat-
ment systems, the Federal EPA requires infiltration/inflow analyses to
be performed on collection systems. These evaluations require the mon-
itoring of collection networks to assure ground water or other author-
ized discharges into the collection system are identified, and the
worst problems corrected. The benefits of these programs result in
greater efficiency and less cost to the consuming public.
Wastewater Programs
The amendments of 1972 to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act es-
tablished national standards that all systems utilizing federal grants
must obtain within benchmark years. While the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency is assigned the overall responsibility to assure compli-
ance, much has been delegated to the Georgia Department of Natural Re-
sources, Environmental Protection Division.
The dates by which standards must be attained are itemized below:
... 1977 Secondary treatment, defined as 85 percent removal
of oxygen-demanding pollutants, must be imple-
mented. (Standard)
... 1983 Wherever attainable, an interim goal of water qual-
ity that provides for the protection and propaga-
tion of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides
for recreation in and on the water shall be achieved
by July 1, 1983. (National Goal)
-------
TABLE 48
TREATMENT FACILITY DATA BY
Public Systems
SUB-BASINS
L- ) ' > •'
NAME
LOCATION
WQMU
FLOW
TREATMENT
YELLOW RIVER
NEWTON COUNTY WPC
PORTERDALE
0491
1 .0
Activated Sludge
Secondary
LAWRENCEVILLE
REDLAND CREEK
0407
.63
Trickling Filter
GWINNETT COUNTY
SPRINGDAL F ESTATES S/D
BEAVER RUIN CREEK
0406
.25
Secondary
Activated Sludge
NORCROSS-PIRKLE
BEAVER RUIN CREEK
0406
.25
Aerated Pond
Polish Pond
NORCROSS-SHEFFIELD
FOREST S/D
BEAVER RUIN CREEK
0406
.09
Aerated Pond
Polish Pond
GWINNETT COUNTY
JACKSON CREEK
0406
2.4
Activated Sludge
Polish Filter
Chemical
GWINNETT COUNTY
VALLEY BROOK
JACKSON CREEK
0406
.07
Activated Sludge
Polish Pond
CONYERS
BOAR TUSK CREEK
0403
.50
Activated Sludge
GWINNETT COUNTY
NORTHWOOD
SWEETWATER CREEK
0407
.05
Activated Sludge
Polish Filter
NEWTON COUNTY
WPC PLANT
YELLOW RIVER
0491
1.0
Secondary
Activated Sludge
SOUTH RIVER
INTRENCHMENT CREEK
ATLANTA INTRENCHMENT
0401
20.0
Trickling \ ^
Secondary
DEKALB COUNTY
HONEY CREEK
0404
1.0
Activated Sludge
Secondary
CLAYTON COUNTY
N.E. WPC PLANT
0403
.80
Activated Sludge
Polish Pond
SpcnnHary
CONYERS
ALMOND BRANCH
0404
1.0
Activated Sludge
Secondary
DEKALB COUNTY
SNAPFINGER CREEK
0490
9.6
Activated Sludge
Secondary
DEKALB COUNTY
POLEBRIDGE CREEK
0401
.70
Waste Stabilization
Pond
STOCKBRIDGE - BRUSH
CREEK
COTTON INDIAN CREEK
0403
.50
Secondary
Activated Sludge
ATLANTA
SOUTH RIVER
0490
12.0
Activated Sludge
-------
Page 2
T A B L E 48 (concluded)
TREATMENT FACILITY DATA BY SUB-BASINS
Public Systems
NAME
LOCATION
STREAM
FLOW
TREATMENT
ALCOVY RIVER
LOGANVILLE-IMHOFF
TANK
BIG FLAT
0410
.10
Imhoff Tank
Primary
GWINNETT COUNTY
LAWRENCEVILLE
SHOAL CREEK
0410
.24
Waste Stabilization Pond
MONROE POND #1
MILL BROOK
0410
.144
Waste Stabilization Pond
MONROE POND #3
MOUNTAIN CREEK
0410
1.10
Aerated Pond
-------
... 1985 Zero discharge; the discharge of pollutant
into navigable waters shall be eliminated.
(National Goal)
Important to this assessment of goals and standards included in the
1972 Pollution Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
is the understanding that the 1977 and 1983 standards must be met by
all treatment systems receiving federal grants. The 1983 goal, how-
ever, is stated simply as a goal that does not require full attainment
by that benchmark year. In fact, the 1983 goal has received repeated
criticism as being unattainable within the time frame indicated in the
law. As follow-up to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments, Georgia EPD has set its own standards for streams within the
State of Georgia. In some cases the State requirements are more se-
vere than those of the federal government.
Within the Upper Ocmulgee Basin all municipal systems have achieved,
or are in the process of achieving, the 1977 standard and are now
working toward achieving the 1983 goal of fishable and swimmable
waters.
The Georgia EPD has established effluent criteria frequently referred to
as 10-2-1-6 for all public wastewater systems in the Basin, This term
refers to the level of treatment required in treatment facilities,
such that the effluent from such facilities achieves the standard of
10 mg/1 five-day biological oxygen demand, 2 mg/1 ammonia, 1 mg/1 phos-
phorous, and 6 mg/1 dissolved oxygen.
The purpose of imposing this effluent criteria upon all municipal waste-
water discharges into the Upper Ocmulgee Basin is to enhance water qua-
lity. The standard is severe and requires sophisticated and expensive
treatment processes. The goal for establishing such standards is the
improvement of water quality in the tributary streams which flow to
Lake Jackson.
Major Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Presently there are a number of wastewater treatment facilities, both
public and private, discharging to the three major streams comprising
the Upper Ocmulgee Basin (see Table 48 ). By far the largest of these
systems, and the greatest quantity of wastewater effluent, are being
discharged to the South River. Current projections indicate that with
time this situation will not change despite greater discharges being
made concurrently to the Yellow and Alcovy River systems. Critical to
this evaluation is a recognition that regardless of the sequence of dis-
charges or their magnitude, the impounding reservoir which will receive
all non-biodegradable constituents of plant discharges is Lake Jackson.
-------
Municipal Treatment Systems
The City of Atlanta, which contributes the greatest flow, consequently
has the largest treatment facilities within the Basin. As mentioned
previously, current plans are to re-divert the discharges of three ma-
jor treatment facilities that currently discharge to the South River,
through an interceptor and pumping system to an eventual discharge in
the Chattahoochee River. Since two of these three major treatment
facilities (Intrenchment Creek and South River wastewater treatment
plants) comprise 70 percent of the total discharge to the South River,
the diversion of their effluent should result in a major improvement
to the stream quality in the upper reaches of that stream.
The mid reaches of the South River and the upper reaches of the Yellow
River receive discharges from the DeKalb and Gwinnett County systems.
The magnitude of discharges now received by the Yellow River from Gwin-
nett County facilities may increase to the discharge levels presently
experienced in the South River by the year 2000. This growth in dis-
charge quantities reintroduces the prospect of interbasin transfer and
whether one stream should be preserved to the detriment, of other streams.
Also compounding these problems is the question of combined sewers.
Combined sewers are those sewers that collect not only domestic waste-
water but also accept stormwater. Combined sewers are found within
the South River Basin. Fortunately, the practice of combining storm
and wastewater flows into a single sewer system has not been pursued
in the more recently developed urban areas of DeKalb and Gwinnett coun-
ties. Within the Study Area three such combined sewers discharge to tri-
butaries of the South River. These are McDaniel Street, Boulevard, and
Confederate Avenue.
The problem of treating discharges from combined sewers is one of peak
flows. Most wastewater treatment facilities are designed to accept
peak wastewater flows but are not designed to accept stormwater discharges
which occur in an erratic fashion and are of great intensity. The At-
lanta Water Resources Study did evaluate methods of treating flows of
combined sewers and concluded that while such a program could be effec-
tive it would also be extremely costly. However, the Atlanta Three
Rivers project as proposed will provide facilities to catch and treat
to secondary levels the most highly polluted portions of overflows
from City of Atlanta combined sewers prior to release in the South River.
Sources of Wastewater
There are a variety of sources that contribute wastewater to the natural
drainage system. In addition to the familiar discharges originating
from residential or domestic uses, there are industrial and commercial
discharges which may, depending upon the nature of the activity, place
minimal or extreme requirements on the treatment facilities that must
-------
accept these wastes. For example, an office building will have only
minimal wastewater discharges while an industrial enterprise dealing
with chemical products may have discharges of such magnitude or concentra-
tion as to require pre-treatment before the discharge may be allowed
into a municipal system. However, a common characteristic of domestic
and industrial discharges is that they are typically collected through
a piping system and carried to a central point for treatment before
discharge to natural streams.
The other type of wastewater source is less definable as to its ori-
gin. Because of this characteristic such sources of pollution are
typically referred to as non-point sources. Included within this
category is surface runoff from storms which wash streets, lawns and
fields, and eventually deposit this runoff into the natural drainage
system. Also included are those areas where development has utilized
septic tank systems that have at times failed, allowing their untreated
discharges to run over the surface of the ground and eventually find
their way to natural drainage networks. In a similar fashion, runoff
from agricultural areas and forests also find their way eventually to
streams and lakes. While these latter sources are not generally of
great concern, they can become meaningful in an area of intense agri-
cultural activity utilizing chemical fertilizers. .
An immediate characterization of point and non-point sources of pollu-
tion can be made between individual river systems of the Upper Ocmul-
gee Basin. The South River, in addition to receiving intense discharges
from point sources, also receives large quantities of discharge from
non-point sources through the existing combined sewers and other na-
tural drainage systems. Conversely, the Alcovy River, which has ex-
perienced minimal urban development and is characterized as draining
an agricultural area, receives minimal point source discharges from
the few municipalities along its reaches, but rather substantial agri-
cultural or non-point discharges. The Alcovy is classified by Geor-
gia EPD as a stream of excellent quality, while the South is charac-
terized as grossly polluted.
Between these two extreme situations lies the Yellow River. The Yellow
River's drainage area is currently only minimally developed with urban
type activities. However, its growth rate is rapid and the forecasted
growth to the year 2000 represents a substantial increase in population
and conversion to urban type land uses. Its water quality is presently
characterized as good, but in its upper reaches the Yellow River receives
both point and non-point source pollutants.
These point source pollutants originate from a combination of public
municipal treatment facilities and numerous small treatment facilities
commonly referred to as "package plants." Non-point sources involve
a full range of agricultural and silvacultural activities in addition
to runoff from urban developments and, in some areas, septic tank
overflows.
-------
The type, size, and treatment characteristics of major treatment fa-
cilities within each sub-basin of the Upper Ocmulgee are identified in
Table 48 . While the number of treatment facilities -- public, pri-
vate and industrial — indicate a rather complex network of collec-
tion systems, an evaluation of the flow or discharge characteristics
of these systems limits any further consideration of those municipal
systems that handle the greatest volumes and therefore have the
greatest impact on the receiving streams.
Non-point sources are very much another matter. It has been estimated
by the Atlanta Water Resources Study that in certain tributary basins,
non-point sources can equate to point source loads during certain
periods of the year. If this is true within the Upper Ocmulgee Basin,
it is cause for great concern as to methods of collecting and treating
non-point sources or, alternatively, restraining their ability to reach
receiving streams.
Characterization by River System
The following discussion deals with the general characteristics of
the three river systems comprising the Upper Ocmulgee Basin,
South River Basin
The South River originates near the center of the City of Atlanta and
flows in a southeasterly then southerly direction until it reaches Lake
Jackson. The river is severely polluted due to significant point dis-
charges near the headwaters of the river system where flows are typi-
cally low and erratic.
Almost the entire southern half of DeKalb county flows to the South
River. While the DeKalb County drainage area is not involved in com-
bined sewer overflows, as is the Atlanta drainage area, the growth ex-
perienced in southern DeKalb County has been so rapid as to require
major expansion in waste treatment facilities by the DeKalb Water
and Sewer Department. A major concern in the South River Basin is the
ability to maintain the water quality of tributary streams lying in
Clayton and Henry Counties. In this area of the South River Basin the
Clayton County water system has a water supply impoundment on Cotton
Indian Creek that services not only Clayton but portions of Henry County.
If this impoundment is to be protected, concern must be expressed by
these jurisdictions for not only point, but non-point sources of pol-
lution.
Yellow River Basin
The Yellow River originates in northern Gwinnett County and flows in a
southerly direction for a distance of approximately 70 miles to its con-
fluence with Lake Jackson. The Yellow River is currently characterized
-------
as being of good water quality. This is due largely to the limited
degree of urban development and the imposed requirements for high levels
of treatment for all point discharge facilities. This basin can also be
characterized by a large number of rather small and inefficient "pac-
kage" treatment plants and a large incidence of developments built
with septic tank systems that have experienced high rates of failure.
Major efforts are being undertaken by Gwinnett County, DeKalb County
and Rockdale County in a cooperative fashion to deal with the burgeon-
ing growth within this Basin in terms of wastewater requirements.
Regional facilities highlight the planned activities of these govern-
ments. These facilities and their phasing over time are indicated
in Figure 31 , which originates from the recommended Areawide Waste-
water Management Plan of the Atlanta Regional Commission, May 1976.
In order to accomplish this phasing, a high degree of inter-govern-
mental cooperation is required along with a heavy dependence on county
systems in deference to municipal systems.
The Alcovy River
The Alcovy River is at this point essentially free of pollution.
While the river basin does drain portions of municipalities such as
Lawrenceville, Monroe, Social Circle and Covington, the majority of
its drainage area is still devoted to agricultural or silvacultural
pursuits. Outside of meeting the needs of the existing municipalities
that drain to the Alcovy, major expenditures for regional wastewater
treatment facilities within this drainage area is not a primary concern.
The Enforcement of Water Quality Standards
Georgia, like other states, is concerned with the preservation and
enhancement of water quality. The basis for many of the regulatory
programs enforced by the Georgia EPD is Public Law 92-500. It is
this law that established water quality standards and goals and requires
the attainment of these standards on a specific timetable.
In order to assure compliance with these standards and to deal with the
specific problems of local jurisdictions, the Georgia EPD closely moni-
tors stream water quality, establishes effluent criteria, classifies
streams as to the desired standards of purity, and reviews and evalu-
ates the design of all federally assisted treatment facilities. These
activities are conducted under a variety of programs. Industrial dis-
charges are required to receive waste discharge permits. The author-
ization for this program is Section 402 of Public Law 92-500, wherein
standards of compliance and timetables are established for each indus-
trial discharger^ and periodic reporting to the State is mandated.
In addition, the Georgia EPD may take violators of State standards to
court seeking orders to cease violations and assure compliance. Such
orders have not been issued within the Upper Ocmulgee Basin. However,
-------
FIGURE 31a
Page
PROGRAMMED FACILITIES AND PHASING PERIODS IN at»trlmm*
YELLOW RIVER BASIN
L*Kl ALLATOOf/A
COBB
FULTON
o "
LANO TREATMENT
¦ WATER INTAK£
• OPERATING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
O POTENTIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACIlITT SITE
® A8ANOONEO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
J5 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY IDENTIFYING CODE
>•» REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (TREATI 0 WASTEWATER)
s REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (UNTPi.'.UD WASTEWATER)
Source: Atlanta Regional Commission, 1976
ADOPTED WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
1976-1980
-------
FIGURE 31b
Page 2'
lAKg SICWtY LAHIt*
LAKf ALLATOOHA
GWINNETT
COBS
32 #
DEKALB
DOUGLAS
ROCKDALE
LAND TREATMENT
CLAYTON
LANO TREATMEKT
¦ WATER INTAKE
• OPERATING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
O POTENTIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY SITE
® ABANDONED WASTEWATER TREATHINT FACILITY
ji wA^rrwATcs rRfArMfur FAcnirr iinNnfriNr, coue
• ••> REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (TRf.AIED WASTEWATER)
RCGIONAl INTERCEPTOR (lINTRf A1 £.0 WASTEWATER)
ADOPTED WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
19H1-1985
cource: Atlanta Regional Commission, 1976
-------
FIGURE- ,31c
Page
IAK( SIOMtr tAMItH
LA,
'OOAM
C088
DOUGLAS
ROCKDALE
LAND TREATMENT
CLAYTON
LEGENO
LAND TREATHENT
¦ WATER INTAKE
• OPERATING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
O POTENTIAt WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY SITE
® ABANDONED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
35 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY IDENTIFYING COOE
...» REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (TREATED WASTEWATER)
w REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (UNTREATED WASTEWATER)
r . D . , . . 1Q7C adopted wastewater management plan
Source: Atlanta Regional Commission, 1976 1986-1990
-------
F I G U R E . 31d
Page
LAKt SiONtr LAM/em
LAKt ALIA TOONA
COBS
#66
FULTON
DOUGLAS
• 72
ROCKDALE
LAND TREATMENT
CLAYTON
LAND TREATMENT
¦ WATER INTAKE
• OPERATING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
O POTENTIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY SITE
<8 A8AN0QNE0 WASTEWATER TREATHENT FACILITY
35 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY IDENTIFYING CODE
..... REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (TREATED WASTEWATER)
REGIONAL IHTERCEPTOW (UNTREATED WASTEWATER)
ADOPTED WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
1991-1995
Source: Atlanta Regional "Commission, 1976
-------
FIGURE 31e Pa9e 5
L**s BONtr lAMtlH
LAKt ALLATOOMA
GWINHtTT
DEKALB
FULTON
DOUGLAS
ROCXOALf
CLAYTON
LAND TREATMENT
LEGEND
¦ WATER INTAKE
• OPERATING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
O POTENTIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY SITE
® ABANOONED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
35 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY IDENTIFYING CODE
..... REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (TREATED WASTEWATER)
^ REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR (UNTREATED WASTEVATER)
ADOPTED WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
1996-2000
Source: Atlanta Regional Commission, 1976
-------
administrative orders (not court orders) have been issued to each of the
major systems operators in recent years. (Personal interview, Mr. Gene
Welch, EPD.)
Basin Plans
The river basin planning activity, which is a continuing planning process
required under section 303 (e) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments, requires that the State investigate water quality within
each major river system flowing within the State boundaries. This in-
vestigation should lead to the establishment of stream classifications,
water and effluent quality standards, and to an allocation of discharge
loads to each segment of each stream within the State. Approval of the
Upper Ocmulgee River Basin Water Quality Management Plan, prepared pur-
suant to Section 303 (3), is the federal action that has precipitated
this environmental impact statement.
Facility Plans (201)
Another area of involvement by the Georgia EPD is the monitoring, fin-
ancial, and technical assistance and evaluation of construction grant
programs, commonly known as the 201 Facility Plan and the 209 Areawide
Management Planning Program. Both of these programs receive financial
assistance from the U.S. EPA matched by local and state governments.
(EPA provides 75 percent of 201 funding.) The facility plans (201)
are typically more localized as to the area of concern and result in
comprehensive recommendations for the implementation of wastewater
treatment requirements.
The broader Section 208 Areawide Management plans address geographic
regions of significant urban and industrial development, such as metro-
politan areas, in an attempt to coordinate a variety of more localized
201 plans into a comprehensive management system that evaluates not
only construction requirements, but also management procedures and
financial arrangements through viable local organizations. A signifi-
cant feature of 208 plans is a full evaluation of non-point sources
and their impact on the total pollution abatement requirements of an
area.
Currently, only one agency is authorized to pursue 208 areawide waste-
water management plans within the Upper Ocmulgee Basin. That agency is
the Atlanta Regional Commission, whose jurisdiction extends to a major
portion of the Upper Ocmulgee Basin. The remainder of the Basin must
await State action under the 208 program.
The more localized 201 facility plans comprise an active program aimed
at meeting national and state standards. Such plans have or are being
developed for most areas of urban concentration within the Upper Ocmul-
gee Basin. The status of 201 facility plans and their sponsoring
agencies are shown in Table 49 .
-------
FIGURE 32
SnfilvHla
a
Oteotur
®\
\
Cewigteri
\
/
;
0
tJACKS ON
AKE
\
V-
to » KM
Monro*
1 YELLOW RIVER
2 SOUTH RIVER
3 ROCKMLE
4 COTTON INDIAN CREEK
5 NEWTON
6 LOQANVtLLE
7 MONROE
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
2QI FACILITIES PLANS
-------
NPDES Permits
Under the provisions of Section 402 of Public Law 92-500, the Georgia
EPD is authorized to issue permits to industrial and private dischargers.
Such permits require a full evaluation of the magnitude and charac-
teristics of the individual discharge, and may require a compliance
schedule to achieve improved standards of treatment and discharge efflu-
ent and, further, may impose a mandatory timetable to achieve compli-
ance. To date, 78 percent of such dischargers are permitted within
the Upper Ocmulgee Basin. The remaining 22 percent contribute such
minimal quantities that their impact is insignificant to the receiving
streams' water quality. To date, permits have been issued to the
dischargers identified in Table 50
Waste Load Allocations
One of the major purposes of a river basin plan is to assess existing
water quality by small segments of a river system, to classify these
segments as to their desired quality, then to set limitations on dis-
charges by stream segment so that the desired water quality standard
may be achieved within the benchmark year. This practice is commonly
referred to as waste load allocation and is a key ingredient of 303 (e)
river basin plans. The difference between current water quality and
the water quality to be achieved by a benchmark year largely determines
the allocations of new or increased'waste load discharges that may be
accepted within any single stream or segment. While this is a general
rule, many other factors enter into the establishment of waste load
allocations such as proximity to water intakes and the cumulative
effect of pollutants which may be accepted for an extended reach of
any river system.
In the case of the Upper Ocmulgee River Basin, Water Quality Management
Plan, the Georgia EPD has opted for the establishment of effluent
criteria as a major factor in waste load allocations. These previously
defined effluent criteria, previously defined as 10-2-1-6, address the
major chemical constituents of wastewater discharges and set a high
standard for existing and any new wastewater treatment facility that will
discharge into the basin. This standard is such that treatment levels
required to meet it are commonly referred to as Advanced Waste Treat-
ment (AWT) processes.
The 10-2-1-6 effluent criteria is a difficult standard to attain and
even more difficult to maintain. Further, it requires considerably more
expensive treatment processes than have been typical in the past. A
by-product of such systems is an immense quantity of inert material,
commonly referred to as sludge. This material requires disposal; the
methods by which sludge is handled and disposed of can become a key in-
gredient in the cost effectiveness of advanced waste treatment processes.
The amount of sewage sludge produced by a facility meeting the 10-2-1-6
criteria would be approximately 2.5 tons per MGD of treated domestic waste.
-------
TABLE 49
STATUS OF 201 FACILITY PLANS
UPPER OCMULGEE BASIN
SOUTH RIVER
City of Atlanta
Clayton County
*—"DeKalb County
Henry County
YELLOW RIVER
Gwinnett County
«?«Conyers-Rockdale
Covington-Newton
ALCOVY RIVER
County
County
Loganville
Monroe
Covington-Newton County
A
CI,
fc&t *Cr,0
-------
B.7 OTHER COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES
To this point in the discussion of the Man-Made environment, the com-
mentary has dealt largest with environmental and community develop-
ment concerns. While these concerns are a major thrust of the en-
vironmental impact statement, the concerns and responsibilities of lo-
cal units of government are broader based and more representative
of the total needs of the respective jurisdictions.
This discussion of the other community services and facilities provided
by total units of government is necessary to provide a total perspec-
tive of their responsibilities and priorities. Further, it is impor-
tant to note that the mix of services and facilities provided by cities
and counties differs substantially due to their respective differences
in historical functions and in the state authorizing legislation.
This section will contrast functions and priorities of cities and
counties within the Yellow River Sub-basin. The distinguishing func-
tions and activities of both cities and counties will be identified
and discussed. The services and functions provided are contrasted
with similar units of government within the State and within the
Southeastern United States.
Area of Discussion
This discussion of community services and facilities is restricted to
the cities and counties located within the Yellow River Sub-basin.
While these cities and counties are dealt with in detail, comparisons
are offered for regional and national perspectives.
Within the Yellow River Sub-basin lie portions of five counties and
all or portions of fourteen municipalities. Not all of the municipal-
ities within the Sub-basin provide a full range of services. Many of
them rely on their county government to perform various services and
functions. For example, library services are typically provided by
counties although the physical structures are located in areas of
population concentration such as cities. Conversely, the provision of
utility services such as power and gas are uniquely authorized to
municipalities within Georgia, but not to counties.
There exists, however, a tremendous area of overlapping services.
These areas of overlap have evolved over time as counties have become
more urban in their development. Such functions as parks and recrea-
tion, police and fire protection, and garbage and trash collection
were historically identified as municipal functions, but in recent
years have been functions accepted by county units of government as
their populations have increased to urban levels. Even within these
areas of overlapping activities, the level of service provided by
the respective units of government frequently differ. For example,
in the area of garbage and trash collection, municipalities may pro-
vide less frequent service and in the more rural areas provide only
for pick-up stations at key road junctions.
-------
A further distinguishing characteristic between cities and counties
in the Study Area is that many of the overlapping functions are fin-
anced through different methods. Specifically, an activity such as
parks and recreation or fire protection would typically be financed
through the general revenues of the municipality. However, due to
the selective service area in counties, these activities are fre-
quently financed through special districts in a fashion that could
equate to user charges. Further, since most municipalities are
established by charter with broad authority to provide services to their
constituents while counties are sub units of the state, the statutory
foundation for many of the urban services provided by counties are
derived as local legislation.
A recent change not yet fully implemented by counties is the home
rule provisions of the Georgia Constitution and the multi-purpose dis-
trict authorization granted through a constitutional amendment, com-
monly referred to as the Mulherin Amendment.
Comparisons
The Municipal Yearbook, published by the International City Manager's
Association, maintains a listing of the total number of governments
within the United States (Table 51 ). it is curious to note that
the local units of governments, cities, counties and townships have
been decreasing in number since 1962, while the overall number of go-
vernments has been increasing. Obviously, states have remained con-
stant since 1962. The overall national increase is attributed to the
increase in school districts.
Since the diversity of functions provided by local units of govern-
ment varies substantially with population, Tables 52 and 53 pro-
vide data on the cumulative distribution of the U.S. counties by pop-
ulation groupings and further on whether the population groupings are
central city, suburban or independent. The counties and cities involved
within the Yellow River Sub-basin span the gamut of this cumulative dis-
tribution.
For comparative purposes, the per capita finances of local governments
are portrayed in Table 54 , which distributes per capita expenditures
by activity and by type of government. Further, the table provides a
distinction of the thirty suburban counties, which are defined as coun-
ties with a current population in excess of 200,000 persons located in
a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) with no town or city
comprising more than one-third of the total county population. From
this table it can be determined that the primary expenditure of local
governments, whether city or county, is for public education with the
second largest expenditure falling in the realm of public welfare. This
pattern holds true for the thirty suburban counties previously identified.
-------
TABLE 51
NUMBER OF GOVERNMENTS IN THE U. S.
Type of Government 1972 1967 1962
Total
.... 79,269
81,299
91,237
U. S. Government
.... 1
1
1
State Governments
.... 50
50
50
Local Governments
.... 78,218
81,248
91,186
Counties
.... 3,044
3,049
3,043
Municipalities
. . . . 18,517
18,048
18,000
Townships
. . . . 18,991
17,105
17,142
School Districts
. . . . 15,781
21,782
34,678
Special Districts
.... 23,885
21,264
18,323
-------
'UU 9
58
18
40
17
14
15
12
44
14
0
TABLE 52
CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF U. S. COUNTIES
Counties Counties Counties Counties Counties Counties
All over over over over over over
Counties 2,500 5,000 10,000 25,000 50,000 100,000
3,046
2,944
2,741
2,202
1,204
639
313
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
185
185
185
185
185
185
185
326
326
326
326
326
326
565
565
565
565-
565
998
998
998
998
539
539
539
203
203
102
196
196
193
189
168
127
78
1,051
1,020
993
734
378
183
93
1,378
1,349
1,293
1,036
512
237
89
421
379
322
243
146
92
53
281
281
281
281
280
267
222
315
314
311
293
233
137
64
2,450
2,349
2,149
1,628
691
235
27
-------
TABLE 53
CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF U. S. MUNICIPALITIES
Cities Cities Cities Cities Cities Cities Cities Cities Cities
All over over over over over over over over over
Classification Cities 2,500 5,000 10,000 25,000 50,000 100,000 250,000 500,000 1,000,000
Total, all cities .
6,246
5,930
3,840
2,290
930
410
154
56
26
6
Population Group
Over 1,000,000
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
500,000-1,000,000 . .
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
250,000- 499,999 . .
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
100,000- 249,999 . .
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
50,000- 99,999 . .
256
256
256
256
256
256
25,000- 49,999 . .
520
520
520
520
520
10,000- 24,999 . .
1,360
1,360
1,360
1,360
5,000- 9,999 . .
1,550
1,550
1,550
2,500- 4,999 . .
2,090
2,090
Under 2,500* . . .
316
Geographic Region
Northeast .
1,806
1,687
1,182
707
261
102
28
8
4
2
North Central
1,829
1,787
1,135
673
267
109
41
15
8
2
South
1,789
1,690
1,001
541
211
103
53
20
8
1
West
822
766
522
369
191
96
32
13
6
1
City Type/Metro Status
Central
361
361
361
361
340
260
136
56
26
6
Suburban
3,116
3,051
2,142
1,301
447
150
18
0
0
0
Independent .
2,769
2,518
1,337
628
143
0
0
0
0
0
Form of Government .
Mayor-council
3,285
3,252
1,801
920
335
165
72
34
21
6
Council-manager
2,391
2,109
1,658
1,128
508
215
70
19
5
0
Commission .
216
216
162
119
64
25
12
3
0
0
Town meeting
262
262
164
80
5
1
0
0
0
0
Rep. town meeting •
92
91
55
43
18
4
0
0
0
0
*Limited to municipalities recognized by the International City Management Association as providing for the
counci1-manager plan or providing for a position of overall general management.
-------
TAB LIE 54
PER CAPITA FINANCES IN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: 1973-74
1973-74 per capita amounts
All local
Item
City
Governments Governments
County ^
Governments
30 Suburban
Counties^
General revenue
Intergovernmental revenues
From state government
From federal government
General revenues from own sources
Taxes
Property
Nonproperty
Current charges
Miscellaneous
General expenditure
Current
Capital outlay
Exhibit: Expenditures for personal services
Expenditure by function:
Education
Highways
Public welfare
Health and hospitals
Police protection
Fire protection
Parks and recreation
Financial adminstration
General control
Interest on general debt
$627.75
201.39
212.70
48.69
422.21
269.80
221.76
48.04
64.79
31.78
665.96
496.53
108.21
323.25
267.73
34.90
45.72
40.34
29.33
14.50
14.09
7.55
15.07
22.93
$334.52
125.94
79.27
41.35
208.58
147.22
92.75
54.47
37.32
24.04
322.13
262.57
59.57
171.84
49.03
25.20
26.44
24.40
35.26
19.50
15.14
5.45
9.66
14.53
$161.49
74.00
59.11
12.50
87.48
62.54
51.34
11 .20
17.48
7.46
154.88
134.17
20.71
60.06
25.51
16.72
34.01
21.60
6.49
1.07
3.27
4.10
9.15
3.73
$688.70
213.51
181 .77
31.75
474.97
384.47
339.84
44.64
58.74
31.74
666.93
578.75
88.18
364.67
337.31
29.47
36.87
33.97
34.76
17.05
21.42
8.49
17.63
25.75
Source: Per capita figures are taken from or calculated from the sources listed in the source note to
, Table
Population for all local governments is as of 1 April 1973, from U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the
Census, Current Population Reports: Population Estimates and Projections: Estimates of the Population
of the United States to June 1, 1975, Series P-25, No. 606(Washington, D.C. Government Printing Office, 1975)
^Population for city governments includes city-county consolidations and independent cities.
3Population for counties excludes city-county consolidations and independent cities but includes incorporated
and unincorporated areas for all other county-type governments.
^See footnote Table
-------
TABLE 55
PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES FOR SELECTED FUNCTIONS IN 30 SUBURBAN COUNTIES: 1973-1974
Selected functions
County, state
Total
direct
expenditure
Current
expenditures
Capital
outlay Education
Public Health &
welfare hospitals
Police
protection Highways
Financial
administration All
Parks & Interest on & general other
recreation general debt contract functions
30 County average $ 666.93
Nassau, N.Y. 1,051.79
Westchester, N.Y. 1,006.49
Rockland, N.Y. 998.65
Contra Costa,Calif. 892.14
San Mateo, Calif. 803.85
Ventura, Calif. 765.30
Montgomery, Md. 826.47
Santa Barbara,Calif. 735.08
Morris, N.J. 669.19
Orange, Calif. 656.49
Oakland, Mich. 642.71
Union, N.J. 569.65
Fairfax, Va. 624.68
Bergen, N.J. 598.49
Prince George's,Md. 642.28
Norfolk, Mass. 597.05
Macomb, Mich. 612.19
Waukesha, Wis. 599.41
Fairfield, Conn. 607.15
DuPage, 111. 602.05
Middlesex, Mass. 530.74
Lake, 111. 534.84
Broward, Fla. 516.78
Baltimore, Md. 516.76
Anne Arundel, Md. 631.13
DeKalb, Ga. 481.43
Montgomery, Pa. 481.99
Delaware, Pa. 472.06
Washington, Ore. 498.81
Jefferson, La. 395.11
$578.87 $88.18 $337.32 $ 36.87 $31.40 $ 29.47 $29.47 $19.89
947.20
913.13
908.74
790.64
737.56
688.99
671.92
688.40
591.76
554.86
551.48
540.44
534.00
525.03
525.01
524.17
522.79
520.84
512.28
484.02
472.13
439.81
435.31
435.25
434.38
408.94
414.13
405.57
390.87
345.18
104.59
93.36
90.11
101.51
66.28
76.31
154.55
66.68
77.43
101.63
91.23
29.21
90.68
73.46
117.27
72.88
89.40
78.57
94.86
118.03
58.61
95.04
81.47
81.51
196.75
72.49
67.85
66.49
108.03
49.94
483.59
421.63
545.13
373.26
373.82
344.95
411.45
362.63
375.95
340.07
336.31
273.03
366.03
299.41
317.83
325.25
353.42
333.71
311.80
371.39
276.29
321.47
215.07
289.89
346.51
224.19
298.84
311.00
310.37
156.73
106,
163
128.
109,
71,
59.
15,
66,
26,
37,
6.
37.
19.
18,
35,
5.
3,
30.
6.
7.
5.
7.
2.
16.
25.
4.
11.
20.
0.
0.
74
36
42
14
30
63
06
64
95
35
17
94
02
08
99
94
53
40
93
55
19
39
33
17
11
16
76
02
31
37
46.
46,
52.
104,
97.
39.
29,
46.
6.
29.
34.
18.
10.
25.
42.
33.
12.
15.
12.
17.
14.
7.
88.
10.
1.
81.
17.
7.
3.
53.
02
21
62
39
38
42
96
65
29
96
95
14
86
42
65
33
02
07
03
44
11
18
81
92
16
14
92
77
66
85
73
45
34
35
35
38
29
31
31
34
26
37
22
41
26
33
32
27
38
27
31
26
34
28
25
22
21
21
15
24
.06
.97
.81
.39
.13
.17
.08
.03
.62
.90
.73
.86
.54
.43
.66
.46
.26
.30
.99
.54
.27
.62
.55
.81
.69
.96
.01
.65
.87
.04
38.99
29.47
34.50
45.41
26.03
37.76
23.94
29.60
41.92
28.12
42.14
19.34
11.45
]9.75
28.05
29.00
41.12
48.52
26.41
37.29
27.17
39.59
13.09
28.35
28.09
17.92
17.94
12.68
21.39
32.75
44.67
31.07
16.82
15.53
24.29
36.16
86.89
19.84
15.65
26.21
10.42
16.36
18.91
20.40
26.85
15.68
7.93
12.49
15.50
32.77
8.65
28.52
13.86
8.07
12.25
9.84
7.06
4.84
7.89
16.46
$25.04
39.88
28.77
42.88
15.17
20.23
15.90
48.24
10.63
33.88
14.99
42.19
17.85
25.05
25.62
30.79
20.26
36.18
23.65
26.59
24.70
21.04
16.53
20.66
19.74
26.91
18.11
27.12
17.27
17.92
29.78
$26.11
37.05
30.68
31.47
34.61
31.54
43.17
19.54
43.00
36.23
32.01
30.64
26.51
26.88
23.75
16.59
20.34
29.07
15.04
18.73
20.89
22.63
20.48
25.34
13.72
25.63
16.03
18.89
17.80
16.93
18.56
$126.19
181.79
209.33
112.20
159.25
124.12
150.14
171.31
125.06
100.70
112.88
113.16
122.62
123.94
114.63
116.87
113.79
96.66
93.23
150.16
62.48
124.39
67.07
103.07
100.09
139.78
87.08
61.35
59.03
104.56
62.58
Source: U.S. Dept. of
Counties: 1973-1974.
Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Local Government Finances in Selected Metropolitan Areas and Large
-------
TABLE 56
GROWTH IN GOVERNMENTAL FINANCES BETWEEN FISCAL YEARS 1971-72 and 1973-74
All Local Governments City Governments
1971-72 1973-74 % increase 1971-72 1973-74 % increase
amount amount from amount amount from
Item (millions) (millions) 1972-74 (millions) (millions) 1972-74
Total revenue $113,162 $143,193 26.5 $ 42,196 $ 52,822 25.2
Total expenditure 116,913 140,387 20.1 43,884 52,242 19.0
Expenditure by function:
General expenditure
104,822
124,668
18.9
35,697
42,523
19.1
Police protection
5,077
6,144
21.0
3,942
4,655
18.1
Fire protection
2,577
3,037
17.9
2,208
2,574
16.6
Highways
6,263
7,310
16.7
2,768
3,327
20.2
Sewerage
3,164
4,080
29.0
1.964
2,575
31.1
Public welfare
8,822
9,576
8.5
3,031
3,490
15.1
Education
47,734
56,080
17.5
5,827
6,472
11.1
Libraries
751
896
19.3
465
556
19.6
Health & hospitals
6,858
8,451
23.2
2,773
3,220
16.1
Parks & recreation
2,323
2,951
27.0
1,571
1,998
27.2
Financial administration
1,258
1,581
25.7
565
719
27.3
General control
2,495
3,156
26.5
932
1,275
36.8
General public bldgs.
1,141
1,394
22.2
531
680
28.1
Interest on gen. debt
3,827
4,803
25.5
1,527
1,918
25.6
Other & unallocable
12,533
15,210
21.4
7,543
9,064
20.2
Utility expenditure
9,697
12,487
28.8
6,451
7,923
22.8
Liquor stores expenditure
223
265
18.8
136
150
10.3
Insurance trust expenditure
1,600
2,077
29.8
1,300
1,674
28.8
County Governments
30
Suburban Counties
Total
revenue
$ 24,169 $ 30,795 27.4
$10,927
$13,615 24.6
Total
expenditure
24,410 29,505 20.9
11,124
13,369 20.2
Expenditure by function:
General expenditure
23,932
28,879
20.7
10,746
12,768
18.8
Police protection
896
1,210
35.0;
537
665
23.9
Fire protection
152
200
31.6
264
326
23.5
Highways
2,708
3,118
15.1
510
564
10.7
Sewerage
480
586
22.1
510
512
0.5
Public welfare
5,986
6,342
5.9
680
706
3.9
Education
3,960
4,757
20.1
5,490
6,458
17.6
Libraries
192
228
18.8
« • •
• • •
• • •
Health & hospitals
3,206
4,027
25.6
507
650
28.3
Parks & recreation
440
609
38.4
290
410
41.4
Financial administration
614
765
24.6
133
162
21.9
General control
1,358
1,706
25.6
270
337
25.2
General public bldgs.
540
650
20.4
• • •
• i •
• • •
Interest on gen. debt
550
695
26.4
400
493
23.3
Other & unallocable
2,851
3,985
39.8
1,156
1,483
28.3
Utility expenditure
218
285
30.7
378
601
58.9
Liquor stores expenditure
101
115
13.9
• • •
• * .
• • •
Insurance trust expenditure
159
225
41.5
• • •
. • .
Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, City Government Finances in 1973-74,
(Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1975).
-------
A further evaluation of the per capita expenditures (Table 55) for su-
burban counties demonstrated in greater detail the range of functions
performed by such counties and the predominance of the educational re-
quirement upon the public tax rolls. If public welfare, health and
hospitals were combined as to their per capita expenditures in such
counties, these expenditures would be twice again the expenditures
for all other listed activities, yet still be beneath the tax outlay
for public education. The "all other functions" category includes
a wide range of functions including water, sewage, and other unallo-
cable expenditures.
Finally, in Table 56 , the growth in governmental finances between
fiscal years 1971-72 and 1973-74 is presented to reflect the growth
by units of government in revenue sources and expenditure levels by
function. While all units of government have witnessed a 26.5 percent
increase during the period in revenue, expenditure levels have been
increasing at a reduced rate. Significant to this evaluation is the
reduction in assistance and subsidies regardless of unit of govern-
ment and the increases in expenditures for sewage activities and
general administration. These figures are indicative of the increased
concern for compliance with Public Law 92-500 and the increasing le-
vel of competence and professionalism being developed by local units
of government, whether city or county.
Within the State of Georgia the distinction between municipal and
county functions has continued to become more cloudy due to increased
utilization of constitutional provisions dealing with home rule, po-
wers of counties, and the multi-purpose district provisions offered by
the Mulherin Amendment. While the functional distinction is becoming
less clear, the revenue and expenditure division is coming more sharply
into focus.
Municipalities in Georgia typically have a broader base of financial
support than counties. Counties are more heavily dependent on the
ad valorum property tax to finance not only educational activities, but
all other activities. Municipalities in Georgia have the prerogative
of taxing utilities, gross receipts, intangibles, alcoholic beverages,
life insurance, real estate transfers, and hotel and motel incomes.
Counties, on the other hand, find themselves with approximately 60 per-
cent of their total revenues emanating from the ad valorum property
tax and an increased concentration on user charges via special district
taxing procedures. These limitations and restrictions on revenue sources
remain the distinguishing characteristics between city and county in
governments in Georgia.
Community Services - Yellow River Basin
The description of individual services offered by cities and counties (Figure 33)
in the Yellow River Basin is developed more extensively in the following
-------
TABLE 57
YELLOW RIVER BASIN
LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL
ENTITIES-1976
Counties
Cities (by counties)
Special Purpose Districts (by counties)
DeKalb
Lithonia
Stone Mountain
County School District
County Hospital Authority
M.A.R.T.A.
County Housing Authority
Lithonia Housing Authority
Gwinnett
Duluth
Grayson
Lawrenceville
Li 1 burn
Norcross
SnelIville
County School District
County Water & Sewer Authority
County Airport Authority
County Hospital Authority
Lawrenceville Housing Authority
Norcross Housing Authority
Newton
Covington
Oxford
Porterdale
County School District
County Water & Sewer Authority
County Hospital Authority
County Covington Housing Authority
Rockdale
Conyers
County School District
Rockdale County-Conyers Water Authority
(non-functioning)
County Hospital Authority
Conyers Housing Authority
Walton
Loganville
Walnut Grove
County School District
Walnut Grove-Youth Water Authority
County Hospital Authority
Loganville Housing Authority
-------
2 l 0
7
f
Dufaitt)
v
7
Covinaton
V
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
COUNTIES a PRINCIPLE CITIES
FIGURE 33
LAKE
'( JACKSO*
-------
TABLE 58
GOVERMENTAL STRUCTRUE AND EMPLOYMENT BY PRINCIPAL
CITIES AND COUNTIES FOR THE YELLOW RIVER SUB-BASIN
County
- Principal city (2)
~Population
lEmploy*
#1,000 Pop.
Govt.
Structure
Public
Police-
Safety
-Fire
Public Works
Pickup - Dlsp.
Health-
Schools-Llbr. Welfare Administration
WQMU
DeKalb
457,900
3594
7.8
Commission
Admin.
455
365
Sanitation
386
~
103
0406
0408
- Lithonla
2,270
18
7.9
Mayor
Council
10
Cty.
County
NA
2
0408
Gwinnett
115,900
809
7.0
Commission
P-128
S-28
160
Franchise
40
0406
0407
- Lawrencevllle
7,175
85
11.8
Council
Manager
15
3
3
NA
9
0407
Newton
32,000
103
3.2
Commission
25
3
Franchise
UJ
UJ
S
3
0408
0409
- Covington
10,728
178
16.5
Council
Manager
33
22
21 1
in
NA
co
16
0409
Rockdale
27,200
185
6.8
Single
Conmlssloner 30
31
Franchise
1
0^08
0407
- Conyers
7,618
104
13.6
Council
Manager
21
13
10 5
NA
6
0408
Wa1 ton
28,700
135
4.7
Commission
21
5
3 2
4
0407
- Loganvllle
1,118
10
8.9
Council
Manager
4
4
NA
»>*
/
2
0407
* Counties: Bureau of the Census, Oct. 1976-July 1975 provisional (1) Bureau of the Census-1970
Cities: 1974 State Office of Planning and Budget State Average-#1,000 Pop. - Less than 5,000 - 17
5-10,000 - 11
(2) Principal city in Yellow River Sub-basin. 10-25,000 - 14
over 25,000 - 13
-------
discussion of legal basis and responsibility for service and facility
systems. The following discussion addresses only major services offered
within the Yellow River Sub-basin and the employment level associated
with their delivery.(TABLE 58), The major service areas to be discussed are:
... Public Safety
... Public Works
... Schools and Libraries
... Health and Welfare
... Administration Services
It is important to note the prevalent practice of inter-governmental
contracting for service. Frequently, one unit of government will con-
tract with another to assume all or a portion of a service responsibility.
Contrasting examples are offered in the area of wastewater treatment
services. Within Gwinnett County, the major system operator is the
county, although some few cities such as Lawrenceville and Loganville
provide their own collection and treatment systems. In Rockdale County
the prime operator is the City of Conyers, which in addition services
major portions of the unincorporated areas.
Of the listed services, schools, libraries, and health and welfare ser-
vices are uniquely county-provided. The remaining services are com-
mon to both units of local government. Significantly, some of these
latter services are performed by a single unit under contract to an-
other unit.
As portrayed in Table 57 , each county and the dominant cities within
them that are located in the Yellow River Sub-basin are shown to reflect
the relative magnitude of public services, their governmental structure,
and the public service manpower associated with each listed service. The
principal cities within each county were identified as the municipalities
within each county offering a full range of services in an effort to ac-
count for the smaller municipalities not offering extensive services or
contracting for such services through other units of government.
Given the state dominance in the service areas of health, welfare and
libraries, a more accurate reflection of the county supplemental con-
tribution to these services is shown in Table 59 for cities and counties.
The figures represent a composite index of all cities and counties within
the Atlanta metropolitan area and thus are more reflective of the priori-
ties and levels of effort applied with the Basin.
-------
TABLE 59
AGGREGATE EXPENDITURES BY ACTIVITY
COUNTIES
Administration
Judicial
Police
Sheriff
and
Jail Fire
Health
Public Parks &
Welfare Works Recreation
Library
Miscellaneous
General
Government Other
Total
lollars
$1000's)
20,553.3
18,958.3 .
14,537.2
8,474.2 14,954.1
41,693.8
4,421.1 39,743.2 6,109.0
2,179.2
9,126.4 5,590.0
186,342.8
er cent
11.0
10.2
7.8
4.5 8.0
22.4
2.4 21.3 3.3
1.2
4.9 3.0
100.0
ollars/
aplta
12.44
11.48
8.80
5.13 9.05
25.24
2.68 24.06 3.70
1.32
5.52 3.38
112.80
AGGREGATE EXPENDITURES BY ACTIVITY
CITIES
General
Administration
Pol ice
F1re
Parks &
Recreation
Public
Works
Library
Misc.
Total
Dollars
($1,000)
34,017.2
34,650.0
9,379.8
12,404.5
35,140.2
3,828.4
1,321.8
130,741.9
Percent
26.0
26.5
7.2
9.5
26.9
2.9
1.0
100.0
Per capita
45.47
46.32
12.54
16.58
46.97
5.12
1.77
174.77
Source: Revenue and Expenditure Survey of the Local Governments 1n the Atlanta Region, ARC, July 1976.
-------
B.8 TAXES AND CAPITAL BUDGETING
Task Description
This report will identify all existing state and local governmental
entities within the Yellow River Sub-basin which have legal jurisdiction
or responsibility for the delivery of the following services and facili-
ties:
1)
Transportation
2)
Police protection
3)
Fire protection
4)
Schools
5)
Libraries
6)
Health
7)
Public Welfare
8)
Solid Waste Disposal, and
9)
Water and Sewerage.
In addition, the report will generally describe the revenue sources for
each local governmental entity with general powers and a breakdown for
wastewater collection and disposal services by source and in each local
entity providing this service.
Description of Methodology
The methods used in this report to gather information varied with each
portion of the task. The inventory began with a search of the United
States Department of the Interior Geological Survey map of the Greater
Atlanta Region in the area specifically within the Yellow River Basin.
This produced a list of counties and possible municipalities. This list
was checked against a computer printout from the U. S. Bureau of the
Census of all governmental entities in the counties touching the Basin
and this was further checked by a search of Volume 33 of the Georgia Code
Annotated, Local and Special Law Index, for law creating municipalities
and granting special powers for the designated government services and
other local entities in the counties involved. This produced the list
in Table 57, minus such local entities as industrial development and
coliseum authorities which did not deliver the specified services. This
table, and much of the rest of the report, groups cities and special dis-
tricts by county.
Please note that the cities of Lithonia, Stone Mountain, Duluth, Gray-
son, Lawrenceville, Norcross, Covington, Conyers, Loganville and Walnut
Grove are all only partly in the Basin and that only Lilburn, Snellville,
Oxford and Porterdale are completely within the Basin.
-------
The description of general powers to deliver the involved services was
gathered from a survey of the Georgia Code Annotated; the Encyclopedia
of Georgia Law; the Handbook for Georgia Mayors and Councilmen; Guide-
book to Georgia County Government; and two unpublished computer searches
by Public Research and Management, Inc. on Georgia municipal and county
laws.
The information on actual services delivered was gathered by a telephone
survey of each government entity identified, which included a verification
of the inventory list in Table 61 and cross-questioning of each entity
on the services provided by other entities.
Revenue information was gathered by telephone survey and examination of
the latest audits or budgets of the listed general power entities.
Legal Jurisdiction
Generally, county commissioners and city governments in Georgia have ex-
tensive constitutional and general statutory authority to provide all of
the services involved in this report. The Georgia Constitution (Ga. Code
Ann., Sec. 2-7901a) provides that any county, city or any combination of
cities and counties may provide, within their respective boundaries:
"1) Police and fire protection;
2) Garbage and solid waste collection and disposal;
3) Public health facilities and services, including
hospitals, ambulances, emergency rescue services,
and animal control;
4) Street and road construction and maintenance; includ-
ing curbs, sidewalks, street lights and devices to
control the flow of traffic on streets and roads con-
structed by counties and municipalities or any combin-
ation thereof;
5) Parks, recreational areas, programs and facilities;
6) Storm water and sewage collection and disposal systems;
7) Development, storage, treatment and purification and
distribution of water;
8) Public housing;
9) Urban redevelopment programs;
10) Public transportation system;
11) Libraries;
12) Terminal and dock facilities and parking facilities;
13) Building, housing, plumbing, and electrical codes;
14) Air pollution control; and
15) Planning and zoning "
These services may be provided by one jurisdiction within the boundaries
of another by consent or contract (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 2-5901) and the
State legislature is banned from in the future legislating on these ser-
vices by local or special act but the legislature, except for planning
-------
TABLE 61
ACTUAL DELIVERY OF VARIOUS SERVICES BY VARIOUS GOVERNMENTS
TO THE YELLOW RIVER SUB-BASIN
Government Roads Bus or Air- Water Sew- Police Fire Gar- Schools Lib- Hos- Health Wei-
Entity Train ports age bage raries pitals Boards fare
Georgia
State
Govt. 6 - - - - 6 - - 1 6 6 Yes 1
U. S.
Government 6 - - -- 6 ___ _ _ _ 5
DeKalb Co.
Lithonia
Stone
Mountain
4
3
Yes
4
3
Yes
Gwinnett
Co. 4
Duluth 3
Grayson
Lawrence-
ville 3
Lilburn 3
Yes
4
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
6
6
1-Joint County-State agency.
2-Service limited to unincorporated area of county.
3-Service limited to city.
4-Service provided to unincorporated and some
municipal residents.
5-Service provided for municipal and some county
residents.
6-Limited portion of service.
7-Not functioning.
8-City and part of county.
9-Bus only.
10-Bus and train in construction,
11-System in construction.
Yes
-------
TABLE 61 (continued)
Government Roads Bus or Air- Water Sew- Police Fire Gar- Schools Lib- Hoi- Health Wei-
Entity Train ports age bage raries pitals Boards fare
(In DeKalb
Co.)
Co. School
District - - ____ - - 1
M.A.R.T.A.
Yes
Co. Hosp.
Authority
Yes
Co. Hous.
Authority
Lithonia
Hous. Auth.
6
6
(In Gwinnett
Co.)
Co. School
District - - ____ - - 1
Co. Water &
Sewer Auth. -- -11 11- ___
Co. Airport
Authority - - Yes - - - -
1-Joint County-State agency.
2-Service limited to unincorporated area of county.
3-Service limited to city.
4-Service provided to unincorporated and some
municipal residents.
5-Service provided for municipal and some county
residents.
6-Limited portion of service.
7-Not functioning.
8-City and part of county.
9-Bus only.
10-Bus and train in construction.
11-System in construction.
-------
T A B L E 61 ,( Continued)
Government
Entity
Roads
Bus or
Train
Air-
ports
Water
Sew-
age
Police
Fire
Gar-
bage
Schools
Lib-
raries
Hos-
pitals
Health
Boards
Wel-
fare
Norcross
3
-
-
3
3
3
-
3
-
6
-
-
-
Snellville
3
-
-
-
-
3
3
-
-
6
-
-
-
Newton
Co.
4
—
—
-
-
4
2
6
—
6
—
Yes
1
Covington
3
-
Yes
5
5
3
3
3
-
6
-
-
-
Oxford
3
-
-
3
11
3
3
3
-
-
-
-
-
Porterdale
3
-
-
-
-
3
3
3
-
-
-
-
-
Rockdale
Co.
4
—
—
—
-
4
2
6
—
6
—
Yes
1
Conyers
3
-
-
5
5
3
3
3
-
6
-
-
-
Walton
Co.
4
—
—
—
—
4
4
4
—
6
_
Yes
1
Loganville
3
-
-
3
3
3
3
3
-
6
-
-
-
Walnut
Grove
3
3
3
1-Joint County-State agency.
2-Service limited to unincorporated area of county.
3-Service limited to city.
4-Service provided to unincorporated and some
municipal residents.
5-Service provided for municipal and some county
residents.
6-Limited portion of service.
7-Not functioning.
8-City and part of county.
9-Bus only.
10-Bus and train in construction
11-System in construction.
-------
TABLE 61 (concluded)
Government Roads Bus or Air- Water Sew- Police Fire Gar- Schools Lib- Hoi- Health Wei-
Entity Train ports age bage raries pitals Boards fare
Co. School
District - - ____ 1
Rockdale-
Conyers
Water
Auth. - - -77- ___ _ - - -
Co. Hosp.
Authority - - ____ ___ _ Yes
Conyers Hous.
Authority - - - - - - - - - - - - 6
(In Walton
Co.)
Co. School
District - - ____ - - 1
Walnut Grove-
Youth Water
Authority - - - 8- - - - -
Co. Hosp.
Authority - - ____ ___ _ Yes
Loganville
Housing
Authority
1-Joint County-State agency.
2-Service limited to unincorporated area of county.
3-Service limited to city.
4-Service provided to unincorporated and some
municipal residents.
5-Service provided for municipal and some county
residents.
6
6-Limited portion of service.
7-Not functioning.
8-City and part of county.
9-Bus only.
10-Bus and train in construction.
11-System in construction.
-------
TABLE 61 (Continued)
Government Roads Bus or Air- Water Sew- Police Fire Gar- Schools Lib- Hos- Health Wei-
Entity Train ports age bage raries pitals Boards fare
Co. Hosp.
Authority - - ____ ___ _ Yes
Lawrenceville
Housing
Authority - - ____ ___ _ _ _ 6
Norcross
Housing
Authority - - - - - - - - - 6
(In Newton
Co.)
Co. School
District - - ____ - - 1
Co. Water &
Sewer Auth. - - - 66 - ___
Co. H6sp.
Authority - - ____ ___ _ Yes
Covington
Hous. Auth. - - ____ ___ _ _ _ 6
(In Rockdale
Co. )
6-Limited portion of service.
7-Not functioning.
8-City and part of county.
9-Bus only.
10-Bus and train in construction,
11-System in construction.
1-Joint County-State agency.
2-Service limited to unincorporated area of county.
3-Service limited to city.
4-Service provided to unincorporated and some
municipal residents.
5-Service provided for municipal and some county
residents.
-------
TABLE 60
GENERAL GEORGIA STATUTES GRANTING POWERS ON
SELECTED LOCAL SERVICES
Authority to Condemn Property(C) or
Authority to Issue Bonds (B)
Service
Ga. Code Ann.
Municipality(M)
or County(C)
Roads and other
land transpor-
tation
Title 95A
M
and
C
B
and
C
Airports
Ch. 11-2
M
and
C
B
and
C
Water Systems
Ch. 87-8, Sees.
M
and
C
B
and
C
69-314, 69-315
C
B
and
C
Sewer Systems
Ch. 87-8, Sees.
M
and
C
B
and
C
69-314, 69-315
C
B
and
C
Police
Ch. 23-14
C
-
Solid Wastes
Ch. 87-8
M
and
C
B
and
C
Schools
Ch 32-11 (local
unit for state)
C
-
Libraries
Ch. 87-8
M
and
C
B
and
C
Ch. 32-27
M
and
C
-
Health
Ch. 88-2
C
-
Hospitals and
Clinics
Ch. 88-18 (create
M
and
C
B
and
C
independent author-
or
Joint
ity) Sees. 69-311,
69-315
B
-------
and. zoning, may provide general statewide statutes in these areas or
population acts, which apply to any city or county under or over some
stated population (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 2-7901a). General acts author-
izing particular services in more detail are listed in Table 60 .
Table 61 lists which services are actually provided by each govern-
mental entity in the Yellow River Basin.
Transportation
The federal and state governments have responsibility for building and
maintaining state and federal highways in the Basin. This includes
parts of Interstate 85 and 20; U.S. highways 23, 29, 78, and 278;
and State highways 8, 10, 12, 13, 20, 36, 81, 84, 120, 124, 138, 162,
212, 264 and 316.
Other surfaced roads are maintained by the various local governments
paid for out of general funds or by a special assessment against pro-
perty owners along the road based on their road frontage. In unincor-
porated areas in the Basin, the various county road departments build
and maintain a network of roads, and in the municipalities either
the county builds and maintains by contract a network-for the city or
the city has its own department for this function.
There is no public water transportation in the Basin but various small
airports are maintained for air travel. The only airport actually in
the Yellow River Basin is the Covington Municipal Airport operated by
the city government. The Gwinnett County Airport Authority operates an
airport just outside the Basin, northeast of Lawrenceville and the DeKalb
County Airport Authority operates the DeKalb Peachtree Airport outside
the Basin in the northern part of that county. Each of these airports
is financed for operations by a combination of fees, contracts and general
funds of the city, or county, and bonds may be issued for any capital
improvement.
Police Protection
There is federal law enforcement and assistance by the F.B.I, and
state law enforcement and assistance by the Georgia Department of Public
Safety and its branches, the State Patrol and the Bureau of Investigation.
The primary source of law enforcement is, however, local through various
county sheriffs, county police departments and municipal police units,
all of which are financed out of general funds except for some portions
of the county sheriff's office being directly supported by fees charged
for his service functions.
The sheriff's responsibilities vary from county to county. In DeKalb and
Gwinnett Counties, the sheriff primarily functions as jailer and handles
court service while the county police departments investigate the various
criminal acts committed in the county and patrol the highways and roads
-------
local school districts. These percentages, of course, vary consider-
ably in each local district since the local support comes primarily
from a separate property tax levied by the school board, the total of
which depends more on the "wealth" of the district rather than on its
educational needs,and state or federal grants are partly based on
local needs and programs.
Libraries
Public libraries in Georgia are locally constituted and operated under
the authority of a local board of trustees. When no county board
has been constituted,'the county board of education serves as library
board (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 32-2707). County libraries may merge or
participate in multi-county systems (Regional Libraries) with a regional
library board as governing authority. Boards of trustees are locally
appointed, their representation being determined by the cities or coun-
ties agreeing to fund the local libraries.
In the Yellow River Basin, most of the cities and counties participate
in regional systems, though they may also use a local board. The regions
include Decatur-DeKalb (DeKalb, Newton, and Rockdale), Lake Lanier (Gwin-
nett) and Piedmont (Walton). These regional systems are generally fir
nanced by the local communities providing the library buildings, its
utilities and dues for some books bought by the regional board while the re-
gion, with state grants, provides some books and all library personnel.
Health
There are three governmental services under this category: hospitals,
ambulance service and health board regulation.
There are state hospitals for certain special purposes but none are lo-
cated in the Yellow River Basin and all public hospital care is provided
by hospital authorities in each county.
The state legislature "created" a hospital authority in each county and
city. However, a hospital authority may not transact any business unless
the governing body of the county or city declares, by proper resolution,
that there is a need for a hospital authority, and thus, hospital author-
ities are effectively created by local resolutions. The members of the
authority board are appointed by the governing body of the county or city
for the term authorized by the resolution. As in other instances, a county
may join with one or more other counties or cities to form one hospital
authority (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 88-1803).
The financing of each authority is a combination of bonds for capital im-
provements issued by the authority, operating expenses provided by user
fees or charges, and indigent care contract payments by the city or county.
i
-------
in the county and, by agreement, patrol in some cities. In all the
other counties the sheriff performs all law enforcement functions
in the county and assists the muncipal police forces to some degree.
All cities in the Basin except Grayson and Walnut Grove have police
departments which investigate the various criminal acts committed in
the city, patrol the city's streets and handle any city court service.
Fire Protection
There are several kinds of fire protection services in the Yellow River
Basin. Fire protection service of county forest land is provided by the
State Forestry Commission, which has divided the state into fire protec-
tion units. These units may comprise one or more counties. For forest
fire protection, a county must contract with the State Forestry Commission
at the rate of four cents per acre of privately owned forest land. The
county may levy a tax to provide the funds for this fire protection (Ga.
Code Ann., Sec. 43-231). There are volunteer fire companies which are sub-
sidized from general funds to some degree in Oxford, Porterdale, Logan-
ville and Walnut Grove. There are full-time departments or departments
supplemented with volunteers in all the other counties and cities in the
Basin except Lithonia, Stone Mountain, Duluth, Lilburn, Grayson, and Nor-
cross, all of which are protected by their county departments. The county
departments generally cover most of the unincorporated portions of the
counties but some sparsely populated portions have not been organized into
fire districts yet. An additional property tax levy for fire protection
may be levied by the county, but cities generally support their depart-
ments out of general funds.
Schools
Within the Basin, all public education through high school is provided by
independent county school districts. These are run by elected boards of
education in each county. The responsibility for the administration and
financial support of the public school system is divided between the state
and the county school systems. The State Board of Education is vested with
authority to formulate broad educational and administrative policies and
to apportion state school funds among the local school boards as state
administrative units. The State Superintendent of Schools, an ex-officio
member of the State Board, is charged with the responsibility for executing
and administering the policies formulated by the Board (Ga. Code Ann.,
Ch. 2-65, 2-66). Generally speaking, authority and responsibility rela-
ting to public school matters that are not specifically delegated to the
State Department of Education are vested by law in the locally elected
boards of education.
Financing public education is a three-way partnership. On the average,
for fiscal year 1967-68, the state provided 55 percent of the total funds
for maintenance and operation of Georgia's public schools; the federal gov-
ernment provided 14 percent; and the remaining 31 percent came from the
-------
Public Welfare
Public welfare is, for the most part, a state service administered through
and with the cooperation of the counties with some local and federal
funding. Each county has a Board of Family and Children's Services
or a welfare board, a county director, and any additional employees as
are necessary for efficient performance of welfare services (Ga. Code
Ann., Sec. 99-501). The county board has the duty of advising on policy
within the framework set down by state and federal regulations. It ap-
points the county director, subject to the approval of the state depart-
ment, from a register of qualified applicants.
The county director is responsible for the administration of the major
welfare program including aid to the aged; aid to the blind; aid to the
disabled; aid to families with dependent children; and he may be in charge
of general assistance, if such responsibility is delegated by the county
commissioners.
While the state and federal governments constitute the major source of
funding in the local public welfare program, the county through its
board of commissioners has important responsibilities. For example,
the county commissioners approve an operating budget for the department
through mutual agreement with the county welfare board. In addition,
the commissioners must provide suitable office space, equipment, and
supplies to the county departments and appropriate certain,funds to
maintain the welfare service within the county and to defray the.cost
of administration of these services.
An additional portion of public welfare services is the public housing
provided by various housing authorities in the Basin. Like hospital
authorities, the state "created" housing authorities in each city and
county, which are activated by local resolutions (Ga. Code Ann., Ch.
99-110). They provide low-cost housing for the poor and aged and have
been activated in DeKalb County (unincorporated areas), Lithonia, Law-
renceville, Norcross, Covington, Conyers, and Loganville. Their opera-
tion is mostly financed by the project income and bonds issued by the
authority.
Solid Waste Disposal
The delivery of this service varies from acre to area. DeKalb has a
county garbage service and landfills that, handle most all the needs
of the unincorporated and many municipal residents. Stone Mountain
has a separate garbage pickup service, however. Gwinnett has no county
service though it franchises and regulates a private service that han-
dles most of the unincorporated portions of the county. Lawrenceville,
Li 1 burn (by contractors), Norcross and Grayson have city pickup ser-
vices. Newton has a county dumpster service in the unincorporated areas
and operates a central landfill. Each of the cities in that county that
are in the Basin (Covington, Oxford and Porterdale) has a municipal
-------
Any county or city may enter into a contract with a hospital authority
for use of the services and facilities for indigent care. Sums due and
payble under the contract must be determined from year to year during
the period of the contract, but may include an annual minimum. These
payments may come out of the general funds of the city or county or out
of extra tax revenues from a property tax not exceeding seven mills
levied annually by counties or cities which have executed contracts
with, hospital authorities (Ga. Code Ann., Ch. 88-18).
The only city or county government in the Basin which now operates an
ambulance service is Newton County. Some hospital authorities operate
such services, but most are private services. Some counties, like Rock-
dale for example, heavily subsidize local private ambulance services,
and in DeKalb County the County Fire Department competes with several
private services to some extent as a special emergency ambulance service.
Rockdale County is also a member of a quasi-public organization or ser-
vice established by the Atlanta Regional Commission called the Metropol-
itan Emergency Medical Service (M.E.M.S.) which provides a go-between
for consumers and ambulance services to insure quicker service by computer
dispatching the nearest ambulance.
Public health is essentially a state program supported with some local
and federal funds, modified and organized to meet local needs, and oper-¦
ated by a county appointed board of health. The county board is responsi-
ble for overseeing the programs and appointing a director in accordance
with state requirements. There are provisions for establishing multi-
county districts and the county commissi oners must approve the annual
budget and appropriate sufficient additional money to provide the service.
The board's responsibilities are to determine county health needs and
resources; to develop, in cooperation with the state health department,
local programs, activities, and facilities; to secure compliance with .
state rules and regulations; and to enforce all laws pertaining to health
(Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 88-202). In order to carry out these objectives,
a county board has the power to exercise authority in all matters per-
taining to county health; adopt and enforce local health rules; receive and
administer grants and donations; contract, establish, and accept fees
for providing mental health and home care services; and contract with other
agencies for assistance in performing functions and the exercising of its
powers (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 88-204).
Major county health department programs include: (1) preventative disease
measures, (2) alcohol and drug abuse programs, and (3) sanitation regula-
tion and control. The preventative disease measures may include vac-
cinations, V.D. control, T.B. tests, school hygiene, testing of food and
milk handlers, health education, and some maternity services. The al-
cohol and drug abuse programs may include public education, methadone
maintenance, and alcoholic treatment centers. The sanitation aspects
may involve inspection and regulation of sewage disposal systems, individ-
ual water supply systems and septic tanks, health nuisances, and all food
establishments
-------
F I G U R E - 32 '
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
DEKALB COUNTY
GWINNETT COUNTY
Resthaven
Grayson
Suwanee
Dacula
Li 1 burn
Sugar Hill
Duluth
Buford
Snellville
Lawrenceville
WALTON COUNTY
ROCKDALE COUNTY
Conyers
NEWTON COUNTY
Covington
Oxford
Served by County
Unincorporated Served by Private Collectors
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Public
Pri vate
Public
Private
Public
Rural Collection (bulk containers)
Private
Public
Private
Public
Public
DISPOSAL
MAP KEY #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
LOCATION
Crymes Sanitary Landfill
Gartrell A. Nash Landfill
Arnold Sanitary Landfill
Phillips Road Landfill
Rockdale County Sanitary
Landfill
Mil stead - Old City
Oxford Landfill
City of Covington
City of Porterdale
Stewart Road
STATUS
Area of site is 97.452 acres. 4000+ tons per month
of all kinds of waste.
Area less than 5 acres. Demolition and land clearin
wastes only.
Area of site is 35.58 acres. Phase I. 2200 tons pe
monty of garbage and rubbish.
Small private site receiving only industrial wastes
Area of site is 62 acres. 50+ tons per day of
various kinds of solid waste.
County site not adequately closed.
Small site for city nonputrescibles.
Approximately 20 acres. Almost used up. Converted
from sanitary landfill to site for city nonputres-
cibles.
Several acre site situated on 90 acres. Waste quan-
tities disposed are very minimal.
Site closed to further dumping. Closure not
adequate.
Source: Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division,
Solid Waste Department., 1977
-------
7
LQvr«nc*vilt«
1
¦
V
Pmimeam
? f
V
YELLOW RIVER
SUB-BASIN
SANITARY LANDFILL
AND DISPOSAL SITES
FIGURE 32
JACKSON
-------
Generally, cities and counties may levy only those taxes specifically
allowed by general or special state laws, but they may charge user fees
for government services in "amounts that are "reasonable" if they have the
authority to provide that service.
Tables 62 , 63 , and 64 provide some comparison between the general
governmental units but because of varying accounting methods, special
local exemptions and rates, unusual grants, and contracts and service
incomes, exact comparisons are not possible.
Property or ad valorem (according to value) taxes are a primary source
of revenue for all cities and counties in the Basin exceptrfor Walnut
Grove, which does not levy a property tax. This tax is imposed on real
property (land, buildings and permanent fixtures), certain personal
property (motor vehicles, inventories, machinery and boats), and pro-
perty of privately owned utilities.
Generally, these properties are valued or assessed by each county tax
assessor at 40 percent of the full fair market value with a review of
the total digest by the State Revenue Commissioner. There are two ex-
ceptions to these rules and they are that the property of privately
owned utilities is assessed by the State Revenue Department alone
and the percentage assessed on all property is higher in a few cities,
such as Covington and Oxford in the Yellow River Basin, which have 75
percent assessments.
The tax rate may be expressed in mills or dollars of tax per thousand
of assessed value and is set by the city council or county commission by
determining the government's need for revenue which may be raised by
this tax divided by the tax assessment or digest. The resulting mill-
age is multiplied by the assessed value of each property and the total'
is the tax bill for that property.
Table 63 provides the 1976 net assessment, millage rate and tax totals
for each of the local entities in the Basin with general powers. Though
each unit arranges its tax digest a little differently from each other,
the figures for net assessment should include the 40 percent of the total
fair market value of the property in the county not exempted from the
property tax by the State Constitution. The millage rate for counties
may be broken into categories to earmark the money for recreation, fire
or hospital districts in the county or for debt service funds. The total
tax does not include the state property tax though it may include the
property tax on automobiles, intangibles or penalties, interest and late
taxes collected in 1976.
Table 64 lists the various taxes other than the property tax actually
being used and the amounts collected by Yellow River Basin local govern-
ments. The beer, wine and liquor taxes are excise taxes levied on the
sale of these products. They are usually paid by the wholesaler for sales
to local retailers or the tax may be on retail sales and collected for the
-------
pickup service. Rockdale has no county service, but Conyers has a pick-
up service which also services much of the county and there is a joint
city-county landfill. Walton has a county pickup service for the unin-
corporated areas and a central landfill, and Loganville and Walnut Grove
have city pickup services. All of these services are financed by user
fees or charges including landfill fees, and most operate at a slight
profit which goes into the local government's general funds. (Figure 32)
Water and Sewage
The extent of these services varies greatly in each community and the
details of financing will be provided later in this report. In DeKalb,
a county water and sewer system provides service tc unincorporated
portions of the county, and in the Yellow River Basin it provides service
to the City of Lithonia. Stone Mountain has a separate water service
and sewage system, but it receives all of its water and has all its
sewage treated through the county system.
There is presently a mixed package of city and county services in Gwin-
nett. A county system provides service to unincorporated areas as
well as in Li 1 burn. Duluth has a separate water system and a few busi-
nesses are connected to the county sewer system. Lawrenceville and Nor-
cross have separate water and sewer systems in each city though the
county processes the sewage for Norcross, and Snellville residents re-
ceive water from the county and a sewer system is being constructed
for a portion of the city which will probably be added to the county
system. Grayson has a city water system, but no city sewer system.
A new independent Gwinnett County Water and Sewer Authority has been or-
ganized, which began operations in March but will basically only process
the sewage of the county system or other systems in the county.
In Newton County there is a County Water and Sewer Authority operating
a system in part of the unincorporated area of the county and in Porter-
dale and' in parts of Oxford, while Covington operates a water and sewer
system in that city and some of its surrounding areas. Oxford has a
separate city water system, and a private sewer system operates in Por-
terdale but is processed by the county.
In Rockdale and Walton counties there are no county systems. The City
of Conyers does, however, operate a water and sewer system that provides
service to much of unincorporated Rockdale County as well as city resi-
dents. In the Yellow River Basin portion of Walton County, Loganville
operates a water and sewer system and the Walnut Grove-Youth Water
Authority provides water in its portion of the county.
Revenue Sources
This portion of the report will describe the type of revenues that are
available to cities and counties and how the revenues are generally levied,
measured and collected.
-------
TABLE 62 (concluded)
Government Property Other Intergovernment Revenues Service Court fees, Interest Other Total
Entities Tax 4* Local Charges Fines and Revenues
with Gene- Taxes State Federal Local Forfeitures
ral Powers
Oxford 7* 50 2 9 5 3 67 5 2 .3 143
Porterdale
7* 189 2 11 26 - 17 29 2 276
Rockdale
Co. 2* 1,676 200 266i* 395 6 113 216 2 57 2,931
Conyers 1* 362 244 32 143 2 1,299 50 13 12 2,157
Walton Co.
2* 887 .3 381b* 285 - 24 183 - 167c* 1,927
Loganville
2* 73f * 31 5 24 78 35 1 247
Walnut Grove - g* g*
i*
* See below.
1-July 76-June 77 Budget
2-July 75-June 76 Audit
3-Jan. 75-Dec. 76 Budget
4-For county or city govt
5-Sept. 75-Aug. 76 Audit
6-Apr. 76-May 77 Budget
7-Jan. 75-Dec. 75 Audit
f-Includes insurance premium tax.
g-Figures were not available at printing but the city
has no property tax but does impose a beer and wine
tax, a business license tax and collects a garbage
service charge.
h-Figures were not available at printing but the city
has a property tax described in Table 6, other taxes
listed in Table 5 and a city water service charge.
i-Includes $79,220 state highway contract.
j-This does not include several hundred thousand in
federal L.E.A.A. and C.E.T.A. grants.
k-This includes only the profits from solid waste,
water and sewerage operations to the general fund.
Totals of these charges are in the tens of millions
of dollars.
operation only,
a-Net revenues, sheriff and courts retain
portion.
b-Includes a $216,308 state highway contract,
c-Includes interest, tax penalties, special
assessment and other.
d-State and Federal grants total
e-Includes $699,994 in profits from city gas
and electric systems.
-------
TABLE 62
REVENUES BY GENERAL SOURCES
(in $1,000 ' s)
Government Property
Entities Tax 4*
Other
Local
Intergovernment Revenues
Service
Charges
Court fees,
Fines and
Interest
Other
Total
Revenue
with Gene-
ral Powers
Taxes
State
Federal
Local
Forfeitures
DeKalb Co.
7* 39,398
3,735
2,393
8,123
247
2,381k*
3,476
751
1,455
61,959
Lithonia 3* 37
88
15
75
5
-
40
-
3
263
Stone
Mountain 7* 134
7
29
190
8
2
3
373
Gwinnett
Co. 3* 7,742
984
364
92 3 j *
—
110k*
605
52
4
10,784
Duluth h*
h*
h*
h
Grayson 7* 5
2
5
2
-
19
-
-
1
34
Lawrenceville
5* 361
62
-
89d*
7
358
31
52
37
997
Lilburn 2* 56
54
11
39
-
-
36
-
12
208
Norcross 3* 139
38
18
25
1
166
51
4
1
443
Snellville 6* 288
157
13
41
-
-
36
9
29
573
Newton Co.
1* 1,297 160 88 323 - 60 197a* . 5 28 2,154
Covington 3* 568 296 85 229 9 997 57 31 749e* 3,021
* See end of Table 4.
-------
TABLE 63(concluded)
Government
Entity
Net Assessed
Valuation (in
Millage Rates by Levies for Separate Activities-
per $1,000 in Assessed Value
Total Ad Valorem
Revenue
thousands)
Gen. Pur- Fire Dis- Schools Other Total Mill-
poses tricts age
Oxford
Porterdale
9,994 b
13,518
5 5
14 14
49,872
189,106
Rockdale Co.
Conyers
147,129
24,119
12.25 23 35.25
15 15
1,582,052 a
361,780
Walton Co. 141,289 6.28 10.25 16.53 2,335,515
Loganville c 9 73,025 c
Walnut Grove d - - d
a-Does not include schools.
b-75% assessment method.
c-Inc. insurance premium tax and the net assessment was not available at this printing.
d-No property tax.
-------
TABLE 63
1976 AD VALOREM OR PROPERTY TAX
MILLAGE RATES, ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY (NET)
AND TOTAL REVENUES FROM THIS SOURCE
Government
Entity
Net Assessed
Valuation (in
Millage Rates by Levies for Separate Activities-
per §1,000 in Assessed Value
Total Ad Valorem
Revenue
thousands)
Gen. Pur- Fire Dis- Schools Other Total Mill-
poses tricts age
DeKalb Co.
2,269,614
11.42 2.55 (26.07) 1.41 15.38 a
39,255,000 a
Lithonia
6,101
6 6
36,606
Stone
Mountain
Gwinnett Co.
450,907
10.5 3.7 - 1.13 15.33 a
6,912,399 a
Duluth
8,998
10 10
89,980
Grayson
1,295
5 5
6,475
Lawrencevilie
33,498
9 9
301,484
Lilburn
11,213
5 5
56,066
Norcross
18,439
7 7
129,071
Snellville
31,967
9 9
287,701
Newton Co.
161,088
8.4 18.5 .2 27.1
4,365,472
Covington
103,231 b
5.5 5.5
567,771
a-Does not include schools.
b-7 5% assessment method.
c-Inc. insurance premium tax and the net assessment was not available at this printing.
d-No property tax.
-------
T A B,L"E- .64.{concluded)
Franchise
Taxes and
Fees
Government
Entity
Beer, Wine
and Liquor
Taxes
Business
Licenses
and Taxes
Insurance
Premium
Tax
Parking
Meters
Hotel-
Motel
Tax
Total of Taxes
Other Than Propert
Rockdale Co.
2* 152
Conyers 1* 58
48
51
85
50
200
244
Walton Co. 2*
Loganville 2*
Walnut
Grove
25
.3
6*
. 3
31
d*
* See below.
1-July 76-June 77 Budget
2-July 75-June 76 Audit
3-Jan. 76-Dec. 76 Budget
4-Sept. 75-Aug. 76 Audit
5-Apr. 76-May 77 Budget
6-Jan. 75-Dec. 75 Audit
a-Inc. Insurance Premium Tax
b-Inc. Beer, Wine and Liquor Business Licenses
c-Included in Property Tax Figure in Table 4
d-Figures not available at printing but the city
does impose the indicated taxes.
e-Inc. Building Permit Fees
-------
TABLE 64
LOCAL TAXES OTHER THAN FOR PROPERTY
(in $1,0001s)
Government Beer, Wine
Entity and Liquor
Taxes
Business
Licenses
and Taxes
Franchise
Taxes and
Fees
Insurance
Premium
Tax
Parking
Meters
Hotel-
Motel
Tax
Total of Taxes
Other Than Proper
DeKalb Co.b*
3,735
-
-
-
205
3,735
Lithonia 3* 29
13
23
23
88
Stone
Mountain 6* 18b*
6*
39
34
Gwinnett Co.3* 500
484e*
-
-
984
Duluth d*
d*
d*
d*
d*
Grayson 6* -
1
1
-
2
Lawrenceville 4* -
62
34
-
62
Lilburn 2* 12
8
28
6*
54
Norcross 3* -
9
10
19
38
Snellville 5* 35
72a*
50
-
157
Newton Co. 1* 143
17
-
" -
160
Covington 3* 219b*
53
-
21
3
296
Oxford 6*
2
-
2
Porterdale 6* -
2
—
2
* See end of Table.
-------
Intergovernment Revenues were broken down between state, federal, and
local sources. From the state it includes any grants, shared revenues
collected by the state such as the state fuel tax, payments by the state
for county services in state tax collecting and elections, and contracts
with the state for the maintenance of state highways. The federal cate-
gory includes revenue sharing funds, C.E.T.A. payments for certain em-
ployees wages, L.E.A.A. grants for law enforcement, community develop-
ment grants, and other categorical grants-in-aid but not including any
payments to local schools, hospitals or other independent local enti-
ties. The local portion includes payments in lieu of property taxes
by housing authorities and payments by cities for some county services
or vice versa, but some local interchange for services may be hidden in
other figures such as the service charges category.
The service charges category includes fees or charges for various govern-
ment services. These include water and sewer user charges and tap-on
fees (sewer charges will be described in more detail later), garbage
collection fees, landfill or dumping charges, and it may include some
charges to other local governments for services like tax collecting
and elections. It does not include bills for electricity or gas sold
by city utilities or user fees and charges by other local government en-
tities such as hospitals, airports and housing authorities.
Court fees, fines, and forfeitures cover a variety of revenues. For cities
it is only the court costs, fines and forfeited bonds in the municipal
or police court, but for counties it may include court costs and fines
in the county superior and probate courts, candidate election qualify-
ing fees paid to the probate court, and other probate court and sheriff's
fees for various services.
The last categories of Interest and Other may overlap somewhat because
some local breakdowns mix interest income from invested idle funds with
other miscellaneous revenues, or they may include interest1income in each
category or accounting fund that had interest-bearing funds during the
year, the Other category, besides some interest, may include building
permit fees, rental of government property, public concessions, inspection
fees, sales of government property, paving and lighting assessments, and
cash gifts.
Wastewater Collection and Disposal
This portion of the report will describe the operating revenue sources
for each public sewage system in the Yellow River Basin, including the
rates or service charges and tap-on or connection fees.
DeKalb County has an extensive system of lines and treatment plants cover-
ing most of the unincorporated portions of the county and some municipal-
ities and providing processing for other municipal systems in the county.
In the Yellow River Basin there are no public processing plants, but some
residents are still on septic tanks and some private processing is still
used for businesses in the area, particularly rock quarries. Financial
information on the DeKalb system is contained in Tables 65 and 66 .
-------
government by the wholesaler from the retailer. The beer tax rate is
set uniformly by state law at five cents per 12 ounce container or pro-
portionately for other sizes and six dollars per 15% gallon container
of draft beer or proportionately for other sizes (Ga. Code Ann., Sec.
58-7061). The rate for wine varies greatly, but the maximum rate for
liquor is set by state law at 80 cents per gallon (Ga. Code Ann., Sec.
58-1038).
Business licenses and taxes vary considerably from government to govern-
ment. They are usually a flat rate per year varied as to the type of
business, but they may vary on the basis of floor space, number of employ-
ees, or inventory. A few areas use a rate based on the gross receipts
of the business. Professionals, such as doctors and lawyers may only be
taxed up to $200.00 per year and liquor stores up to $2,000.00 per year
in any of these manners, and life insurance companies may be taxed or
licensed for doing business in a city according to the city population
under a schedule established by the State (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 56-1310).
Cities may charge a tax or fee for a franchise or right to use the city
streets for various commercial purposes. This may include private tele-
phones, electric, gas, cable T.V.,.water, sewer and garbage companies.
Some cities even charge a fee to other local government utilities for the
right to use their streets, as Oxford does for Covington's gas and elec-
tric system.
Cities and counties may impose various other minor taxes. Cities may
impose a life insurance premium tax under state law of up to one percent
of the gross premium on any life insurance policy issued to city resid-
dents. Cities may establish parking meters (Ga. Code Ann., Sec. 95A-503(g)).
Cities and counties may impose a hotel-motel tax of up to three percent
on room charges, though if the city imposes the tax, the county may not
in that city (Ga. Code Ann., Ch. 52-5). There is also a local optional
sales tax of one percent that may be imposed by counties after a refer-
endum or by cities under certain circumstances, which requires a property
tax reduction to match that new revenue (Ga. Code Ann. 92-3447a.l).
It must be noted here that Gwinnett County has imposed a business or occu-
pation tax for the unincorporated areas, which began January 10, 1977, and
though no local entity has imposed the local option sales tax, Walton
County had a referendum scheduled on it in January 1977.
Table provides a listing of the various revenues of the cities and
counties in the Yellow River Basin. It does not include revenues raised
by other special governmental entities such as school boards or hospital
authorities. The Property Tax category includes all but those property
taxes that the counties collect for the state and local school boards
and may include an intangible property tax, property transfer taxes and
late taxes, penalties and interest, the Other Local Taxes are the
totals from Table 64
-------
TABLE 65 (concluded)
Steri1i zation: To insure sterile lines, all new lines 6" or larger
must be sterilized before approval by County:
Minimum charge: $25.00
6" Water Main: 0.05 per foot 10" Water Main: 0.20 per foot
8" Water Main: 0.10 per foot 12" Water Main: 0.30 per foot
NOTE: Lines smaller than 6" may be sterilized at same fee established
for 6" line.
Miscellaneous Service Charges:
Water Restoration: First cut off: $4.00; second: $10.00; removal of
meter: $25.00. Special Industrial Waste Sampling: At Cost.
-------
TABLE 65
DEKALB COUNTY SEWER RATES AND SERVICE CHARGES
Minimum or Readiness to Serve Charge: (A base monthly charge for pro'
viding service availability regardless of volume used, based on capac>
i ty of meter.)
Meter Size
3/4"
(for less) 1" 1-1/2" 2" 3" 4" 6" 8"(**) 12"
Sewer 4.80 8.00 16.00 25.60 51.20 80.00 160.00 256.00 400.00
NOTE: Most low and residential users are on bi-monthly meter reading
and billings; this includes mainly meters of 1" and under which
constitute approx. 97% of meters in water system. Monthly bill-
ing is at half this rate.
Commodity Charges: (Based on volume of water metered.)
Sewer: $0.80 per 1,000 gallons
Industrial Waste Surcharge: (Based on routine laboratory tests of com-
mercial and industrial customer discharges to the County Sewer System
and on volume of water metered.)
1. BOD (Bio-Chemical Oxygen An additional $0.0004 per 1,000 gallons
Demand) level: for each mg/1 of BOD in excess of 250
mg/1.
2. SS (Suspended Solids) level: An additional $0.0004 per 1,000 gallons
for each mg/1 of SS in excess of 250
mg/1 •
New Sewers Assessment Rate: The assessment rate is based on actual ave-
rage cost per lineal foot from previous year - charged per front foot of
abutting property along the sanitary sewer and applied as lien against
property.
Sewer Tap Fees:
Residential: $200 but if the tap is to sewers built under a petition
earlier than 9/72 then it is $50; if between 9/72 and 12/74 then it is
$100.
Non-Residential: Fee to be based upon a population equivalent propor-
tionate to a single family unit. (State and National Equivalent Tables
-------
Stone Mountain has a city sewage system for which they charge a user
fee and all the city sewage is processed by the county system. The
city is generally treated like a large customer under the standard rates.
The city charges a $100.00 connection or tap-on fee to all customers
and has a monthly commodity charge based on the volume of water metered
of $2.50 for the first 5,000 gallons and $0.45 for each 1,000 gallons
over that. The city also charges miscellaneous small fees for inspec-
tions, tests and the like and establishes a property assessment based
on the front footage of each property owner to equal a total cost for
new sewers laid by the city or under city contract. Most new sewers
are, however, built by developers to city specifications and dedicated
free to the city. There were $650,000.00 in water and sewer bonds or
revenue certificates of the city outstanding in December 1975, and only
interest payments were made on that indebtedness in 1976.
In Gwinnett County, in the early part of 1977, two county-wide local
government entities plan to be involved in wastewater disposal. Pre-
sently, the county owns and operates a system that distributes water and
returns and processes sewage by most of the unincorporated portions of
the county and many of the municipalities. A county water and sewer
authority will begin operation handling all or most processing of waste-
waters for the county system and some municipalities by contract. To
finance the expansion and establishment of these systems, the authority
has issued $35 million in bonds, the county has added $5 million in 1976
to its $26,415,000 in outstanding water and sewer bonds and federal
grants of $15 million from EPA and $1.21 million from other federal agen-
cies are being used.
Table 67 shows the various charges by the county. "Original contract
users" means they were on the system within six months of the contract
that created the processing plants they are connected to, while "contract
user" means within six to 30 months and "non-contract" means after 30
months. Most county package plants and oxidation ponds have been or are
in the process of being eliminated so that a portion of the fees is largely
obsolete. The ready-to-serve charge is a minimum charge even if no water
is used based on the average rate of use for that type of customer.
After the water is flowing and the system is in use, the charge is the
ready-to-serve charge rate plus the use charge rate on the actual water
metered. All new users (contract and non-contract) must pay a connection
charge based on the estimate of daily use by each type of customer plus,
for users added after a cut-off date for each plant set by the county
commission, one year's ready-to-serve charge.
Lawrenceville has a city sewage system which presently treats all the
city's sewage. There are $413,000.00 in outstanding water and sewage bonds
and no new bonds were issued in 1976. The city charges a flat rate of
$0.50 per month to residences and $2.00 per month to commercial establish-
ments. There are some new hookups to the system and the connection fees
are $50.00 for a four inch residential tap and $100.00 for a six inch tap
-------
TABLE 66
DEKALB COUNTY WATER AND SEWERAGE SYSTEM FUND
OPERATING FUND-STATEMENT OF INCOME
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1975
SEWERAGE
SYSTEM
$7,697,658
492,215
7
7,497
201
331,206
8,528,784
6,791,676
$1 ,737 ,1 08
Non-operating Income (Expense):
Interest income-debt retirement
funds 403,904
Interest income-revenue bond
funds 1 ,300,286
Interest income-renewal and re-
placement funds 10,588
Interest-other 24,232
Other income 144,232
Interest expense-revenue bond
funds ( 2,777,1 79)
Paying agents' fees { 4,450)
Net Income $ 4 ,628,973
Outstanding water and sewer
bonds $54,413,000
Lease-purchase obligation on the
R.M. Clayton Water Pollution
Control Plant $16,362,203
WATE R
COMBINED SYSTEM
Operating Revenues:
Metered sales $16,917,777 $9,220,119
Meter installation fees " 362,,800 362 ,800
Sewer tapping fees 493,21 5
Fire sprinkler fees 156,202 156,202
Sale of materials, supplies,
etc 3,985 3 ,978
Service and repair charges. . . . 13,083 5,586
Rental 1 ,613 1 ,412
Miscellaneous 376,102 44,896
18,323,777 9,794,993
Operating Expenses 12,796,417 6 ,004,741
Operating Income $ 5,527,360 $3 ,790,252
-------
T-A-B L E 68
LAWRENCEVILLE WATER AND SEWER FUNDS
AUGUST 31, 1976
Outstanding Water and Sewer Bonds: $ 413,000 Principal
189,847 Interest
$ 602,847
NOTE: No new bonds issued in 1976.
Renewal and Extension Fund:
8/31/75 Balance $ 1 53,600
Interest 12,000
Revenue fund transfer (minimum
required by bonds) 4,400
8/31/76 Balance $ 170,000
NOTE: Minimum of $25,000 balance required by bonds.
Revenue Fund:
Tap fees $ 11,518 (inc. 4,400 transferred to
Renew. 4 Ext. Fund)
Water 188,265
Sewer 26 ,754
Mi seel 1 aneous 690
$ 227,237
Cash Balance $ 92,562
Accrual Balance $ 1 26 ,000
Deficit over last year (after
expenses and required transfers). . . .$ 25,070
Sinking Fund:
Cash balance $ 90 ,562
Accrual balance $ 105,000
NOTE: Minimum of $43,000 balance required by bonds.
Income
Interest $ 3,476
Transfer from revenue fund $ 43 ,590 (minimum required by bonds)
Total $ 47 ,066
-------
TABLE 67
GWINNETT COUNTY SEWER RATES AND CHARGES
Minimum or Ready-to-Serve Charge:
Original contract user $ .35/1 ,000 gallons/month
Contract user $ .42/1,000 gallons/month
Non-contract user $ .49/1,000 gallons/month
Commodity or Use Charges: (Based on volume of water actually metered.)
All users $ .18 plus ready-to-serve charge/month
Connection Charge:
Original contract user None
Contract user $ .20/gallon of estimated average
daily use
Non-contract user $ .60/gallon of estimated average
dai1y use
Plus for users added after the commission established cut-off date for a
particular plant, one year's worth of ready-to-serve charges.
Charge for Schools:
$ .20/student and faculty member each
month.
Charge for County Package Plant and Oxidation Pond Connections:
Multi-family (per apartment). . . $3.60/month
Single family 4.10/month
Small commercial 7.00/month
Laundromat (per machine) 4.50/month
Industrial and high-water
demand user By special contract
NOTE: These are charged in place of other sewer charges.
-------
TABLE .69
COVINGTON SEWER SYSTEM RATE, CHARGES, REVENUES,
AMD BONDS - 1976
Outstanding Water and Sewer Bonds:
Monthly Water and Sewer User Rates:
water bill).
Water
First 3,000 gallons
Next 7,000 gallons
Next 10,000 gallons
Next 30,000 gallons
Over 50,000 gallons
Sewer connection fee:
$ 2,099,000
(Sewer rates are 70% of corresponding
Inside City
$ 3.00
.70/1000 gal
.60/1000 gal
.55/1000 gal
.45/1000 gal
Outside City
$ 4.00
.75/1000 gal
.65/1000 gal
.60/1000 gal
.45/1000 gal
$ 250.00
NOTE: There is no present special property assessment for new sewer lines.
Revenues:
(1976 Budget)
Water
Sewer
$436,468
$305,528
-------
plus both are required to pay a $100.00 fee to the sewer extension
fund, as required in the city bond ordinances. If a business has
more than one outlet to the system, they are charged an additional
$100.00 for each up to five and $100.00 for every five or less outlets
over the first five. All actual connections are performed by private
contractors at the owner's expense. Additional financial information
on the system is presented in Table 68
Duluth, Li 1 burn, Snellville and Grayson either have no sewer system or
are connected at least in part to the county on an individual basis,
but Norcross does have sewer treatment capacity though it buys its
water from the county. Norcross is not presently allowing new hookups
though the charge would be $150.00 for residences and a figure based
on estimated volume for businesses. The city has no bonded debt on
their system. A flat user fee of $2.00 per month is charged to residences,
and businesses presently on the system are charged monthly as follows:
Gas Service Stations $ 10.00
Laundriesv(per machines) $ 1.00
Car Wash $ 15.00
Schools $ 15.00
And others may be charged as for residences if the
use is similar.
Newton County has a water and sewer authority that serves some of the un-
incorporated areas, some businesses and Emory College in Oxford. Oxford
is planning a partial system for the city to hook into the county treat-
ment system. The county charges approximately $400.00 for tap-ons to
the system though special contract or promotional rates are sometimes
used. All the direct customers of the authority are large contract users
with individually negotiated monthly or annual rates. These include
Emory College, the County School Board, Covington (part only), Porterdale
and the like. The authority has no outstanding debt at this time.
The Covington water and sewer system operates through the city and parts of
the county. Though one subdivision's sewage is processed by the county
under contract with the city, Covington generally handles its own processing.
Financial information on rates, bonds and revenues are in Table 69 .
Rockdale County has no county sewer system, but the Conyers city system
operates in much of the county as well. The city charges a $175.00 connec-
tion fee to most customers in or out of the city but if the actual cost
differs, a fee reflecting that cost is charged to businesses or residences.
The city charges $2.00 (minimum) monthly for sewer service and an additional
$0.40 per 1,000 gallons of metered water after the first 3,000 gallons.
The city system has $5.4 million in water and sewer bonds outstanding and
has a portion of an EPA grant still due.
-------
The only public sewer system operating in the Walton County portion of
the Yellow River Basin is the Loganville system. The city has no out-
standing sewer bonds, but there were $382,000.00 in water bonds outstand-
ing. Though no new tap-ons are allowed, the city was charging $100.00
for a connection. The user fees are a flat $2.00 per month for resi-
dences and $4.00 per month for businesses.
Table 70, as a conclusion, shows the collection and treatment relation-
ships in the Yellow River Basin, while Figure 33 indicates treatment facility
locations.
Summary
This section has attempted to inventory the local government entities in
the Yellow River Basin, to describe the various governmental services
available there and who delivers them, to assemble and describe the re-
venue sources for general local government entities, and to describe
in detail the financial and relational arrangements of the various waste-
water1. disposal agencies in the Basin. The inventory has been broken
down into counties which contain parts of the Yellow River Basin and cities
and special purpose districts in each of these counties which are partly
or completely within the Basin. The report concludes that all the
cities and counties have the authority to deliver all the services in-
volved in this task, but the actual delivery of those services varies
greatly in technique from area to area though some generalization is
possible. Services such as transportation are largely by private cars
arid trucks on locally-maintained roads with main arteries being main-
tained by the state and federal governments. Police and fire protection
is mainly the function of local police and fire units. Schools are a
joint state-county operation, and libraries are in regional units with
everyone in the Basin within range of some local facilities. Health is
basically a county responsibility or the concern of county-wide hospital
authorities. Public welfare is a joint state-county operation with fe-
deral money and a limited involvement of special local housing authori-
ties. Solid waste disposal varies from no service in some areas to pri-
vate companies (possibly regulated by the local government) to city
or county systems of some sophistication. Similarly, water and sewerage
are services lacking in some areas and extensively provided for in others.
Finally, the revenue information shows the variety in the types and levels
of revenue gathered for the general operation of each government and the
variety in the specific financing of wastewater disposal.
-------
TABLE 70
RELATIONSHIP OF WASTE WATER AGENCIES
IN THE YELLOW RIVER BASIN
Collector System
DeKalb (inc. Lithonia)
Stone Mountain
Gwinnett (inc. Grayson, Lilburn,
Snellville and some of
Duluth)
Norcross
Lawrencevi11e
Newton (inc. Porterdale Authority
and some of Oxford)
Covington (inc. some of county)
Treatment System
DeKalb
DeKalb
Gwinnett Co. and Authority
Gwinnett Co. and Authority
Lawrencevi11e
Newton Authority (inc. a portion
of Covington)
Newton Authority (inc. a portion
of Covington)
Covington
Conyers (inc. some of Rockdale Co.)
Conyers
-------
B.9 OTHER PROJECTS, PROGRAMS AND EFFORTS
Until recent years most state legislators considered land use controls
a truly local endeavor. But the record of the past decade proves an
increased involvement by state agencies in matters of land development
regulations. This new involvement by states in land use control has
been so substantial as to require annual reporting.
The State of Hawaii first enacted statewide zoning in 1961. More recently,
additional states have entered this previously barren field for state
legislators. The neighboring State of Florida has created state regional
planning agencies with "critical areas" subject to special review and
approval by these regional agencies. In addition, many states —
Georgia included — have begun to pay attention to regulatory devices
related to coastline or wetlands areas. Georgia's Wetlands Bill can
be offered as the first step of the State to engage in critical areas
regulation.
At the federal level, profound steps have been taken in the area of
flood plain regulations with the Federal Insurance Administration having
the responsibility to identify flood hazard zones within the state and
further to restrict lending agencies or members of federally sponsored
insurance programs, such as FDIC or FSLIC, from extending mortgage com-
mitments to homes located within such identified flood hazard zones.
Wild and scenic rivers legislation has been passed at the federal level
with companion bills being offered in many state legislatures offering
a preservation device for truly wild and scenic segments of major rivers
in the nation.
Approximately 10 years of experience exists under the Highway Beautifi-
cation Act, which is a regulatory device affecting signage along the
interstate and primary highway system. Further, federal grant programs
supporting airport construction have recently enacted requirements
for flight hazard zones, land acquisition in approach patterns, and other
techniques including the identification of areas subject to severe noise
pollution and providing funds for the acquisition of structures located
within such noise boundaries.
Two major land use regulating bills have been extensively reported and
debated by Congress in the areas of strip mining legislation and assis-
tance to states for land use planning. These bills have advanced through
Congress to the point of deciding votes in conference committee, and in
the end were defeated in close votes.
It should be mentioned that two other significant pieces of legislation
have been enacted by the State, which have limited application to the
Atlanta metropolitan area. These two land use devices are known as
the Metropolitan River Protection Act and the Area Plan Review Proce-
dures granted to the Atlanta Regional Commission (Georgia Act 5).
-------
FIGURE 34
\
V
/Hs°
u>9anvMw
/\
\ A L Covingto
u /i W j
t-
0
JO B Km.
Ml.
McDoMugn
,JACKSON
LAKE
V
1 ATLANTA- INTRENCHMENT CREEK
2 DEKALB COUNTY- SHOAL CREEK
3 ATLANTA - NEW SOUTH RIVER
4 ATLANTA-OLD SOUTH RIVER
5 DEKALB COUNTY-SNAPFINSER CREEK
S DEKALB COUNTY-POLE BRIDGE CREEK
7 GWINNETT COUNTY- NORTHWOOD
8 GWINNETT COUNTY-JACKSON CREEK
9 LAWRENCEVILLE — REDLAND CREEK
10 CONYERS — BOAR TUSK CREEK
11 NEWTON COUNTY- WTC PLANT
12 COVINGTON PLANT
13 LAWRENCEVILLE-SHOAL CREEK
14 MONROE -PONO No. I
15 MONROE-POND No.3
UPPER OCMULGEE
RIVER BASIN
MAJOR EXISTING
WASTE WATER
TREATMENT FACILITIES
-------
B.10 SENSITIVE MAN-MADE AREAS
It is often difficult to precisely separate natural and man-made signi-
ficant areas. Frequently, the same areas are significant and may be so
due to the combination of natural and man-made aspects. An example is
Stone Mountain Park, a park based on a natural feature (Stone Mountain)
but supplemented by impoundments, trails, amusement features and a host
of other recreational activities, all of which have been man-made.
Similarly, the Soapstone Ridge in the South River Basin is highly sensi-
tive from the natural viewpoint but man-made features of previous cul-
tures and habitations also impact the ridge to make it significant from
a man-made or historical viewpoint.
This discussion will focus on the Yellow River Sub-basin. Before
doing so, however, it is important to note that there are significant
man-made features in both the South and Alcovy Rivers of consequence
to water quality management plans for the entire Basin.
Central to this discussion of sensitive areas is Lake Jackson. This is
a man-made impoundment which has for years been serving as a repository
for the non-biodegradable materials originating in the Atlanta urban
area. It is also an active recreational and fishing resource. Its
threatened eutrophication is and remains a central concern for water
quality management alternatives throughout the basin. Numerous swamps
of the Alcovy River Basin are in many respects man-made and not natural.
Through interviews, it was determined that many of the swamp areas
in Walton County were in fact man-made during the early decades of this
century when row cropping resulted in extensive erosion and sedimenta-
tion of the drainage courses. Alledgedly, at one bridge location in
Walton County the adjacent farmer can testify to the effect that more
than 18 feet of silt had accumulated during his lifetime at that loca-
tion. These swamp areas, although largely man-made, are still important
to water quality through the filtering process they offer for non-point
and point discharges.
In the South River Basin the sensitive man-made areas that impact on the
water quality management alternatives most significantly are the impound-
ments and discharge locations of Clayton and Henry Counties to Big and
Little Cotton Indian Creeks. While Clayton County is now engaging in an
interbasin diversion for ultimate land disposal of effluent as a means
of improving water quality in the Flint River system, a similar level of
importance should be assigned to the preservation of the drainage basins
of the Big and Little Cotton Indian Creeks. Since the impoundment is
downstream from the expanding urban area of Clayton and northern Henry
Counties, careful attention must be paid by the respective public offi-
cials to assure that these impoundments are not endangered from non-point
as well as point sources.
Yellow River Sub-Basin — Sensitive Man-Made Areas
There are numerous historical and cultural facilities of importance lo-
cated within the Yellow River Sub-basin. These areas have been previously
identified and mapped; however, due to the large scale of the Study Area
-------
While both of these review prerogatives are assigned to the Atlanta
Regional Commission and are, therefore, unique when compared to the
other 16 Area Planning and Development Commissions in the State, the
final approval authority rests with local units of government.
Both these bills provide that the Atlanta Regional Commission will pre-
identify areas or programs of regional consequence which calls for a
review period of 60 days for all development proposals within these
designated areas. To date, the most prevalent use of these review pre-
rogatives have applied: (1) to the Chattahoochee River corridor from
Peachtree Creek northward to Lake Lanier, .(2) along pre-established
corridors for the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit System, and (3) for
regional improvements which impact upon two or more of the local govern-
ments. When combined with the A-95 review procedures already employed
by the Atlanta Regional Commission, these additional legislative prero-
gatives place the Atlanta Regional Conmission in a substantial coordin-
ating role among its constituent governments.
Of significance are the most recent attempts at increased involvement
by the State of Georgia upon local land use decisions. Characteristi-
cally, such attempts at increasing state jurisdiction have been rejected
in the General Assembly but continue to be items for discussion on the
legislative calendar. For example, during the 1976 session of the
Georgia General Assembly, legislation was again introduced for: (1) vital
areas identification and regulation by the State Department of Natural
Resources, (2) a noise pollution control act providing for the creation
of standards on noise emission and technical assistance to local units of
government, (3) a flood hazard bill which would impart to the Board of
Natural Resources the power to coordinate, plan and regulate all activities
in the state concerning flood plain management, and (4) a proposed bill
to create a statewide energy resources conservation activity with the
power to implement statewide energy policies through a new energy commission.
All of the above bills failed in the 1976 session.
While the record of passage of such legislation has been poor, the fact
that it has been introduced in a relatively conservative state legis-
lature, and repeatedly introduced for discussion and vote, indicates the
growing awareness of the State to its responsibilities in these areas.
The Georgia State Constitution was recently submitted for a voter re-
ferendum and approved. This new constitution is a re-editing of the basic
constitution and its numerous amendments, but also includes provisions
that would allow the General Assembly to again assert itself into areas
of natural resources and environmental protection. The ramifications
of this new state constitution in these subject areas are yet to be
determined.
-------
Prime Agricultural Land
The discussion on existing land use demonstrates adequately the signi-
ficance of agricultural lands to the total area of the Yellow River
Sub-basin. Extensive agricultural areas currently being farmed occur
largely in the Big Haynes Creek tributary watershed and southerly to New-
ton County. Forest resources predominate in the lower Yellow River Sub-
basin from Lake Jackson upstream to the vicinity of Porterdale and Co-
vington. While such areas are sensitive and a valuable resource to
local and state economies, the major economic impact that determines
their survival is one of taxation. Significantly, the Georgia State
Legislature has been considering for the past two sessions the pros-
pect of revising the foundation of ad valorem taxation in the state
from one of fair market value to one of land use. If such a conversion
can be accomplished by the Legislature, significant relief could be
achieved for productive farms and farmers and go a long way toward
preserving these prime agricultural lands.
High Density Areas
The principal cities of each of the counties within the Yellow River Sub-
basin have been previously identified. They do provide high density
areas offering a multiplicity of activities and services.
On a more general scale, however, the major transportation corridors
that will be achieving high density standards include the 1-85 and
1-20 corridors. The projected land use plan emphasized this relation-
ship between transportation, jobs and community services and, accordingly,
allocates most of the growth to their respective corridors due to those
factors.
Water Intakes
Two public water systems draw their supply from the Yellow River. Those
water systems are the Conyers Water System with its intake in the Mil-
stead impoundment and the Porterdale Water System in Newton County in
the City of Porterdale. In both instances, natural and man-made features
also occur at these same vicinities.
Specifically, at Milstead a low head dam (man-made), which previously
served a mill complex, offers 3 significant recreational resource in con-
junction with the obvious needs to preserve water quality in the vicinity
of the intake.
A similar situation occurs in Porterdale where a low head dam serves the
Bibb Manufacturing facilities in Porterdale at Cedar Shoals. The shoal
area itself is rather extensive and quite scenic while offering recrea-
tional potential. Beside the dam near the bridge abutment is a small
parking area, which provides means of.public access to this area.
-------
few recommendations can be made toward preservation of any one of the
facilities. The burden must be placed on local units of governments
and their respective historical or cultural societies to undertake pro-
grams of local initiative in concert with State agencies toward pre-
servation.
Archaeological resources, however, are quite another matter. These
resources have been generally mapped and cataloged in two prior dis-
cussions wherein their frequent occurrence adjacent to or within drain-
age systems was noted. The cultures of these prior civilizations
were heavily dependent on water not only as a staple of life, but also
as a means of cormiunication and transport. As a result, by far the
greatest concentration of campsites and villages occur along the na-
tural drainage system. These areas are considered sensitive for a
variety of reasons but in terms of water qualitymanagement alterna-
tives gravity flow interceptor systems run a severe risk of impacting
such areas during the construction phase. Such primary impacts can
be avoided or in the alternative such sites can be researched and
cataloged, but in either event careful attention must be paid to
these locations. The general nature of the mapping that portrays these
locations is first a function of scale of the Study Area, and secondly
an effort to disquise the precise location so that these areas will
remain undisturbed by hobbyists.
Recreational Areas
A previously provided recreational inventory locates and describes
major recreational facilities in excess of 50 acres. This was the mini-
mum scale that could be shown adequately in the report format. It is
significant to note that within or immediately adjacent to the Yellow
River Sub-basin many of the major park and recreational facilities such
as Stone Mountain, Soapstone Ridge and Mount Arabia are all facilities
that have been either purchased or designated for purchase by public
agencies for their unique natural resources. Within the Yellow River
Sub-basin there are additional regional parks proposed through the
State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan and the Atlanta Regional
Commission's Open Space Preserve Plan.
Of key concern is the recommended Yellow River acquisition for "park pur-
poses. This river park system is proposed as a ribbon park with major
segments for acquisition in Gwinnett County from McDaniel's Bridge
south to Annistown Road Bridge and in DeKalb County from near the county
line south to the confluence of the Yellow River and Swift Creek. This
proposed recreational river system is perhaps the most significant of
those recommended for eventual purchase and development within the Yel-
low River Sub-basin. Others are typically large park facilities focused
on a water resource tributary to the Yellow River. While these are sig-
nificant in their own right, the Yellow River ribbon system is the pre-
dominant area of concern in the Yellow River Sub-basin.
-------
relieve existing problems, efforts should be made by respective local
governments to insure that soils and minimal lot sizes are acceptable for
septic tank installation.
It is curious to note that in certain of the jurisdictions in the Yellow
River Sub-basin septic tanks are permissible on lots as small as 18,000
square feet, or approximately 1/2-acre lots. In contrast, the more de-
veloped counties of Fulton and DeKalb typically impose minimum lot sizes
of an acre or more where septic tanks are installed. The soil character-
istics of the adjacent jurisdictions are, however, not radically differ-
ent. It is conceivable that the lower lot size requirements for septic
tanks in some jurisdictions of the Yellow River, while a positive induce-
ment to development, also are a base reason for the high incidence of
septic tank failure that has been realized.
Storm Water Retention - -
Of the jurisdictions within the Yellow River Sub-basin, only
DeKalb County currently requires on-site stormwater retention for all
new developments. Such requirements, while founded on minimizing flood
damages, also have the positive effect of providing for the retention
and gradual release of the "first flush" of non-point sources. These posi-
tive aspects suggest that the jurisdictions of the Yellow River enact sim-
ilar requirements for the same purposes.
Basin Preservation
While technically not a man-made facility, basin preservation does require
man's efforts and activities to accomplish the intended purpose. Accord-
ingly, the following discussion deals with basin preservation techniques.
While these techniques could be locally applied to the basins within the Al-
covy River or specifically in the South River Basin for the Clayton County
Water and Sewer Authority, they are offered here primarily as an impact to
Big Haynes Creek watershed, a tributary to the Yellow River.
The AWRD has identified the Big Haynes Creek watershed as a potential fu-
ture source of water supply. Caution is advanced, however, and appropriate
steps must be undertaken to preserve and maintain water quality within the
Big Haynes Creek watershed if its potential as a future water source is to
be realized. Previous discussion on water programs outlined the nature of
water supply within the entire Basin. It was concluded that the northern
tier of counties which have access to the Chattahoochee River system can
be termed "water rich," while those in the southern tier dependent upon head-
waters of numerous rivers and streams can be captioned "water poor." As
a result, potential new water sources located convenient to this southern
tier of counties are indeed important for future considerations.
The future land use plan portrayed in this chapter attempts to specifically
exclude urban development from the Big Haynes Creek watershed. This is
consistent with the goal of maintaining this watershed in an undeveloped
-------
Lake Jackson
Lake Jackson is a man-made impoundment built:by Georgia Power Company
in the early 1900s. The lake has become an active area for water-
related recreational activities. In addition, what were originally
vacation summer cottages have increased and become full-time residences
along the lake shore. The improvement of the water quality in Lake
Jackson remains a key concern for the water quality management alter-
natives to follow.
Man-Made Activities
This section should not be ended without a discussion of man-made ac-
tivities which have created perhaps the most significant sensitive
areas in the Basin. The history of such activities and their increasing
occurrence as a result of forecasted additional population growth
demands that these topic areas be addressed.
Unsuitable Land
As previously mentioned, the term unsuitable land is a relative term,
but is designed to encompass those lands which have such natural fea-
tures as shallow depth to rock, high water tables, steep slopes, or
highly erodible soil. Development activities in such areas can have
severe consequences to water quality management alternatives. It is
a recommendation of this EIS that the local units of government take
appropriate actions to preserve them and to minimize the man-made in-
fluences of development that might otherwise create non-point problems
as well as the disruption of some truly scenic areas.
A host of man-made.activities associated with development and growth have
the potential for impacting water quality in the Yellow River Sub-basin.
These activities are identified as follows:
Erosion and Sedimentation Control —
While Gwinnett County was a leader in establishing such regula-
tions, it is now a State Law that all local units of government enact
such requirements. This action by the State could significantly improve
the silt loads that have been previously experienced in the Yellow River
when applied throughout its length. Since the Basin is scheduled for
major development, the enactment of soil and sedimentation control can
play a major role in reducing an otherwise substantial silt load on the
river.
Septic Tanks - -
The Basin has a history of development on septic tanks. Many
of these same developments have also experienced high rates of septic tank
failures with the attendant problems. While public sewerage systems can
-------
DOCUMENTATION
C.
Chapter I
Georgia Conservancy, Incorporated. DeKalb Chapter. Files.
Metropolitan Water Resources Study Group. Newsletter, Volume 3, No. 7.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV. Library and files.
Interviews:
Billingsley, Linda. Georgia Conservancy, Incorporated. DeKalb Chapter.
Green, Richard D. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV.
Ravan, J. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV.
Chapter II
Atlanta Regional Commission. Water Demand and Wastewater Report Averaged RDP,
Cycle II, RDP Alternative E and RDP Alternative W. January.1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Airport System Plan Summary Report. June 1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. An Economic Base Study of the Atlanta Region.
March 1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Atlanta Regional Commissions Regional Development
Plan and Population Projections. 1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Regional Development Plan, Land Use, District Level.
December 1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Regional Development Plan, Land Use, Super District
Level. December 1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Regional Development Plan, Population, Jobs, Occupied
Housing, Units by Structure Type and Population by Age, Super District Level.
December 1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Regional Development Plan, Population, Jobs, Occupied
Housinq Units by Structure Type and Population by Age, District Level. December
1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Revenue and Expendeture Survey of the Local Governments
in the Atlanta Region. July 1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Comparative Revenue Study. September 1973.
Atlanta Regional Commission. ARC Staff Recommended Nature Preserve Sites, First and
Second Priority Nature Preserve (acquisition prior to 1980). October 1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Recommended Areawide Wastewater Management Plan. May
1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Water Supply Program for the Atlanta Region. July 1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Possibilities for Water Conservation in the Atlanta
Region. March 1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Alternative Method for Park and Open Space Acquisition,
Development and Maintenance. 1975.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Areawide Outdoor Recreation Planning in the Atlanta
Region. 1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Resolution to Establish Priorities for Park Acquisition
and Develop Projects Proposed for Funding During Fiscal Year (FY) 1977. March
1976.
Atlanta Regional Commission. Public Authorities and Special Districts in the Atlanta
Metropolitan Region.. 1974.
Atlanta Regional Commission. A Resolution by the ARC Staff Adopting Proposed Nature
Preserves for the Atlanta Region. 1976.
Board of Commissioners of Walton County. Walton County Anticipated Revenue and Budgeted
Expenditures for Year July 1, 1976 through June 30, 1977.
City of Covington, Georgia. 1977 Budget.
City of Oxford, Georgia. Financial Rppnrt iQ7c;
-------
state for its possible future use as a water source. A variety of tech-
niques are advanced for maintaining this watershed in a relatively un-
developed state and encouraging its continued use for agricultural pursuits.
Point Sources - -
The AWRS plan suggests that in basins designated for preservation,
point sources be prohibited. This practice should be encouraged for Big
Haynes Creek so that point source loads can be avoided.
Minimum Services - -
The previous discussion on service districts and district taxation
by counties is pertinent to this topic. As areas of counties increase in
density, they demand services which have been frequently provided by
means of special districts. The avoidance of such special district crea-
tion by local units of government could serve as a retardant on development
in the Big Haynes Creek watershed.
Land Use Taxation - -
If the proposed shifting of ad valorem tax baselines from market
value to land use can be accomplished by the Georgia State Legislature,
its impacts on preservation of primarily agricultural lands in the Big
Haynes Creek area could prove to be the most meaningful action for basin
preservation. It would relieve farmers of the tax burden imposed on
counties by burgeoning urban populations.
Low-Density Development —
While under.Georgia law,units of government cannot deny a
development of property as long as standards are met. It is within the
prerogative of local government to fashion their community service intra-
structure such that certain areas, such as Big Haynes Creek, do not receive
the full breadth of services otherwise offered to more developed areas. In
fact, current planning within Gwinnett County, for example, stresses sew-
erage improvements to the Yellow River Basin in a prioritized fashion with
the Big Haynes Creek watershed receiving a relatively low priority.
It is only logical to assume that large lot zoning could be applied to
the Big Haynes Creek watershed. Without a full range of services and
given the concern for basin preservation, such zoning practices in conjunc-
tion with the careful priority arranging of other public services could
offer meaningful progress towards basin preservation.
-------
City of Social Circle, Georgia. Proposed Budget for 1976.
Citizens Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality. Report to the President and
to the Council on Environmental Quality. December 1975.
DeKalb County Planning Department. Yellow River Basin and Its Environment and Land
Use. 1976.
Executive Order 11593. Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, 16
U.S.C. 470 (Supp 1, 1977).
Fulton County Commission. Annual Report for Year Ending December 31, 1975, Fulton
County, Georgia.
Georgia Bureau of Industry and Trade. Annual 1976 Georgia Manufacturing Directory.
Georgia Center for Technology Forecasting and Assessment. The Energy Problem and
Its Implications for Georgia. November 1973.
Georgia Institute of Technology, Water Resources Center. Georgia Laws, Policies and
Programs Relating to Water and Related Land Resources. June 1967.
Georgia State Legislature. A Bill to Entitle an Act. H.B. No. 293.
Georgia State Legislature. Georgia Water Quality Control Act, (Ga. Law 1964). March
11, 1964.
Georgia Municipal Association, Incorporated. Water and Sewer Rate Structures in
Georgia Municipalities. September 1974.
Georgia Science and Technology Commission. The Energy Problem and Its Implications
for Georgia. 1973.
Georgia State Data Center, Office of Planning and Budgeting, Atlanta, Georgia. Annual
Estimates of Population for'the"State of Georgia, 1975. July 1976.
Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Section. Resource
Policy and Procedures of the Georgia State Historic Preservation Office.
Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Department of Planning and Research.
Narrative Plan Volume II, Regional Analysis.
Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Section. Envir-
onmental Assessments of Historic and Archaeological Resources Policy and Pro-
ceedures of the Georgia State Historic Preservation Office.
Georgia State Department of Conservation. Surface Water Resources of the Yellow River
Basin in Gwinnett County, Georgia. 1962.
Govenor George Busbee. Press Release, December 2, 1976.
Gwinnett County Chamber of Commerce. Gwinnett Puts it All Together.
Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners. Approved Sub-division Regulations. 1970.
Gwinnett County Department of Planning. Upper Yellow River STEP II Grant Application,
Environmental Assessments of Historic and Archaeological Resources.
International City Management Association: Municipal Yearbook 1975, Volume 42. 1975.
International City Management Association with national Association of Cities. The
County Yearbook 1976, Volume II. 1976
Mcintosh Trail Area Planning Commission, sponsored by the Department of Community
Development. Mcintosh Trail Areawide Future Land Use Plan. June 1976.
Mcintosh Trail Area Planning and Development Commission, sponsored by the Department
of Community Development. Future Land Use Plan for Newton County. May 1975.
Mcintosh Trail Area Planning and Development Commission. Water and Sewer Plan and
Capital Improvement Program. April 1974.
Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study Group. Water-What About Tomorrow? Progress
Report. July 1974.
Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study Group. Water-Problems and Solutions,
Second Prgress Report. July 1975.
Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study Group. Newsletter, Volume 4, No. 7. July
1976.
Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study Group. Preliminary Background Appendix.
October 1974.
Metropolitan Atlanta Water Resources Study Group. Watershed Development in Georgia,
Status Report. September 1976.
National Historic Register
-------
Newton County Board of Commissioners. Newton County Zoning Regulations. 1971.
Northeast Georgia Area Planning and Development Commission. Monroe County Compre-
hensive Plan. March 1976.
Northeast Georgia Area Planning-and Development Commission. Walton County Georgia
Land Use Plan.- Jyly 1972.
Public Law 92-500, 92nd Congress, S. 2770, October 1972.
Public Law 89-886, (80 - Stat. 915jl
Public Law 89-665, {80 - Stat. 915).
Public Law 91-190 National Environmental Policy Act. U.S.C. 4321 , Et. Seq. (1970).
State of Georgia Department of Transportation. Airport System Plan 1973-1993.
State of Georgia Department of Transportation. A 20 Year Multi-Model Transportation
Plan.
State of Georgia Department of Transportation. Proposed Highway Improvements and Costs
Rural/Urban Principal and Arterial Routes and Rural Roads Projects by Congressional
Districts by County Identified by the Statewide Transportation Plan. October 1974.
Soil Conservation Society of America, Georgia Chapter. Land Use Policy Statement for
Georgia. 1974.
State Soil and Water Conservation Committee for Georgia. Model City and County and
Municipal Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance. 1975.
Temporary State Commission on the Water Needs of Southeast New York. Measures to Re-
duce Water Consumption in Southeast New York. 1973. Albany, New York.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District. Your Water In Douglas County, Georgia;
Your Water In DeKalb County, Georgia; Your Water in Fulton County, Georgia; Your
Water in Clayton County, Georgia; Your Water in Rockdale County, Georgia; Your
Water in Gwinnett County, Georgia.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey of Gwinnett County, Georgia. July 1967.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service", Natural Resources Economic
Division for the U.S. Water Resources Council. 1972 OBERS Projections, Volume 5,
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 1974. and Volume 4, State. 1974.
U.S. Departmet of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Social and Economic Statistics Administra-
tion. City Business Patterns in Georgia. 1973.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. City Government Finances in 1973-1974.
1975.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. Local Government Finances in Selected
Metropolitan Areas and Larger Cities. 1973-1974. 1975.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. Current Population Report, Polulation
Estimates and Projections, Estimates of the Population of the U.S. to June 1, 1975,
Volume P=25, No. 606.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1970 Census of Population and Hous-
ing, Atlanta Georgia, SMSA (PHC (1) - 14); Estimates of Population of Georgia"
Counties and Metropolitan Areas, July 1, 1974 and 1975.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Regional Economic Information
Systems.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia. Population by
County Historic (1940 - 1970) and Projected (1980 - 2020). 1972.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Office of Water Programs, Atlanta, Ga.
Gwinnett County Upper Yellow River Step II Grant Application CI30411 -02 -1.
U.S. Geological Survey Department. A Land Use Plan Cover Classification System for Use
and Remote Sensor Data, Survey Circular 671. Jyly 1976.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. National Flood Insurance Program,
Atlanta Area. November 1976.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Yellow River, Its Environment and Land
Use Plans. July 1976.
U.S. Water Resources Council. A Unified National Program for Flood Plain Management.
July 1976.
-------
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. Federal State Cooperative Program
for Population Estimates, Series P-26, No. 75-10. October 1976.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1970 Census of Population, PC
(Vi) - 12. Final Population Counts in Georgia. December 1970.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Occupancy, Utilization and
Financial Charachter of Housing Units, 1970.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
Table H-1.
General Characteristics of the
Population, Table P-l.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Income Characteristics of the
Population, Table P-4.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Social Characteristics of the
U.S.
Population, 1970. Table P-2.
U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Summary Statistics of
Economic Change, 1950 - 1970, United States and Georgia, Table 2.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Analysis of Average Per
Capita Income by Source, United States and Georgia, Table 4.
State of Georgia, State Data Center, Office of Planning and Budgeting. Annual Estimates
of Population for the State of Georgia, 1975. July 1976.
State of Georgia, State Data Center, Office of Planning and Budgeting. Population
Projections for Georgia Counties, 1980 - 2000. July 1975.
Interviews:
Billingsley, Linda. Yellow River Action Committee.
Brinkley, Lewis. Director of Planning, Gwinnett County, Georgia.
Duncan, Jack. Park Planner, DeKalb County Parks and Recreation Department.
Evans, Edward. Director of Planning, Mcintosh Trail Area Planning and Development
Commission.
Fromber, Karl. Recreational Planner, Atlanta Regional Commission.
Green, Richard. Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV.
Herwig, Roy. Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Water Resources Management
Program..
Jenkinss Earl. Soil Conservation Service.
Jordan, Kenneth. Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Water Resources
Management Program.
Maloof, Sally. DeKalb County Historic Society.
Maxey, Robert. Planning Director, Northeast Georgia Area Planning and Development
Commission.
Michaels, Stephen. DeKalb County Planning Department.
Mueller, Heinz. DeKalb County Planning Department.
Ravan, J. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV.
VanLandingham, David. Director of Water Pollution and Control, Gwinnett County.'
Welsh, Gene. Chief - Georgia State Department of Natural Resources, Water Resources
Division.
Local officials for the following counties: Butts, DeKalb, Gwinnett, Newton,
Rockdale, Walton and Fulton.
Local officials for the following cities: Conyers, Covington, Lawrenceville, Monroe,
McDonough, Loganville, Lithonia, Oxford, Social Circle, Porterdale and Lilburn.
\
EPA Library Rec
o3
ion 4
30
------- |