Title: The Developer's Role In 208
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004520/00001
 Material Information
Title: The Developer's Role In 208
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: Urban Land - JulyAugust 1977
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - The Developer's Role In 208 (JDV Box 91)
General Note: Box 23, Folder 1 ( Miscellaneous Water Papers, Studies, Reports, Newsletters, Booklets, Annual Reports, etc. - 1973 -1992 ), Item 23
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004520
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text
July/August 1977
Urban Land
news and trends in and Wdevelprent



The Dev&lIoQerP -
ROle in







)

)Urban Land


Officers & Members
of the
Executive Committee
Harold S. Jensen, Chicago
President
Marshall Bennett, Chicago
First Vice President
I. Rocke Ransen, Montreal
Second Vice President
Gerald D. Hines, Houston
Secretary
Michael F. Kelly, Minneapolis
Treasurer
Claude M. Ballard, Jr., Newark
President, Urban Land
Research Foundation
Ronald L. Campbell, San Mateo, Calif.
William W. Dillard, Dallas
Robert E. Engstrom, Minneapolis
Richard G. Hanson, Houston
Hunter A. Hogan, Jr., Norfolk
Thomas F. Murray, New York
Robert M. O'Donnell, Denver
N. S. Ridgway, Jr., Los Angeles
Marion G. Smith, Jr., Nashville
Ronald R. Rumbaugh
Executive Vice President

Council Chairmen
N. S. Ridgway, Jr., Los Angeles
Commercial & Office Development
William W. Dillard, Dallas
Industrial
Robert M. O'Donnell, Denver
New Communities
Ronald L. Campbell, San Mateo, Calif.
Recreational Development
Robert E. Engstrom, Minneapolis
Residential
Richard G. Hanson, Houston
Urban Redevelopment

Trustees
Knox Banner, Washington, D.C.
Boyd T. Barnard, Philadelphia
David D. Bohannon, San Mateo, Calif.
Franklin L. Burns, Denver
Paul Busse, New York
William F. Caldwell, Williamsville, N.Y.
Robert H. Carey, Farmington, Mich.
Lawrence M. Cox, Suffolk, Va.
James S. Dailey, Hartford
George A. Devlin, Detroit
James B. Douglas, Seattle
Roy P. Drachman, Tucson
Robert M. Gladstone, Washington, D.C.
R. John Griefen, Boston
Greenlaw Grupe, Jr., Stockton, Calif.
Bruce P. Hayden, Hartford
George R. Henkle, Lebanon, Ohio
Cyril C. Herrmann, San Francisco
Earl D. Hollinshead, Bethel Park, Pa.
Sheridan Ing, Honolulu
James D. Klingbeil. Columbus
Peter C. Kremer, Valencia, Calif.
0. G. Linde, San Francisco
Rodney M. Lockwood. Birmingham, Mich.
Joseph W. Lund, Boston
Hunter Moss, Boca Raton, Fla.
John McC. Mowbray, Baltimore
Robert T. Nahas, Oakland
Robert E. Raymond, Hartford
William B. Rick, San Diego
Donald R. Riehl, San Francisco
David Sawyer, Houston
Charles F. Seymour, Philadelphia
Harold G. Shipp, Mississauga, Ontario
George Stemrnlieb, New Brunswick
Fred F.Stockwell, Boston
Joseph Straus, Jr., Philadelphia
Kenneth S. Sweet, Jr., King of Prussia, Pa.
Joseph P. Taravella, Coral Springs, Fla.
John B. Turner, Jr., Houston
John R. White, New York


Issue At A Glance


Commentary 3
Think Small, But Often
Robert B. Teska
Since change is occurring at an ever-increasing rate, the author feels that the challenge
of the 1970s will be managing change. The author lays out just what a management
system might entail and concludes that the dramatic master plans and large-scale
redevelopment projects are a thing of the past. We are called upon, says Teska, to make
smaller decisions, but make them count.

The Developer's Role in 208 5-10
Two articles which deal with the effects of Section 208 on the development industry.
There's a 208 In Your Future documents how the 208 plans being prepared will
affect the development industry and how the industry can make its concerns known to
the planners.
By The Numbers by Connie Weis O'Mara sorts out the law (PL 92-500) which gave
birth to Section 208 and relates Section 208 to three other important sections of the
law.

The Economic Impact of Air and Water Pollution Control 10
Ronald H. Miller
Through a 1974 grant from the Appalachian Regional Commission the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation undertook an assessment of the impacts of
major environmental programs on the economy of five urban communities in the state's
Appalachian region. Miller reports on these findings

Atlanta Meeting Highlights 21

Legal Notes 24
The Supreme Court Reviews Another Ohio Zoning Case

Land Use Abstracts 25

Letters 28


Vol.36 No. 7


July-August 1977


Urban Land is published monthly, July and August issues
combined, by ULI-the Urban Land Institute, 1200 18th Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. Subscription to Urban Land
is included in annual membership dues. Yearly subscription
rates for nonmembers are as follows: $25 (U.S.A.); $30
(Canada and Mexico); $35 (all other countries). Second
class postage paid at Washington, D:C. @ ULI-the Urban
Land Institute, 1977.
All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A.
The opinions and views expressed in articles appearing in
Urban Land are those of the authors, and do not necessarily
represent those of ULI-the Urban Land Institute. Comments
from our readers are invited.


Frank H. Spink, Jr., Director of Publications
W. Paul O'Mara, Editor
Holly Williams, Editorial Associate
Nancy Stewart, Editorial Associate
Carolyn E. Noe, Art Director
Irene Treml, Artist
Robert L. Helms, Production Manager
Patricia E. Thach, Production Assistant









COmmEnTAR Y...


Think Small, But Often:

A Moral for Downtown Land Use Management


Robert B. Teska


Chicago is the home of Daniel Burnham
whose famous words, "Make no little
plans. have inspired generations
of planners and developers. But Dan
never had to prepare an environmental
impact statement. There was no anti-
growth movement in 1909, and most citi-
zens trusted or at least acquiesced to the
establishment. And the words depres-
sion and recession had not yet been ex-
perienced.

Today it is different. Life is more compli-
cated; development is more compli-
cated. Consequently it is unlikely that we
* will see many projects initiated in the
near future on the magnitude of Burn-
ham's lakefront park system, a southwest
Washington, D.C. urban renewal project,
San Francisco's BART, or a New Orleans
Superdome. Even a current endeavor
such as Chicago's Illinois Center was
committed prior to the mid-1970s.

In many parts of our lives and our cities
change is occurring at an ever-increas-
ing rate. Alvin Toffler calls it future shock
when change exceeds our capability to
respond. (In other parts of our lives
change is much too slow; this we refer to
as obsolescence.) Managing change,
then, becomes the byword of the 1970s,
especially for downtown America.

Toffler defines change as "the process
by which the future invades our lives." As
a planner, I like that definition. Manage-
ment, according to Webster, is "the judi-
cious use of means to accomplish an
end." As an engineer, I like that defini-
tion.

The fundamentals of managing change
* involve a constant review of those forces
which historically have made downtown
work. Location and accessibility are high


on the list. Market research and com-
munications theory will provide insight
into the proper mix and arrangement of
key downtown activities. The develop-
ment package must work together tech-
nically, and it must carry a price tag that
is affordable. Lastly, the development
plan should be flexible and take into ac-
count the most current of trends. What are
some land use regulation trends which
merit consideration?

* The roles of various levels of gov-
ernment arc shifting. Generally
speaking, the federal government
has been taking a lesser role in
housing and urban redevelopment
and a more active role in environ-
mental matters. But the most signif-
icant trend is the increasing role of
state government in land use and
environmental protection, with em-
phasis on pollution control, critical
areas, key facilities, and land uses
of more than local concern.
Dysfunctions in functional planning
abound. For example, while we are
pursuing compactness of urban de-
velopment in order to enhance
rapid transit and energy conserva-
tion, air and water pollution control
programs are encouraging disper-
sal.
The multiplicity of regulatory pro-
grams is increasing to the detriment
of public as well as private de-
velopment, and to the detriment of
well-planned projects in addition to
poorly planned projects.
Everyone wants to participate, but
on his own terms, making it virtually
impossible to formulate a concen-
sus and then to adhere to it once it
has been achieved The desire to
encourage public participation is


being achieved more frequently,
but sometimes with a big price tag.
Unwelcomed in most respects, the
recent recession has given us an
opportunity to catch our breath, and
it has actually helped downtown
by slowing down growth and
sprawl, by weeding out marginal
development, and by enhancing
reinvestment in older properties
and their potential for adaptive
uses.
The pendulum is swinging toward
economic impact assessments. At
least two states, Florida and Illinois,
now require an economic impact
assessment of state environmental
regulations, and Congress has re-
cently delayed enforcement of 1970
Clean Air Act standards by several
years.

Land use management and down-
town development are increasingly
recognized as public/private
partnerships. The emphasis is on
mutual concern and enlightened
self-interest, rather than separate
adversary activities.
Planned unit development and
mixed use development have be-
come the pattern rather than the ex-
ception, and they require innovative
land use management techniques.
Land use management is finally be-
coming recognized as a systems
approach, as contrasted with the ad
hoc approach. This theme warrants
pursuing.
Is there any doubt that recent trends to-
ward more regulation have placed a
straightjacket on inner-city develop-
ment? Of course they have. But some-
times we tend to over dramatize this
effect.


july-august/urban land 77 3











Is there any doubt that regulations are not
a cure-all for the problems that plague
downtown? Of course they are not. But
they have helped to clean up our air and
water, to eliminate incompatible land
uses, and to improve environmental de-
sign. We need many of them.

Improper regulation, poorly enforced
without a sound rationale, is counter-
productive. Proper regulation, equitably
and effectively applied at the right time,
is something we can live with, even sup-
port. It applies the concepts of balance,
order, and a keen sense of entrepre-
neurship which should underlie any land
use management system. Such a system
would:

1. Establish clear-cut, complemen-
tary roles and responsibilities for
each level of government, and em-
phasize the major responsibility at
the most effective level while other
levels avoid duplicative or conflict-
ing activities.
2. Enhance the effectiveness of or-
ganizational structures and admin-
istrative procedures, including a
master permit register, consoli-


dated application and review pro-
cedures, joint hearings, time limits
on decision making, and equitable
treatment for all applicants.
3. Embody a wide variety of proven
and innovative techniques, from
which the appropriate combination
could be deployed to solve a par-
ticular problem or accomplish a
given objective. Categories of
techniques are planning and coor-
dination, regulation, incentives and
disincentives, acquisition of prop-
erty rights, construction and
maintenance, judicial process, in-
formation and education, and vol-
untary action.
4. Apply such techniques to an area or
set of circumstances in confor-
mance with a cohesive strategy,
and monitor the results frequently
to determine the degree to which
objectives are being achieved. If
they are not, the strategy should be
modified. The most important les-
son is this: the land use manage-
ment system is the means to ac-
complish objectives, not an end in
itself. Bureaucrats, public and pri-
vate, find this hard to accept.


The private sector must be prepared to
actively participate as a partner with the
public sector in a management system.
In fact, the private sector must insist on
this partnership arrangement, beginning
with the original formulation of policies
and regulations.

This Commentary has two important
messages to impart:

Land use management can work to
the benefit of downtowns-as well
as to their detriment. Downtown
interests have a vital role to play in
the systems approach outlined.

With few exceptions, the dramatic
master plans, large-scale rede-
velopment projects, and once-in-a-
lifetime decisions are a part of the
past, at least temporarily. Today we
are called upon to be alert at all
times, to make every small decision
and every project large or small
contribute to the long-term goals of
a community.

The moral of the story is: "Think small, but
often."


Robert B. Teska, AIP, PE, is the principal of Robert B. Teska Associates, Evanston, Illinois, and has over 18 years of professional experience in
planning, design, and resource management for public and private clients.


"Commentary" is a regular feature of Urban Land which provides an opportunity for the sharing of experiences and information by
responsible spokesmen in the fields of land planning, management, and development. Your comments are welcome. The views and
opinions expressed in "Commentary" are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent any positions, policies, or atti-
tudes of ULI-the Urban Land Institute, its collective membership, or staff. Articles are selected by staff on the basis of timeliness and
relevance of subject matter.


4 urban land/july-august 77











TKe DeveloQeP'


ROle in 208

In the next several years Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 is
I kely to have a major impact not only on water pollution control but also on land use and growth man-
agement in many communities.
ULl-the Urban Land Institute has been working with the Water Planning Division of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency since February 1977 to make the development industry and public officials
more aware of Section 208 and techniques of mitigating water pollution. Under a grant from EPA. ULI
has been preparing material to be used for training purposes These materials include a special issue
of ULI s Environmental Comment, published in April 1977 and entitled "208: The Transition from Plan-
ning to Management," and 10 detailed case studies of projects which have employed techniques in the
front-end planning process to mitigate the impact that construction activity can have on water quality
As another part of their joint effort, ULI and EPA cosponsored a Locksmith Session and a workshop on
Section 208 at the ULI spring meeting in Atlanta
This issue of Urban Land is an attempt to detail some of the major points made at both sessions in At-
lanta and to outline the developer's role in preparing ana implementing Section 208 plans
Frank Schnidman
Research Counsel
I II -tl-,- HI I-I -I I I.-l- .'


july-august/urban land 77 5











ThIere


Section 208 (b)(2)(H) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972 specifically states that
management plans being developed
must include-

a process to (i) identify construction
activity-related sources of pollution,
and (ii) set forth procedures and
methods (including land use re-
quirements) to control to the extent
feasible such sources.

By the end of this summer the first
group of 16 designated 208 water qual-
ity management planning agencies
(funded in fiscal year 1974 and early
fiscal year 1975) will have completed
their initial water quality management
plans and will have forwarded them to
their state and the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency for certification and
adoption. Beginning late this year, ap-
proximately 130 more of the Section
208 agencies, funded in fiscal year
1975, will also be seeking adoption and
certification of their plans.

What will these plans mean to the de-
veloper? As 208 agencies move from
planning to implementation of their ap-
proved management plans, the agen-
cies will be much concerned with non-
point source pollution from construction
activities. The 208 agencies have
sought and will continue to seek legis-
lative support for ensuring that de-
velopers consider the impact on water
quality during the planning stages of a
project and apply the most effective
control measures during actual con-
struction. The type of action which the
developer will be required to undertake
may involve preventing sediment los-
ses; reducing peak surface runoff; and
preventing the generation, accumula-
tion, and runoff of oils, wastewater,
mineral salts, pesticides, fertilizers, sol-
ids, and organic materials from the site
area. The 208 agencies may even seek
to include-in contracts between own-
ers or developers and the contractor re-


'8 0 208 n






sponsible for construction-specific in-
structions as to control measures and
systems of measures needed, schedul-
ing and coordination of activities, and
the use of permanent and temporary
preventive techniques.

Under existing discretionary approvals
which are needed prior to commencing
construction (PUD approval, condi-
tional permits, impact statements, and
so forth), the 208 agency may seek to
include, in the planning process, soil
information as well as topographic,
geologic, hydrologic, and other perti-
nent information applicable to the site
area, in cases where this information
would te needed to determine an ade-
quate means of controlling pollution
during construction. In attempting to
keep problems from arising, it may be
necessary to fit the construction site or
facilities to the landscape. This would
mean that:
The natural ground contours
should be followed as closely as
possible, and grading should be
kept to a minimum.
Areas of steep slopes where high
cuts and fills may be required
should be avoided.
Generally, areas adjacent to nat-
ural watercourses should not be
disturbed.
Care should be used in locating
artificial drainageways, so that
their final gradient and the resul-
tant water discharge velocity will
not create additional erosion.
Natural protective vegetation
should be left undisturbed if at
all possible.
If these measures cannot be taken, the
developer may be required to prevent
the runoff of pollutants through the use
of specific structural or other control
measures.
EPA guidance manuals state that effec-
tive development plans should con-
sider the proper scheduling and coor-


joup FutuDe u






dination of construction and the provi-
sion of adequate maintenance of con-
trol measures to ensure pollution pre-
vention. This means that the plans
should consider:
The time of year construction is to
occur.
The extent of grading to be done
for surface elevation changes.
The amount of ground to be ex-
posed to the elements, compared
with that protected by vegetation.
The quantity of runoff expected to
enter the site from higher areas.
The characteristics of groundwater
under the site.
Other factors which can create or
reduce pollution.
The development planning process,
then, should combine fitting the de-
velopment to the site, limiting the grad-
ing and exposure of bare soils, and ap-
plying adequate control measures and
techniques at proper times. This is
necessary to achieve the most effective
nonpoint source control mechanism as
well as the type of plan which will suc-
ceed in passing through the approval
process. But if a project is to be so
planned, will it still be economically vi-
able? What levels of application of the
above techniques should be required?
Should any variances be allowed?
These questions can only be answered
on an individual basis, yet the realism
of the development industry's concerns
and practices must be integrated into
the preparation of any 208 management
plan. How can this be accomplished? It
can be accomplished through active
public participation in the development
of the plan.

A Definite Role for the Developer
At the present time, the developer's
concern for regulation consists of de-
termining early in the planning process
the existing applicable requirements or
limitations imposed by federal, state,


6 urban land/july-august 77










regional, or local agencies. Section 208
provides the developer with the oppor-
tunity to become involved in the public
sector plan preparation. How? There
are five basic steps involved in the
preparation of a water quality manage-
ment plan, and there is a role for private
sector input at each step. Since many
agencies began planning in 1974 and
1975, most are well into Step 3.

Step 1: Establishment of goals and
objectives. The 208 agency, as a first
step, must identify the water quality
problems in the area. It should know
which problems the citizens feel are
most important and which are of lesser
importance. It will need to know the
values the community places on clean
water, open space, growth, and recre-
ation, and will seek the views of all
segments of the community-elected
officials, farmers, businessmen, repre-
sentatives of organized groups, ap-
pointed officials of governmental agen-
cies such as water authorities, sanita-
tion districts, the Corps of Engineers,
conservation districts, and the public at
large.

The result of this process should be a
complete assessment of the water-
related values, preferences, and con-
cerns of the community. This will give
the agency staff full information about
the scope of the water problems in the
area. It also will give the agency a list
of the individuals and special groups
interested in how they are affected by
water problems.

Step 2: Design of alternatives. Hav-
ing gathered as much information as
possible, the planners develop various
options. Decisions will be made to
eliminate options that are impractical or
are clearly unacceptable to the public.
Others will be combined into workable
alternatives. Technical aspects of these
alternatives will be explored and a
rough estimate of the costs and the im-
pacts of possible choices will be made.
The goal here is to develop ways that
clean water can be achieved in the
area.

Step 3: Measuring the effects of the
* major alternatives. This is a critical
time. Decisions must be made to nar-
row the options available to the com-


In the early 1970s Congress began
revising the 1965 Water Quality Act
and in October, 1972, passed the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(FWPCA) Amendments. The goals es-
tablished under the act stipulate that
by 1983 the nation's waters must be
safe for fishing and swimming and
that by 1985 there must no longer be
any discharge of pollutants into these
waters.
The National Commission on Water
Quality has pointed out that regulation
of municipal and industrial wastes
alone will not meet these two goals of
water quality. Diffuse (or nonpoint)
sources of-pollution-such as runoff
from agricultural and construction ac-
tivity causing toxicity, erosion, and
sedimentation-are also major prob-
lems that must be controlled and
abated if the 1983 goals of the
FWPCA are to be met.
Given this situation, Section 208 of the
FWPCA is of particular importance
because it provides the only authority
to control nonpoint sources of pollu-
tion. More specifically, Section 208
requires the development and even-
tual implementation of areawide and
statewide plans to control and prevent
water pollution from municipal and
industrial sources (point sources) as
well as from all nonpoint sources.
Section 208 is also the means to
coordinate the efforts of several major
sections of the FWPCA in meeting the
goals for 1983. Among these sections:
Section 201 provides 75 percent
federal financing to local gov-
ernments for the cost of building
or expanding sewage treatment
facilities. These funds are dis-
tributed to states which in turn
rank waste treatment projects
according to the state priority list,
which includes the severity of
pollution, the population served,
and other factors. Applications
which rank sufficiently high on


this list are forwarded to EPA for
review and funding.
Section 303 mandates the estab-
lishment of state water quality
standards and a continuing
planning process for the purpose
of ensuring that all state waters
meet the 1983 goals.
Section 402 requires that industry
and municipalities with sewage
treatment plants, and other such
parties which discharge wastes
through outlets, get permits from
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) or the state water
pollution control agency. These
permits set limits on the quantity,
rate, and concentration of pollut-
ants discharged and establish a
timetable that the discharger
must abide by to meet state
water quality standards.
Quite clearly, then, 208 plans have the
potential for becoming powerful tools
for ensuring improvement in the qual-
ity and maintenance of the nation's
waterways.
EPA is administering the FWPCA, but
the actual drafting (and eventual im-
plementation) of 208 plans is occur-
ring at local and state levels. Since
1974, some 176 local, regional, and
interstate planning agencies have
been designated by the states and
EPA to complete 208 plans for areas
afflicted with severe urban or industri-
al pollution problems. State agen-
cies, such as a water pollution control
agency, are planning for that portion
of a state which is undesignated. Most
of these state agencies, however, did
not start 208 planning until 1976, fol-
lowing a court decision requiring
states to plan for undesignated areas.
Some states are composed largely of
designated areas-Florida is a good
example-while others, such as Ne-
braska and Vermont, are entirely un-
designated. Planning for Nebraska
and Vermont and for other states with-


july-august/urban land 77 7


BU Tne NumToero

Connie Wels O'Mara













out designated areas is carried out
through state agencies-such as the
Nebraska Natural Resources Com-
mission and the Vermont Agency of
Environmental Conservation.

EPA provides between 75 and 100
percent financing of the 208 planning
to be done over a 2-year period Since
some agencies began planning in
1974. several 208 plans have already
been submitted to EPA for review and
approval Most. however, will be sub-
mitted during 1978. All 208 plans
must be submitted to EPA by
November 1 1978

All 208 plans are to be based on state
water quality standards that are estab-
lished under Section 303 of the
FWPCA These standards are com-
posed of three elements: the use to be
made of a specific segment of
water-whether it is for public water
supply, propagation of lish, shellfish.
or wildlife recreation, agriculture, or
industry: criteria to assure that the
water segment will meel that use. and
an antidegradation statement specify-
ing that existing water uses will be
maintained and protected and thai
waters presently exceeding the qual-
ity needed to support fish, shellfish.
and wildlife as well as recreation will
not be degraded The contents of the
208 plans should vary geographically
In agricultural areas the major pollu-
tion problem might be runoff from
feedlots and croplands: in urban
areas the malor problem might be
urban runoff and pollution from indus-
trial and municipal sources. Each 208
plan should be indicative of the area's
most important problems The con-
tents of each plan will be developed
according to EPA guidelines
(November 1975) and will involve the
following elements:

Population, household. and
economic projections for a 20-
year period.
A summary of existing land uses
(residential. commercial, and in-
dustrial) within the planning area
A classification of all streams


and other waters into one of two
types those that presently meet
state water quality standards or
will meet them after limiting the
amount of pollutants discharged
(effluent limited segments), or
segments that will not meet ap-
plicable state water quality stan-
dards even with discharge lim-
itations (water quality limited
segments) For the latter. the
state agency, under Section 303
of the law, will establish more
stringent discharge limitations
* An inventory of pollution from all
point and nonpoint sources In
some areas, nonpoint sources
are the major causes of water
pollution
* Identification ol new and ex-
panded municipal sewage treal-
menr systems necessary to han-
dre an area's wastes for the next
20 years. This part of the plan
should include an analysis of al-
ternatives to conventional waste
treatment methods, the amount
and availability of land required
for a Ireatment facility and for
disposal of residual wastes
(sludge) resulting from wastewa-
ter treatment and the costs for
facility construction and waste
disposal
* Identification of methods to con-
Irol sludge pollution ot surface
and groundwater
* Identification of new and im-
proved slormwater systems for
urban and industrial problems,
with special emphasis on land
management controls. such as
using on-site retention and dis-
posal rather than underground
pipe systems for off-site treat-
ment.
* Identification of all regulatory
programs and land use measures
to control nonpoint source pollu-
tion, e g zoning subdivision
regulations, floodplain regu-
lations. and performance stan-
dards, and an assessment of the
time required to achieve the de-
sired results


Identification of planning and
management agencies with the
administrative, legal, and finan-
cial capabilities to construct, op-
erate, and maintain treatment
facilities or implement the regu-
latory programs on nonpoint
sources These agencies will be
responsible for implementing the
208 plan
An assessment of the social en-
vironmental. and economic im-
pacts of the 208 plan

All 208 plans will be updated each
year as part of what EPA calls the
state continuing planning process.
Legislated under Section 303, this
process refers to the creation of the
necessary institutional arrangements
and management programs to make
and implement the decisions de-
signed to achieve water quality goals
and standards It is during this pro-
cess thai individual state water quality
standards are developed and
adopted 208 plans are reviewed by
EPA. and an overall state strategy for
meeting water pollution problems is
prepared Each state must submit a
description of its continuing planning
process to EPA Components of this
description relevant to the 208 plans
for water quality management include.
Maps and listings indicating both
designated and undesignated
planning areas
Maps and listings for the state
indicating each water quality
segment and its classification
(effluent limited, or water quality
limited).
A schedule indicating when
water quality standards will be
reviewed and revised and when
the antidegradation statement
will be developed and adopted
A state work plan (called a state.'
EPA agreement) that describes
the level of detail and the timeta-
ble for completing the approved
statewide 208 plan
A listing of the state 208 agency,
designated 208 agencies, and
other agencies delegated to


8 urban land/july-august 77









208


complete portions of the 208
plan.
It was the intent of the law that the 208
plan would also delineate the waste
treatment facilities to be funded with
75 percent federal money under Sec-
tion 201 Section 201(c) of the law
states. "To the extent practicable,
waste treatment management shall be
done on an areawide basis and
provide control or treatment of all
point and nonpoint sources of pollu-
tion Moreover, the FWPCA stipulates
that after a 208 plan is approved by
EPA, only those treatment facilities
identified in the state plan and only
the agencies designated to do waste
treatment planning can receive fund-
ing under 201. The actual practice,
however, has been different. In most
places, 208 plans have not yet been
completed and approved while 201
facility planning and construction have
been underway. Rather than 208 plans
determining what 201 planning should
take place, 201 planning is becoming
an integral part of individual 208
plans.
The law also states, in regard to point
sources of pollution, that no discharge
permit under Section 402 may be is-
sued for any point source which is in
conflict with an approved 208 plan.
Specifically, the permits must contain
schedules of compliance established in
the 208 plan These schedules should
also be used when establishing condi-
hons for permits. Quite clearly, the in-
tent of the law was for the two programs
to be coordinated. At this time, a
number of permits have already been
issued, and others are pending but
have yet to be issued. All existing per-
mils must be revised periodically. All
new permits and revised permits must
correspond to an approved 208 plan, or
they cannot be issued.

Connie Weis O'Mara is the project man-
ager of a Section 208 grant trom the En-
vironmental Protection Agency to the
League of Women Voters Education Fund
j (LWVEF). This article reflects the views of
,. the author and not necessatty those of the
taWVEF.


munity. Various alternatives, their
merits, and their drawbacks, should be
openly discussed. Where will the pro-
posed sewage treatment plant be built?
Who will pay for construction runoff
control? Should a new storm sewer sys-
tem be installed? Should new industry
be permitted, and, if so, where? What
energy and resource demands must be
considered? What are the long-term ef-
fects on the community? Are the deci-
sions feasible? Can the plan be im-
plemented? There will have to be an-
swers to these questions.

This is when the tough decisions have
to be made on what will happen in the
community and when compromises will
have to be made, but all concerns must
be weighed and considered in the final
decision. For a developer, the best time
to influence a community's future
growth is long before it affects him per-
sonally. The 208 agency will hold pub-
lic meetings,to discuss the alternatives,
and summaries will be published in the
agency's newsletter and in the press.
Drafts of the impact assessments will
be available at depositories. Develop-
ers should attend the meetings, talk to
local officials, challenge data, and
submit comments to the planners.
Strong feelings on the proposed plan
are best expressed at this time, for soon
the scope and the budget will be fixed
and not subject to change.


Step 4: Recommendations and ac-
ceptance of the final plan. Now the
final plan is ready to be approved by
the agency, the public, local officials,
the governor, and finally the EPA re-
gional administrator. Modifications can
still be made, but if suggestions by the
public have been incorporated in the
plan, it should be acceptable, it should
work according to the implementation
plan, and ultimately, it should result in
clean water. As mentioned earlier, this
final plan should include mechanisms
to turn it into a working system-
ordinances that must be passed, bond
issues proposed, and responsibilities
assigned. It must be a plan the com-
munity will implement and support. To
achieve this, members of the public
should attend public meetings and
workshops where the plan will be pre-
sented.


Step 5: Plan implementation and re-
vision. This is the final but continuing
phase to get the water quality program
implemented. The governor will have
designated an agency or agencies to
make the plan a working system. Ac-
tivities such as setting a regulatory
program in place, construction of
treatment works, and zoning changes
will get underway. Important, too, is as-
surance that the original plan remains
relevant and workable under changing
conditions. This will require continuous
updating, probably by the 208 agency.
Revisions can be made at the time of
the required annual certification by the
governor.
The developer should stay informed on
the progress being made. The updating
process-including progress meetings
and the annual governor's approval-
provides for a continuing time and
place to make the developer's voice
heard.
Though many agencies are now in the
latter stages of plan preparation, it is
not too late to become involved. Deter-
mination of alternatives, acceptance of
the final plan, and plan implementation
and revision provide a great opportu-
nity to supply information to the deci-
sion makers to better enable them to
make sound judgments in selecting
techniques and devising pollution pre-
vention plans for regulating construc-
tion.


The Locksmith Session at the ULI Spring
Meeting was led by Allan L. Farkas of
Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc., of Bethesda,
Maryland, and the resource person was Vic-
toria Greenfield of EPA's Water Planning
Division. Presiding at the workshop was
William B. Rick, president of Rick Engineer-
ing Company, San Diego, California.
Panelists were Walter Grosyk, Deputy Direc-
tor, Water Planning Division, U.S. EPA;
Ronald L. Campbell, executive vice presi-
dent, David D. Bohannon Organization, San
Mateo, California; Paul O. Reimer, president,
Reimer Associates, Burlingame, California;
Allan L. Farkas; and James Sharp, counsel,
National Realty Committee, Washington,
D.C.
ULI would like to express its appreciation to
EPA's Victoria Greenfield for her assistance
in preparing the meeting sessions.


july-august/urban land 77 9













Bibliography

Comparative Costs of Erosion and Sediment Control,
Construction Activities. Report No. EPA 430/973-016.
Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.
$2.20.
Cost information on erosion and sediment control
measures has been assembled in this report, evalu-
ated, and documented for more than 24 methods in
current and widespread use in the United States.
Control of Erosion and Sediment Deposition from Con-
struction of Highways and Land Development. U.S.
EPA. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office,
September 1971. $0.60.
Discusses the causes and effects of excess sedi-
ment runoff, measures for control, costs, and
administration.
Nonpoint Source Control Guidance, Construction Ac-
tivities. U.S. EPA, December 1976. Available from EPA
regional offices.
Designed to provide state and areawide 208 agen-
cies, the federal agencies, and other concerned
groups and individuals with information which'wR~
assist them in carrying out their water quality plan-
ning and implementation responsibilities.
The basic guidance information included is princi-
pally technical in nature and presented in four main
chapters: identification and assessment of existing
construction nonpoint source problems; analysis
and procedures needed for selection of controls;
descriptions of individual and systems of best man-
agement practices (BMP) -with a method for de-
termining their effectiveness; and several methods
for predicting potential pollution problems from fu-
ture construction activities.
Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control Pollu-
tion Resulting from All Construction Activity. Report
No. EPA 430/9-73-007. Washington: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1973. $2.30.
Issued according to requirements of Section 304(e)
of P.L. 92-500. Report provides information of a
general nature regarding measures of controlling or
preventing erosion and sediment runoff, stormwater,
and pollutants other than sediments.
Water Quality Impacts of Land Disturbing Activities:
Evaluation and Development of Institutional Systems
for Environmental Management. U.S. EPA, July 1976.
Available from EPA regional offices.
This publication presents a systematic approach to
the identification of optimal control authorities and
programs for land-disturbing activities. It is in-
tended for use by both state and areawide 208
agencies as a possible approach to evaluating im-
plementation alternatives. While recommendations
are specific to the state of Nevada, the process may
have applicability in various programs and media.


Economic growth, energy needs, and
environmental protection have become
prime subjects of debate among public
and private policymakers and manag-
ers at the national, state, and local
levels. Proponents of improving the
economy and energy prospects have
generally called for a relaxation of en-
vironmental standards, and proponents
of environmental standards have cried
foul. Emotions run deep among these
interest groups, with little attempt at ob-
jective analysis or development of rea-
sonable compromises.

The current situation began with the
passage of major federal environmental
legislation: the National Environmental
Policy Act (1969), the Clean Air Act
Amendments (1970), and the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA)
Amendments (1972). At the same time,
the nation entered into a recessionary
period marked by inflation of substan-
tial proportions. The "energy crisis" in
the fall of 1973, and the subsequent
recognition of the nation's long-term
energy problems, fueled the debate
further.

Given these conditions, many antici-
pated that a major backlash would de-
velop against environmental objectives,
with pressures to relax legislated pro-
grams. This backlash never mate-
rialized with the public or most elected
officials.

Protecting critical environmental and
natural resources and enhancing
economic development prospects while
meeting urgent energy needs is not an
either-or situation. The assumption that
environmental programs are inherently
in conflict with economic and energy
objectives is false. Indeed, many en-
vironmental regulatory and manage-
ment programs are consistent with and
supportive of economic development


10 urban land/july-august 77


C














The Economic Impact of

Air and Water Pollution Control

Ronald H. Miller


objectives and energy efficiency needs.
It is necessary to consider that, over the
long term, degradation of the environ-
ment and exhaustion of natural re-
sources will limit the nation's overall
economic progress and welfare. There-
fore some consensus ultimately must
be developed.
What are the economic and energy im-
pacts and implications of air and water
pollution control programs being im-
plemented under the Clean Air Act and
the FWPCA? Many economic impacts
are direct and relatively easy to iden-
tify, such as the added cost and fuel
penalties that may be associated with
control devices on motor vehicles to
* reduce pollutants. Other impacts of au-
tomobile pollution control have indirect
and induced consequences not readily
apparent, such as the transportation
control strategies required in many met-
ropolitan areas to reduce carbon
monoxide emissions.
Cleaning up the nation's waterways to
achieve the goals of the FWPCA will
have implications beyond the costs of
controlling effluents from large waste-
discharging industries-such as iron
and steel, paper and chemicals-and
capital investment needed for mu-
nicipal sewage treatment works. Still
largely undetermined, for example, are
the costs and consequences of control-
ling nonpoint pollution from agriculture,
lumbering and forest management, and
construction operations. Indeed, the
overall complexity of regulatory and
management mechanisms, the mul-
titude of standards, the variation among
localities with respect to economic and
environmental conditions, and the crit-
ical technological factors necessitate
some detailed empirical investigation
Sand analysis.
The complex and wide-ranging interre-
lationships and ramifications of air and


water pollution control programs on the
economy are illustrated by the matrix
information presented in Chart 1.
This assessment represents only a lim-
ited number of regulatory and man-
agement program elements, but it does
indicate that air and water pollution
control programs have impacts not only
in terms of dollar costs with respect to
capital investment for abatement, but
also for household lifestyles, commu-
nity development and siting, and loca-
tional choices for industrial and com-
mercial projects.
It should be noted that the impacts
identified in Chart 1 represent positive
as well as negative or constraining
conditions. As a case example, the cur-
rent construction program for municipal
sewage treatment and collector sys-
tems is a major source of jobs and
business opportunities, and it provides
public infrastructure investment to sup-
port long-term community development.
On the other hand, while the federal
government generally provides 75 per-
cent of the construction costs, local
government must bear most of the op-
erational and maintenance costs. For
many small communities, these costs
could be a significant burden.

While the secondary and indirect costs
and benefits can be identified in the
matrix, this framework cannot assess
the economic value of the basic goals
of air and water pollution control, such
as the reduction in health damages and
the preservation of critical natural
resources.
The assumption underlying programs to
abate air and water pollution is that al-
though they will require the expenditure
of substantial resources, the benefits
derived from pollution abatement will
outweigh the costs. The Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1970 assumed that


benefits from abating air pollution-
reduction in damages to health, mate-
rials, crops, and property-would out-
weigh the costs of emission controls on
motor vehicles, pollution control
equipment on smokestacks, and the
use of cleaner fuels. Similarly, the
drafters of the FWPCA Amendments of
1972 assumed that the benefits gained
would more than offset the clean-up
costs.
When major federal legislation was
enacted, information was almost totally
lacking concerning the ultimate costs
and benefits. The situation has im-
proved considerably, especially on the
cost side of the equation. With the initi-
ation of important ongoing surveys and
estimates by the U.S. Commerce De-
partment's Bureau of Economic Analy-
sis and Census Bureau, as well as
studies by federal agencies, industry,
and trade associations, there are now
some current and projected abatement
cost estimates of important sectors of
the economy. Still lacking, however, is
information on the broader conse-
quences and implications of environ-
mental programs.
On the benefit side, though, the situa-
tion has not improved during the past
decade. Efforts at assessing the bene-
fits from abating air and water pollution
even under prestigious auspices have
had very limited success. Studies such
as the National Academy of Sciences'
1974 Air Quality and Automobile Emis-
sion Control, prepared for the U.S. Sen-
ate's Public Work Committee, and the
National Commission on Water Qual-
ity's Staff Report in 1976 have not
provided real definitive benefit
assessments.
Starting in 1972, the U.S. Bureau of
Economic Analysis began to estimate
national expenditures for pollution con-
trol and abatement within the context of


july-august/urban land 77 11









$ Impact



Chart 1. Economy/Environmental Programs Matrix Interface
Selected Air Pollution Control Program Elements


Types of Facilities
and Activities Affected


Indirect source
regulations
(shopping and office
centers, parking lots,
highways)


Transportation
control plans
(motor vehicle usage,
business and industry
within plan areas)


Fugitive dust
regulations
(construction, road
maintenance,
materials,
stockpiling)


Significant
deterioration
regulations
(large emission
sources in "clean air
areas")


Air quality
maintenance plans
(development
projects in areas
where plans may be
needed)


Industrial process
and fuel combustion
regulations
(large oil or coal
fueled heat and
power generation
sources and
emission-producing
processes)


Business and industry
Type of impact
Energy and fuel use
and costs X XX X XX
Production processes
and materials X X XX X
Management and
operations
Site, facility, and
equipment design XX X X
New facility location X XX XX
Markets for products
Financial Implications
Capital investment X X X XX
Operation and
maintenance X X X XX
Fees and user charges
Households
Housing choice and costs X X X
Employment opportunities X X X
Recreation and travel XX X
Purchases of goods X
Payments of fees
and charges X
Communities and
Government
Resources, land use, and
development X XX XX
Business and industrial
development X XX
Public infrastructive
investment X XX X X
Government administration
and operations costs XX X
Property values X X
Public revenues X X
X-indicates existing or potential impacts of a moderate nature.
XX-indicates existing or potential impacts of a significant nature.


GNP and the National Income and
Product Accounts. The increase in the
share of GNP devoted to air and water
pollution control-from 1.3 percent in
1972 to 1.6 percent in 1974-reflects
responses to the mandates in the Clean
Air Act and FWPCA. It is likely that
overall expenditures for water pollution
control have been peaking since 1974,
principally because of deadlines to
achieve the interim 1977 effluent dis-
charge targets. Chart 2 shows the
rapidly rising trend in capital ex-
penditures by business for water pollu-


tion abatement and the slower growth
for air pollution control.


Among the business and industrial sec-
tors of the economy, air and water
pollution control costs are most concen-
trated in manufacturing and electric
utilities. Together, these two sectors
have accounted for almost 95 percent
of all abatement capital expenditures
for plant and equipment. Within man-
ufacturing, capital expenditures for
pollution control ace concentrated in six
industrial sectors: primary metals;


stone, clay, and glass; food products;
paper products; chemicals; and petro-
leum. These are primary or basic pro-
cessing sectors, where producing fin-
ished goods from raw material gener-
ates considerable residual wastes. In
total these six sectors have accounted
for about 85 percent of all manufactur-
ing capital expenditures.

In those industries where pollution con-
trol investment requirements represent
a significant proportion of total invest-
ment, industry and trade have argued
that this is burdensome to their com-


12 urban land/july-august 77













Selected Water Pollution Control Program Elements


Types of Facilities
and Activities Impacted


Interim 1977 industrial
effluent standards
(industrial wastewater
dischargers)


1983 industrial effluent
standards
(industrial wastewater
dischargers)


Pretreatment
regulations for
discharges into public
system
(industries and
institutions utilizing
public sewage
systems)


Surface waters quality
standards
(all effluent
discharges and water
based recreational
activities)


Construction and
operation of municipal
treatment plants
(industrial,
commercial and
residential
development,
construction and
capital equipment
industries)


Nonpoint source
regulations
(agriculture,
silviculture,
construction and
mining operations,
and urban runoff)


Business and industry


Type of impact
Energy and fuel use
and costs
Production process
and materials
Management and
operations
Site, facility, and
equipment design
New facility location
Markets for products
Financial implications
Capital investment
Operation and
maintenance
Fees and user charges
Households


X

X
, XX


Housing choice and costs X X
Employment opportunities XX
Recreation and travel XX X
* Purchases of goods X
Payments of fees
and charges X
Communities and
Government
Resources, land use, and
development X XX X
Business and industrial
development X XX X X X X
Public infrastructive
investment X X X XX X
Government administration
and operations costs X XX
Property values X
Public revenues X X X
X-indicates existing or potential impacts of a limited or moderate nature.
-XX-indicates existing or potential impacts of a significant nature.


panies and affects the entire economy.
Their position is that this investment is
"unproductive" and does not expand
capacity and generate income and
job-producing benefits. They state that
this investment reduces the availability
of capital for capacity expansion and
has an impact on production costs
which can often cause the shutdown of
"marginal" facilities.

A number of federally and privately
Sponsored research studies for CEQ,
EPA, and trade associations have dealt
with these issues. For the most part,


however, there is little agreement
among these studies concerning the
implications for specific industries. All
the studies have shortcomings common
to economic analysis and modeling that
attempts to simulate the impacts of
complex and interrelated economic,
technological, and regulatory policy
variables.

Given all the shortcomings of the infor-
mation base concerning the economic
implications of achieving clean air and
pure water goals, it is still possible to
draw some important conclusions.


Specifically, it is likely that the nation
has the resources to absorb the costs of
cleaning up the environment. These
costs, in comparison with other domes-
tic program expenditures, appear to be
reasonable given the benefits derived.
Notwithstanding these conclusions,
there is mounting evidence that we
need to assess further our air and water
pollution program objectives. More effi-
cient and equitable mechanisms are
needed to implement and administer
key program elements, as will be noted
later.


july-august/urban land 77 13








$ Impact


Chart 2. Capital Expenditures by Business for Air and Water Pollution
Abatement

Billions

$ 7- Total



$6-




$5-




$ 4- Air



Water
$3-




$2-


$ 1-


I I I i
1973 1974 1975 1976 (planned)

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business (July 1975 and July 1976)


The New York State Situation


Discussion regarding the economic
and energy implications of air and
water pollution control programs has a
sense of urgency for the Northeastern
states and particularly for New York.
The decline in the industrial strength of
the Northeast, the fiscal problems of
New York's state and city governments,
and the dependence of the region on
costly imported oil have been well
publicized.

The Northeast also has some of the
worst air and water quality problems
found in the nation. New York, with its
concentration of industry and people in


major urban centers, is a prime case
where objective assessment is needed
of the implications and interrelation-
ships of environmental policy and the
economic growth. The state, chiefly
through the Department of Environmen-
tal Conservation (DEC), must meet fed-
erally mandated air and water quality
objectives while stemming the con-
tinued deterioration of its economic
base.
Close examination of the programs
being implemented by the state under
the Clean Air Act and FWPCA reveals a
significant connection with the
economy. Both positive and negative
effects on job andincome growth are
present. Since the state has relatively


few heavy industries, such as those in
petrochemicals and primary metals,
New York ranks well behind Texas,
Pennsylvania, California, and other
states in abatement expenditures, as
measured by total business investment
costs. However, the level of abatement
expenditures does not provide a com-
plete indication of the ramifications to
industry of meeting environmental regu-
latory requirements. Enough evidence
is available to demonstrate that New
York and other Northeast states are
likely to sustain greater economic dis-
location from federal air and water qual-
ity mandates than are other regions.
The region's concentration of aging and
marginal industrial facilities is less able
to bear the impact of abatement pro-
grams. The National Commission on
Water Quality has concluded that the
impact of the interim 1977 industrial
effluent standards would be more se-
vere in the Northeast because of under-
capitalized and increasingly obsolete
plants.
What are the economic and energy is-
sues confronting New York as it imple-
ments major elements of the Clean Air
.Act and FWPCA?

Air pollution control. New York state's
air pollution control program predates
the 1970 Clean Air Act Amendments
and federal legislation of the early
1960s. In 1957, the state enacted com-
prehensive air pollution control laws,
and in 1964 air quality standards were
developed to protect public health.
With passage of the 1970 Clean Air Act
Amendments, however, the state be-
came a "junior partner" to the federal
government, with federal planning, reg-
ulatory requirements, and standards
basically preempting state standards,
unless they are more stringent. New
York is directly responsible, however,
for major elements and mechanisms:
Submission of Implementation
Plans (SIPs) for the attainment and
maintenance of national air quality
standards, originally by 1975 and
then extended to 1977 for selected
pollutants.
Responsibility to see that air qual-
ity doesn't deteriorate in clean
areas of the state, as a result of
court-interpreted "nondegrada-


14 urban land/july-august 77











tion" requirements of the Clean Air
Act.
Continuous operational programs
to monitor air quality conditions,
issue permits for new facilities and
the operation of existing ones, and
enforce regulations concerning
fuel use and emission standards
for motor vehicle and stationary air
pollution sources.

As part of the strategies needed in its
original SIP, developed in 1972, and by
subsequent actions to attain air quality
standards in major urban areas, the
DEC promulgated rules and regulations
covering indirect source controls, and
also established numerous area and
industry-specific fuel combustion and
industrial process standards. Under
EPA requirements, DEC is now evaluat-
ing its SIP for needed revisions be-
cause of lack of attainment of air stan-
dards in New York City, Buffalo, and
some other urban areas.

A Transportation Control Plan to reduce
motor-vehicle-related pollution in New
York City-particularly in Manhattan-


was submitted to EPA in April 1973 and
amended in October 1974. As a result
of protracted delays in implementing
key controversial components of the
plan, environmental groups initiated
legal action, and currently the city and
state are under federal-court-issued
implementation target dates. The city is
now implementing some of the plan
strategies. Current congressional con-
sideration of amendments to the Clean
Air Act would provide extensions to
1977 mandated attainment, however.

With the participation of regional and
county planning agencies, DEC is also
addressing the impact of future growth
and development. In ten areas of the
state, technical studies are underway to
determine whether plans are required
to maintain air standards over the next
10, 15, or 20 years. Any required
maintenance plans will have to be
submitted to EPA by next year.

Key economto, development, or energy
related implications associated with the
state plans and regulations in effect or
needed to achieve Clean Air Act objec-


tives in New York State are summarized
in chart 3. While the chart mainly iden-
tifies conflicts, there are substantial
benefits inherent in reducing air pollu-
tion levels. For example, in developing
the Transportattion Control Plan for New
York City, DEC estimated that reduction
in annual damages to health, property,
materials, and vegetation could amount
to between $200 million and $800 mil-
lion (in 1972 dollars) in the first years of
plan implementation. The plan en-
visioned a reduction in gasoline con-
sumption as a result of emissions in-
spections and traffic control strategies.
The estimated 5 percent reduction in
gasoline consumption at current aver-
age gasoline prices would mean a cost
savings of about $85 million annually.
Unfortunately, important economic and
other benefits of "clean air" goals are
difficult to quantify. Thus, debate cen-
ters on the direct economic costs and
impacts.

Water pollution control. The enact-
ment of the FWPCA in 1972 marked a
monumental step forward for federal in-


Chart 3. Implications of Major New York State Air Pollution Control Programs on the Economy, Development, and Energy
Conditions


Program Element


Geographic Areas
of Impact


Economy/Development/Energy Implications


Implementation plan (SIP) for
attainment of standards
(1972)

Reevaluation of adequacy of
SIP (under way)



Transportation control plan
(original 1973)


Indirect source regulations (in
effect)

Significant deterioration regu-
lations (Nondegradation
requirements)-current
EPA regulations in effect
but revisions expected by
Congress
Fugitive dust regulations
(Proposed)
Air quality maintenance plan-
ning (underway)


Principally metropolitan areas
of state


Likely to be Buffalo and New
York City



New York City, especially
Manhattan CBD


Principally urban areas of
state

Statewide





Primarily urban areas

Potential in mid-Hudson,
Long Island, and suburban
fringes around central
cities


* Investment in more costly abatement equipment for control of particulate
emissions.
Required use of low-sulfur-content fuel oil and forced substantial conversion of
coal-fired boilers of utilities and industry to oil.
Increased investment in abatement devices to control still present particulate
problems. Major implications for steel industry in Buffalo, residential and
commercial sources in New York City.
Potential restrictions on expansion or location of new major fuel combustion or
process sources in conformance with EPA's "trade-off" regulations.
Discourage use of private autos in CBD. Commuting and parking more dif-
ficult.
Plan is energy saving as it promotes use of mass transit and reduces traffic
congestion.
* May restrict large-scale development in locations identified as "hot spots" in
locations where motor vehicle pollution is a problem. More likely to require
design changes in projects and facilities.
* Not likely to have significant statewide implications because of slow growth
prospects and flexibility in implementation of regulations.
* Could be supportive of comprehensive land use planning and energy conser-
vation objectives.


* Will require some changes in operations and practices for construction indus-
try, public works and facility maintenance, and stockpiling of raw materials.
* May restrict large-scale development in locations identified as "hot spots" in
terms of air quality.
* Could accefituate scattered development rather than concentration.


july-august/urban land 77 15


I I I I I








$ Impact


tervention in water pollution control.
Federal funding for construction of pub-
lic sewage-treatment plants has
amounted to $20 billion since 1973,
and prospects are for $17 billion for
1977 to 1979. The act also mandated
regulatory mechanisms requiring uni-
form technology-based effluent lim-
itations with permit systems for point
source discharges and comprehensive
planning to alleviate urban and rural
nonpoint source pollution.

New York's program to control and pre-
vent water pollution predates the
FWPCA, however. The state im-
plemented stream-water quality stan-
dards in 1949 and a discharge permit
system in 1962. In 1965, the Pure Wa-
ters Bond Act was enacted. It provided
$1 billion to support new and upgraded
municipal treatment works. Over 400
projects have been completed at a total
value of $4.5 billion as a result of this
act. The 1972 Environmental Quality
Bond Act continued the state's com-
mitment by providing $650 million as
part of the state's share of eligible proj-
ect costs.

The FWPCA gave the states primary re-
sponsibility for developing, implement-
ing, and enforcing plans and programs
consistent with the act's goals. New
York State presently-


* Reviews and approves municipal
sewage facilities construction
projects (Section 201) and con-
tributes the state's share (generally
121/2 percent) of eligible project
capital costs. Statewide annual
project priorities are developed by
DEC and submitted to EPA. Since
1973, New York has received $2.1
billion in federal grants, and a
similar amount is likely for the
1977-79 period.

* Administers the permit program for
point sources under delegation in
1975 as permit agent for the Na-
tional Pollution Discharge Elimina-
tion System (Section 402). As of
1976, there were over 3,000 iden-
tified industrial and municipal dis-
charges to surface waters in the
state. Over 800 are considered
major, and DEC has issued over
700 permits for these sources,
consistent with the EPA 1977
interim effluent standards. It is ex-
pected that 90 percent of these
permitted sources will be in com-
pliance with the 1977 standards.
* Administers water quality stan-
dards for all surface waters and a
monitoring system to insure
adherence to these standards
(Section 303). While selected


stream segments have water qual-
ity levels inconsistent with federal
and state requirements, they rep-
resent only about 1 percent of the
70,000 miles of state streams.
Conducts water quality planning
on a statewide and basin basis
under Sections 208 and 303(e) of
the FWPCA. In six areas of the
state, designated 208 agencies
are completing areawide waste
water treatment management
plans. For the remainder of the
state, DEC has responsibility for
208 planning. The objectives of
this planning process are to iden-
tify and develop management and
institutional arrangements and
regulatory tools to cope with urban
and rural, point and nonpoint prob-
lems over the next 20 years.

For New York as well as other states
and local communities, efforts under
the FWPCA to prevent, control, and
treat water pollution have significant
direct and indirect benefits and costs.
Consequences for the New York
economy, public and private projects
and activities, and ultimately the gen-
eral public are only now being iden-
tified for program elements noted in
chart 4, and most of these same issues
are relevant for other states as well.


Chart 4. Implications of Major New York State Water Pollution Control Programs on the Economy, Development, and
Energy Conditions


Program Element


Geographic Areas
of Impact


Economy/Development/Energy Implications


Municipal construction pro-
gram



Industrial effluent standards
1977 interim
1983 best available
technology
Pretreatment
regulations (proposed
EPA revisions)
Water quality standards





Control of nonpoint sources
(planning and program-
ming underway)


Statewide




Primarily in urban areas





Statewide




Urban and rural areas


* Largest source of public works construction jobs and supply opportunities.
* Sewage works and related systems support community development and as-
sume important role in attracting private investment.
* Fiscal burden of debt service and operation and management costs may be
significant for many communities.
* Significant capital investment required for abatement.
* For smaller marginal industries impacts may be significant.
* Significant increases in energy consumption, especially for chemical industry.
* Opportunities exist for greater plan productivity if abatement is done by
change-in-process rather than end-of-line treatment.
* Pretreatment regulations are likely to be administratively burdensome and
costly with respect to investment, monitoring, and reporting.
* In limited locations expansion of "wet industries" even with proper effluent
controls could be restricted because stream segments are at their assimilative
capacities.
* Protection of water-related resources and environment enhances the recre-
ational value of surface waters and aids in tourism and recreation industry
promotion.
* To be defined, best management practices (BMP) may offset the viability of
marginal agriculture and silviculture operations.
* Modified construction practices could increase costs.
* Solutions to urban runoff problems are likely to result in increased operational
costs for local governments.


16 urban land/july-august 77










The basic economic issues confronting
the state with respect to water pollution
control are common to all public
programs-efficiency and equity. Will
the overall benefits of achieving pro-
gram goals offset the costs? Who will
bear the costs and receive the
benefits?
The choice of the target dates for
achieving water pollution control objec-
tives affects costs and benefits. In
enacting the FWPCA Amendments in
1972, Congress considered the 1977
interim standards, 1983 final standards,
and 1985 goal of "zero discharge" as
reasonable within the context of the
prevailing national mood. There is
growing concern about the feasibility
and desirability of meeting the target
deadlines and the regulatory ap-
proaches and mechanisms employed
for this purpose.
Even more basic than target dates,
there is growing criticism in both the
public and private sectors of the means
by which government acts to achieve
social, environmental, and economic
objectives. Water pollution control is
among the major public regulatory and
management programs currently being
assessed in the search for better alter-
natives to the traditional public regu-
latory procedures.

Case Study of Local Economic
Impacts
Through a 1974 grant from the Appala-
chian Regional Commission the New
York DEC undertook an assessment of
the impacts of major environmental
programs on the economy of five urban
communities in the state's Appalachian
region. The primary focus was on key
air and water pollution control program
elements being implemented by DEC
under the mandates of the Clean Air Act
Amendments and the FWPCA. The
economic implications of the National
Flood Insurance Program and the
Coastal Zone Management Program
were also evaluated, but in less detail.
The five case study communities repre-
sented a spectrum of urban centers,
with respect to size, economic struc-
ture, and development prospects.
Binghamton is the largest urban cen-
ter. Elmira-Corning and Jamestown


Table 1: Population of the Study Areas
(in thousands)
1950 1960 1970 1975

Binghamton area 180.8 210.7 222.3 219.3
Elmira-Corning area 106.3 118.8 119.0 115.8
Jamestown area 70.1 73.8 73.3 71.7
Olean area 34.4 35.5 35.0 35.2
Norwich area 21.0 23.1 24.5 24.8

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1960, 1970 and Current Population
Reports Series P-25, No. 680 (Issued May 1977).


rank next in order. All are important in-
dustrial and commercial centers. Nor-
wich and Olean represent smaller but
important industrial centers. Table 1 in-
dicates past and current population
levels for the five study areas.
Aided by faculty and graduate students
from three universities, DEC staff as-
sessed the economic implications of
key program elements:
Air pollution,control. This study area
included the following elements:
Air quality maintenance
planning-Binghamton, Elmira-
Corning, and Jamestown are offi-
cially designated maintenance
areas for which analysis is cur-
rently underway by DEC staff to
determine whether further growth
and development will cause viola-
tion of national air quality stan-
dards. Control strategies and
plans will have to be submitted to
EPA by July 1, 1978, if the depart-
ment's technical analysis indicates
maintenance problems over the
next 5 to 10 years.
Significant deterioration
regulations-Current federal reg-
ulations require that "clean areas"
of the nation not be allowed to de-
teriorate beyond certain limits. The
regulations, applying to most
areas in New York and its Appala-
chian region, are one of the more
controversial aspects of the Clean
Air Act and resulted from the U.S.
Supreme Court's affirmation in
1973 of a lower court ruling. The
Court upheld the position that it
was the intent of Congress not to
allow areas having cleaner air than
required by national air standards
to significantly deteriorate.


EPA regulations currently provide
the states with options to desig-
nate areas into three classes:
Class I limits significantly any in-
crements in pollution; Class II al-
lows moderate increments; and
Class III allows degradation to na-
tional secondary air standards.
Congress is now considering
amendments to the Clean Air Act
that will specifically define its in-
tent with respect to deterioration
allowances.

Water pollution control. The municipal
construction program, the discharge
permit requirements, water quality
standards, and nonpoint source control
were addressed in the project since
they are applicable to all areas in Ap-
palachia. However, since nonpoint
source management programs are cur-
rently in the developmental stages, it
was not possible to evaluate their
implications.
To successfully complete a project of
this nature required the development of
a diverse data base and the application
of a broad array of research techniques:
data from DEC's regulatory and permit
authority; surveys and interviews with
key local plant managers, elected offi-
cials, and agency staffs; and secondary
engineering and economic statistics
from government reports and university
research material.
Analytical techniques included linear
programming, comparative industrial
locational cost analysis, input/output
models, regional multipliers, employ-
ment/pollution load coefficients, and
trend projections of industrial employ-
ment. All of these approaches are
common economic analysis tools used
in many program areas.


july-august/urban land 77 17


--








$ Impact


Study findings. A major aim of the
study was to provide detailed informa-
tion to support prospective policy and
programming changes at the federal,
state, and local levels. Yet specific
program findings should be considered
within the perspective of the "bottom
line" conclusions concerning the over-
all relationships of environmental pro-
grams and the economy of the Appala-
chian region. The study concluded:
Economic development prospects
in Appalachian New York will con-
tinue to be principally determined
by traditional competitive econom-
ic forces with air and water pollu-
tion control programs only margi-
nally affecting the economy.
Declining prospects for manufac-
turing in Appalachia do not appear
to be caused by environmental
constraints on plant locational de-
cisions but rather a function of un-
favorable competitive conditions
that have affected the state and the
entire Northeast region.
Water pollution control programs
have greater positive and negative
impacts on the Appalachian econ-
omy than air pollution control pro-
grams.
Water pollution control varies sig-
nificantly with respect to specific
program impacts. For example,
Jamestown is likely to be the most
affected by industrial effluent lim-
itation standards while little im-
pacts are likely for the other case


study communities. All areas,
however, will benefit from the in-
vestment in municipal sewage
treatment facilities.
Air quality goals and economic
growth appear to be compatible
for the three study areas and gen-
erally for the entire Appalachian
region.

With respect to the specific elements of
New York's state air pollution control
programs being implemented under the
Clean Air Act and specifically ad-
dressed in the Appalachian study grant
scope, the findings are as follows:
Air quality maintenance
plans-Expected industrial growth
and overall development in Bing-
hamton, Elmira-Corning, and
Jamestown over the next 10 to 15
years should not result in contra-
vention of national air quality stan-
dards, Therefore, it is not likely
that,state maintenance plans
would be needed that might limit
industrial expansion or increase
abatement costs.

Significant deterioration
regulations-State implementa-
tion of these regulations should
have minimal overall impact on the
study areas and the Appalachian
region. Given the flexibility al-
lowed in designation of the three
classes, these regulations can
support overall land use plans and
community development objec-


tives for the region. Perceived
local concerns about the econom-
ic ramifications deserve recogni-
tion and response.

* Pollution abatement costs-
Current costs of air pollution con-
trol, as indicated in Table 2, were
found to only be a minimal factor
in business operations. The costs
of higher levels of abatement as
shown in the table are illustrative
of control practices that would be
needed if substantial industrial
emissions reductions were re-
quired. However, as noted earlier,
more stringent areawide controls
are not likely to be needed for the
study areas. The data does serve
to confirm the increasing marginal
costs of higher pollution control
and especially the incremental
expense of cleaning up the "last 5
percent."
The key program elements being
implemented by the state to
achieve the goals of the FWPCA
were found to have important but
not overriding implications for the
study areas and by inference to
the entire state Apalachian region.

*Municipal construction
program-This program repre-
sents an important infrastructure
investment to promote Appala-
chian development and signifi-
cantly support the federal/state
strategy of concentrating invest-


Table 2: Air Pollution Control Costs for Manufacturing Process Industries: Present and Illustrative
(Thousands of 1972 dollars)


Present annual
air pollution control costs'
Per employee As percent
$ of shipments


Annual costs for
more stringent abatement
95% 99.9%
abatement abatement2


Percentage increase
from current to:
95% 99.9%
abatement abatement


Binghamton 1,050 31 0.07 1,120 1,900 7 81
Area3
Elmira-Corning 1,430 57 0.2 2,030 4,050 42 183
Area3
Jamestown 560 32 0.1 730 1,690 30 201
Area3
'Estimated annual costs for operations and maintenance (including depreciation on capital) during the 1973-1975 period for control of particulate and
SO2 emissions. Abatement with existing equipment averages between 80 and 90 percent for industries in the study area.
2Abatement of 99.9 percent efficiency is possible for most processes under existing state-of-the-art technology.
3lncludes the entire counties in which these urban areas are situated.
Sources: Cornell University Regional Science Research Training Program for NYSDEC, and 1972 Census of Manufacturing.


18 urban land/july-august 77


$1,000











ment in "growth centers" as a focal
point for regional economic de-
velopment. Projects in operation,
under construction, or planned in
seven counties that were studied
amounted to $260 million worth of
eligible project costs, of which
$220 million, or 84 percent, were
located in growth centers.
The construction program also
provides employment oppor-
tunities for the local labor force.
Substantial jobs would be gener-
ated if the total identified mu-
nicipal treatment needs were met.
More modest jobs are associated
with the level of investment under
the state's current approved proj-
ect priority list, earmarked for fed-
eral subsidies.
Caution is needed with regard to
the construction program for Ap-
palachia and other primarily rural,
low-population areas. Some com-
munities will find that the local
share of costs could be a signifi-
cant burden. Although the existing
75 percent federal construction
subsidy and 12V2 percent state
share eases the capital costs, ris-
ing operational and maintenance
costs of complex treatment works
are of great concern. Priority is
going to investigations under Sec-
tion 208 to identify solutions other
than traditional sewage systems
for alleviating rural waste problems.
SIndustrial effluent and stream-
water quality standards-The
economic implications for industry
in Appalachia are compounded by
water quality problems caused by
municipal discharges and non-
point sources. This situation may
require more stringent and costly
abatement by existing industry to
meet stream assimilative capacity
and water quality standards. It can
limit the location of new "wet in-
dustries" to those basins and
stream segments outside urban
industrial complexes where tra-
ditional locational requirements-
labor, utilities, transportation ac-
cess, and services-may be lack-
ing or too costly.
Findings for each of the study
areas for specific industrial-related


standards and water quality condi-
tions are found in Table 3. With re-
spect to the various economic im-
pact concerns, only for Jamestown
does there appear to be serious
ramifications for industry and the
overall economic base. For the
other areas, the impacts are lim-
ited and do not have major conse-
quences for the existing economic
base and development prospects.

Conclusion: Issues That Need To
Be Addressed
While significant progress has been
made towards achieving the basic
goals of the air and water pollution con-
trol programs, not all the goals will be
achieved by the target dates. Air pollu-
tion levels in many of the large urban
areas remain above standards, and
substantial water quality problems will
remain unsolved into the 1980s in
numerous basin and stream segments.
While there is strong public support for
the basic goals of clean air and pure
water programs, there is strong concern
regarding the substantial economic and
social costs and institutional changes
necessary to achieve all of the objec-
tives. In addition, knowledgeable pro-
fessionals and technicians recognize
that many of the existing air and water
control regulatory and management
mechanisms are administratively bur-
densome, inefficient, and themselves
the cause of delays in achieving pro-
gram objectives. For example, in enact-
ing the 1970 amendments to the Clean
Air Act, Congress could not have fore-
seen that achieving national air quality
standards for large urban areas would
have to involve major control strategies
limiting the location of industry as well
as the patterns of transportation and
land use, thus affecting the basic urban
structure. Furthermore, they did not
foresee the physical impossibility at the
state level of controlling problems such
as photochemical oxidants resulting
from the transport of pollutants across
multistate regions. Growing evidence
also points to natural topographic and
atmospheric conditions negating at-
tempts to achieve stringent secondary
national standards in many large urban
areas, even with very-restrictive con-
trols on source emissions.


Given this situation, it is necessary to
consider some of the following related
national policy issues:
The extent to which it is feasible
and economically desirable to
achieve air quality standards in all
areas within the next 5 to 10 years.
The development of operational
policies, such as attempted by
EPA in its "trade-off regulations,"
to accommodate industrial activity
and economic development in
urban areas where attaining na-
tional air quality standards may be
a physical impossibility.
The question of equity concerning
the motor-vehicle-related pollution
with respect to costs of controls at
the source-by producing less
polluting types of vehicles-versus
the economic and social impacts
of regulating travel and shifting
transportation patterns and net-
works.
The development of more informa-
tion, understanding, and direction
at the federal level, with strong
participation by states, concerning
the solutions to large-scale pollu-
tion problems requiring interstate
strategies.

After five years of experience with fed-
eral/state implementation of the
FWPCA, there is a need for corrective
actions while maintaining the basic
thrust of the act. In its haste to clean up
the nation's waterways, Congress legis-
lated a well-intentioned program. How-
ever, it mandated target objectives and
complex mechanisms that have the
weaknesses of a "shotgun" attack,
namely, overkill in key respects and
lack of appropriate targeting in others.
As a result, reducing municipal wastes
has evolved into a massive capital in-
vestment program with numerous proj-
ects of questionable cost-effectiveness.
On the other hand, the act did not suffi-
ciently address problems of nonpoint
sources of pollution and the critical
subject of toxic discharges. In general,
priorities need to be set, and flexibility
in the use of regulatory and manage-
ment remedies should be afforded.
Particularly important considerations
from an economic impact perspective


july-august/urban land 77 19


III









$ Impact


Table 3: Summary Evaluation of Economic Implications of Major Water Pollution
Control Issues on Appalachian Study Areas
ELMIRA-
BINGHAMTON AREA CORNING AREA JAMESTOWN AREA NORWICH AREA
Major pollution control Pretreatment BPT & BAT effluent
Maor pollution control Assimilative capacity requirements Assimilative capacity
requirements or conditions of Susquehanna and water mitations nd pre- of Cenango River
causing economic Impacts quality conditions treatment standards of Chenango River
Nature of impacts
* Increased costs of business Moderate Significant
operations for important
sectors of economy.
* Could lead to potential Moderate
plant shut-downs or
relocations.
* Basic detracting factor in Marginal Moderate Marginal Moderate
location of new water using
industry or expansion of
existing ones.
Long-run impact on commu- Marginal Potentially Moderate
nity industrial development significant
Reason for impacts Industrial structure Overall long-term develop- Old industrial com- "Wet industries" im-
has few major water- ment dependent upon non- munity with little portant to economic
using industries. In ad- water quality.locational growth prospects must base and have good
edition, constraints factors. However, "wet keep its existing growth prospects if
will be alleviated by industries" operations and "wet industries" via- water quality problems
upgrading and new facil- growth opportunities will ble to maintain were not present.
ities for municipal be affected, economy base. Growth will therefore
treatment, be of a more moderate
nature.

Source: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, "The Impact of Environmental Legislation on Economic Development in Appala-
chian New York," January 1977.


for New York and other Northeast states
are:

The provision of variances on a
case-by-case basis to industrial
and municipal discharges in meet-
ing the 1977 and 1983 target
effluent limits, where it can be
documented that severe economic
dislocation would result with min-
imal immediate environmental
benefits.
The development of a flexible ap-
proach and a discharge limitation
requirement that moves away from
uniform national discharge criteria
to basin or local options, consis-
tent with maintaining high water
quality standards.
The maintenance of sufficient fed-
eral technical and funding support
to ensure that those sewage treat-
ment facilities being built as a re-
sult of federal capital grants sub-
sidies will operate efficiently and
contribute to important water qual-
ity goals.


The shift to more cost-effective al-
ternatives to the existing municipal
construction program, which gen-
erally has high capital and operat-
ing costs requiring costly and
long-term commitment of re-
sources at the federal, state, and
local levels.
There are many worthwhile tasks that lie
ahead to achieve important air and
water quality goals more efficiently and
equitably. Perhaps a new mechanism
whose time has come concerns the in-
troduction of strong economic incen-
tives rather than more of the traditional
public regulatory approach. Increasing-
ly, beyond the expected support of
academic policy analysts and
economists, the concept of "effluent
charges"-attaching fee payments on
the discharge of air and water residu-
als-is gaining support. Proponents in-
clude top Carter administration offi-
cials.
Given the existing governmental price
tag of over $750 million for administra-
tion of air and water pollution control


and the evidence of their deficiencies,
some few millions spent on pilot efforts
to implement effluent charges or other
"market" economic incentives surely
have potential payoffs.
Another need, quite different from the
above action, yet perhaps key to its
success, concerns the need to tone
down the overall environmental protec-
tion versus economic growth debate.
Business and industry must stop crying
wolf and equating economic "catas-
trophe" with every environmental regu-
lation. At the same time, environmental
advocacy groups need to recognize
that environmental protection goals are
but one among other important social
welfare goals of the nation.


Ronald H. Miller is chief of the Program De-
velopment and Economics section within the
New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation's Resources Program subdivi-
sion. Miller has held other positions within
state government and has also taught en-
vironmental economics at the university
level.


20 urban land/july-august 77











If we are to progress, major changes
must occur in relationships between
public and private sectors and in the
manner in which each views its own
and the other's role and respon-
sibilities. .We have come to realize
that the goals of both sectors are prac-
tically identical. We seek to provide
both the best possible built environ-
ment, and adequate life support sys-
tems to accommodate the built envi-
ronment's needs. And we have come to
perceive that as these public/private
roles are so compatible, so should be
the participants. Equity in the environ-
ment is an idea whose time has
come. We hope to devise some
practical guidelines for an equitable
sharing of the roles and respon-
sibilities.

With these words, outgoing ULI Presi-
dent Thomas F. Murray opened ULI's
spring meeting in Atlanta. This theme of
the public/private interface pervaded
the sessions.
James Rouse, of the Rouse Company,
suggested that developers of regional
shopping centers, in identifying proj-
ects, take their lead from the major de-
partment store chains. This was borne
out by Michael F. Kelly, of Dayton Hud-
son Properties, who stated that the
major retailers all have at least 5-year
expansion programs. He added, how-
ever, that expansion plans can be
turned off in one business quarter. And
in talking about structuring develop-


city's joint development effort in
downtown Cincinnati. Hubbard said
that the give-and-take his firm experi-
enced in working with the city has
given the Hines firm more confidence in
working with cities as partners.
The problems of success were ad-
dressed by Victor Adorian, director of
Small Craft Harbor in Marina del Rey,
California. This well-known, county-
sponsored marina has been returning
$5 million in revenue annually against
the $2 million originally anticipated
and has brought about $165 million in
private investment, compared with the
$23 million the county put into the proj-
ect.
One of the biggest attractions of ULI's
conferences is the ability of developers
to submit to the criticism of their peers.
A session of such criticism started off
the Atlanta meeting. R. Gordon
Mathews described the process of
reevaluation and redesign of the
Panther Valley project, a 1,600-acre
PUD that had design problems and suf-
fered from the recent recession. This
panel discussion covered nearly every
kind of difficulty that a project can get
into, from unforeseen subsoil conditions
(the presence of rock in even the most
buildable areas) to the difficulty of
providing an adequate water supply,
plus engineering problems, entrance
details, the golf course as a very costly
central amenity, and the lack of access
resulting from delayed highway con-


Atlanta Meeting Highlights


ment partnerships, I. Rocke Ransen, of
Mondev International, and James
Rouse both emphasized that city gov-
ernments are becoming more willing to
become equity partners with develop-
ers, particularly in downtown projects.
Two good examples of public/private
partnership were discussed at the
meeting. Kenneth Hubbard, of Gerald
D. Hines Interests in Houston, and Nell
Surber, director of Cincinnati's Depart-
ment of Development, presented a case
study on the Hines company's and the


struction. Also described were present
plans to work out these problems.
In the discussion that followed, perhaps
the most telling comment was one
made by Recreational Development
Council member Emil A. Hanslin, who
stated that a 5-year development plan
is too long for any project under today's
circumstances. The implications of this
view on the feasibility of large-scale
development, even in the best of cir-
cumstances, remains a concern for all
interested in the achievement of better


july-august/urban land 77 21































Hunter A. Hogan, Jr. presents past President pins to Roy P. Drachman, Thomas F. Murray, and


David D. Bohannon.


living environments, represented by
projects like Panther Valley.

Timesharing was the focus of a series
of sessions sponsored by the Recre-
ational Development Council during the
first day of the meeting. Speakers were
drawn from contributors to ULI's special
report on timesharing, to be published
this summer. First, Carl Burlingame,
editor and publisher of Recreational
Development Today, put the timeshar-
ing concept in perspective. At one end
of the spectrum, Burlingame said, we
find the fully developed, fee-simple
single ownership of a second home,
and at the other end we find the lot
sales concept. Timesharing falls be-
tween. Burlingame referred to the tra-
ditional offerings of land sales, shelter
sales (including the condominium in
various forms, as well as houses on
lots, and so forth), and lodging, namely,
resort hotels and motels. He then de-
scribed timesharing not as another form
of real estate but rather as various
techniques for purchasing a prepaid
vacation.

G. Morris Hamm described the suc-
cessful application of the timesharing
concept to a recreational campground.
R. William Ronk described the market-
ing of timesharing. James T. Nighs-
wonger finished off the morning session
by describing the marketing of time-
sharing for hotel-type facilities.

In the afternoon, Jon H. DeHaan dis-
cussed exchange programs as a very


important aspect of timesharing proj-
ects, since this feature maximizes the
prepaid vacation aspect. Stuart Bloch,
one of two editors of the timesharing
book, who was instrumental in pulling
together the 16 authors, presented an
overview of the legal aspects of various
timesharing techniques and an under-
standing of the regulatory problems
and future prospects.
After sitting through these sessions, one
could not help feeling that timesharing
in its various forms-fee ownership,
right to use, club membership-is an
important new concept in recreational
development. Its prospects for the fu-
ture are growing but it likely to undergo
many of the problems of maturing that
the condominium form of ownership has
now passed through. There are many
opportunities for abuse. Since it com-
bines complex ownership, marketing,
and management problems in a single
package, there is a compounded poten-
tial for making mistakes.
Robert H. Dedman's presentation on
the development of a tennis complex
brought this current phenomenon into
good perspective. Dedman started off
by reporting the lack of success of
freestanding tennis complexes,
suggesting the chance of success to be
one in a hundred. He then focused on
tennis as an element within a larger
project which can carry the tennis facil-
ity as a front-end cost, with much of the
capital cost being spread over the
larger development.


Dedman's description of the operations
of country clubs was presented as a
key element in their success. He ex-
pressed an opinion that freestanding
clubs will face stiff competition from
country clubs. He described the Club
Corporation's experience as an organi-
zation owning and operating 63 clubs,
many of which involved acquisition of
projects in which a capital write-off had
to be taken to make the projects
economically feasible.
Next, Dedman compared tennis to golf
and found tennis a much more attrac-
tive economic concept as a recre-
ational facility, but expressed concern
about the limits of the growth market in
tennis, and the likelihood that at some
point the growth will peak. He feels
there will also be competition for the
tennis market from public facilities.
Dedman also discussed the racket-ball
phenomenon and stated that there will
be a substantial growth in this type
of facility, as it can be designed to at-
tract women in a way that its predeces-
sor, handball, cannot.

John W. Schwab provided a view of the
Peachtree World of Tennis. The focus
was on the operational aspects of a
"country club for tennis players" and
the kind of management skills required
for good club management.
On another theme, C. Lincoln Jewett, of
Howard P. Hoffman Associates in New
York, noted that recycling surplus in-
dustrial properties can be profitable to


Past Presidents Hunter Hogan and Roy
Drachman.


22 urban land/july-august 77











both the city and the company involved.
He illustrated how the revitalizing pro-
cess relates not only to the corporation
that owns a property, but also to the de-
velopers, brokers, and city officials.

Jon Q. Reynolds, a developer in the
competitive East Bay area of San Fran-
cisco, discussed his successful build-
ing program as it could relate to "Indus-
trial Development for Almost Any City."
His objective is to provide services for
local business, then attract national us-
ers. Some suggested keys to success:
Industrial development does not
have to be ugly or dirty. Do some-
thing worthwhile. Use an architect
and be modern in concept.
Know your market-anticipate
changes, and pre-think trends.
Know what you are doing and do
what you say.
Build to the top of the market-
have the best facilities available.
Do it once and do it right. Spend a
little extra money during the initial
investment.
Development is a local business.
Operating in a proven market
leads to repeat business.
Keep it simple.
When you learn a concept, learn it
well. Then modify, add to, expand,
improve.
Develop uniqueness.
The job has to be fun. Like what
you do.
Big or small, concepts are the
same.
The project has got to be profit-
able.
Watch the store. Don't lose contact
with your business.
Residential Council member William F.
Caldwell, from Williamsville, New York,
stated that banks are becoming much
more sophisticated in their operations.
The information that they now require
from a residential developer includes
accurate pro forma statements, cash
flow projections, renter projections,
market substantiation, and some indica-
tion of the expected sales pace.


Caldwell offered three rules of thumb
for developers in their negotiations with


Outgoing ULU President Thomas Murray with new ULI officers: Harold S. Jensen, Chicago, Presi-
dent; Arlene Bennett; Marshall Bennett, Chicago, First Vice President; and I. Rocke Ransen,
Montreal, Second Vice President.


lenders: One, decrease your liability.
Two, negotiate loans aggressively and
get the lender to be flexible. Three, do
your homework early and be patient.
Developer and Residential Council
member George S. Writer, Jr., showed
some slides of a number of his projects
in the Denver area: The Dam, The Dam
East, Willow Creek clusters, Willow
Creek single family, and The Village.
He suggested that although business
has been quite good, many times his
housing is sold for the wrong reasons.
What he means by this is that typically
when building a project, his company
had determined a specific market.
Upon sampling subsequent pur-
chasers, the company finds it has sold
its units to a different class, age, and
lifestyle group. For example, in the
Willow Creek clusters which generally
feature three-bedroom cluster housing,
67 percent of his buyers had no chil-
dren and 21 percent had children be-
tween 13 and 22. In addition, many of
his buyers are not in the age groups
expected. In the Willow Creek single-
family project, for example, 63 percent
of the buyers were 35 years of age or
younger.


Among the tidbits of information that
Writer passed out were that his
company:
Keeps to a specific price and
class range.
Spends more money on active
recreation and less on passive
recreation.
Generally builds around large
trees at all costs, given the market
in Denver and the semi-arid cli-
mate which produces only a
5-month growing season.
Does not consider townhouses to
be dead but believes that de-
velopers must achieve a better
execution of the townhouse
design.


Contributors to this summary included W.
Paul O'Mara, Senior Publications Associate
and editor of Urban Land; Jerry S. Church,
Director, Membership Services Division;
Robert L. Helms, Director, Administrative
Division; Frank H. Spink, Jr., Director, Publi-
cations Division; and Carla S. Crane, Direc-
tor, Program Division.


july-august/urban land 77 23









LEGAL nOTES...


Frank Schnidman ULI Research Counsel


Grandmother's Conviction Reversed:
Supreme Court Reviews Another
Ohio Zoning Case
On May 31, 1977, the U.S. Supreme
Court handed down its twelfth zoning
case-Moore v. City of East Cleveland,
Ohio (75-6289)-the third Ohio-based
case before the Court in less than a
year, and a case from the same met-
ropolitan area as the first zoning case
before the Supreme Court 51 years ago.
Whereas previous Ohio cases con-
cerned the constitutionality of zoning it-
self, the validity of using a referendum
on a rezoning, and the discriminatory
effect of rezoning decisions, Moore
deals with the definition of single family
as it relates to who can live together in
single-family neighborhoods.
The Supreme Court had broken its 46
years of silence on zoning in 1974
when it decided Village of Belle Terre
v. Borass (416 U.S. 1), a case which in-
volved a zoning ordinance of the Vil-
lage of Belle Terre, New York, which
defined the word family. In essence,
this definition restricted a family to a
household of blood relatives plus not
more than two unrelated people. Six un-
related college students were living to-
gether in a house in a single-family
dwelling district. The owner of the
house, who was cited for a violation,
challenged the constitutionality of the
ordinance. The Supreme Court upheld
the ordinance, finding that no funda-
mental right guaranteed by the Con-
stitution, including right to privacy or
right of association, was violated, and
that the village was validly exercising
its police power regulatory authority.

The city of East Cleveland had a similar
ordinance, except that its definition of
family was more restrictive. Section
1341.08 of East Cleveland's zoning
ordinance contains the following
definition:
"Family" means a number of individuals
related to the nominal head of the house-
hold or to the spouse of the nominal head


of the household living as a single house-
keeping unit in a single dwelling unit, but
limited to the following:
(a) Husband or wife of the nominal head
of the household.
(b) Unmarried children of the nominal
head of the household or of the
spouse of the nominal head of the
household, provided, however, that
such unmarried children have no
children residing with them.
(c) Father or mother of the nominal head
of the household or of the spouse of
the nominal head of the household.
(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of
subsection (b) hereof, a family may
include not more than one dependent
married or unmarried child of the
nominal head of the household or of
the spouse of the nominal head of the
household and the spouse and de-
pendent children of such dependent
child. For the purpose of this subsec-
tion, a dependent person is one who
has more than fifty percent of his total
support furnished for him by the nom-
inal head of the household and the
spouse of the nominal head of the
household.
(e) A family may consist of one in-
dividual.
Mrs. Inez Moore resides in East Cleve-
land together with one son, Dale Moore,
Sr., and his son, Dale, Jr., plus John
Moore, Jr., child of Mrs. Moore's other
son. The two boys, both Mrs. Moore's
grandchildren, are first cousins rather
than brothers, therefore violating Sec-
tion 1341.08 of the ordinance. In early
1973 Mrs. Moore received a notice of
violation from the city, stating that her
grandson John was an "illegal occu-
pant" and directing her to comply with
the ordinance. When she failed to re-
move John from her home, the city filed
a criminal charge. Mrs. Moore sought to
have the charge dismissed, claiming
that the ordinance was constitutionally
invalid on its face. She was unsuccess-
ful, and upon conviction she was sen-
tenced to 5 days in jail and a $25 fine.
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed
after giving full consideration to her
constitutional claims, and the Ohio Su-
preme Court denied review.


The U.S. Supreme Court heard argu-
ment on November 2, 1976. Six months
later, by a 5-to-4 decision, the Court
held in favor of Mrs. Moore, in that the
ordinance deprived her of liberty in vio-
lation of the due process clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment. In reviewing
the opinion it should be noted that the
justices authored six separate deci-
sions:

Justice Powell, joined by Justices
Brennan, Marshall, and Blackman.
The majority decision, distinguish-
ing Belle Terre as affecting only
unrelated individuals, found a
case history of strong constitu-
tional protection of the sanctity of
the family, and a national history
and tradition compelling a larger
conception of the family.
Justice Brennan, joined by Justice
Marshall. A concurring opinion,
written to highlight what it consid-
ered an "eccentric way" of protect-
ing single-family neighborhoods,
and a "depressing insensitivity to-
ward the economic and emotional
needs of a very large part of our
society."
Justice Stevens. A concurring
opinion, holding that the ordinance
constitutes a taking of property
without due process and without
just compensation, because it re-
stricts the owner's right to decide
who may reside with her, and that
the ordinance is therefore invalid.
Chief Justice Burger. A dissenting
opinion, citing the caseload bur-
den on the federal courts and hold-
ing that there was a "plainly ade-
quate administrative remedy" of a
variance which Mrs. Moore did not
seek, and such being the case,
should be precluded from Su-
preme Court review. "We ought not
encourage litigants to bypass
simple, inexpensive and expediti-
ous remedies available at their
doorstep in order to invoke expen-
sive judicial machinery on matters


24 urban land/july-august 77










capable of being resolved at local
levels."
* Justice Stewart, joined by Justice
Rehnquist. A dissenting opinion,
holding that the Belle Terre case
governs, and that "to suggest that
the biological fact of common an-
cestry necessarily gives related
persons constitutional rights of as-
sociation superior to those of unre-
lated persons is to misunderstand
the nature of the associational
freedoms that the Constitution has
been understood to protect."
* Justice White. A dissenting opin-
ion, finding that the due process


clause does not enable the Court
to strike down merely unreason-
able or arbitrary legislation, and
that there being no procedural
issue at stake, the Court should be
quite concerned about how far it
will expand the use of substantive
due process.
Over the years this case will be cause
for much commentary by legal schol-
ars. The Supreme Court in the past has
relied heavily on the presumption of
legislative validity of local government
zoning actions, going so far as to state
that reasonableness, not wisdom, gov-
erns. Moore is an example of a case


going beyond the presumption and ex-
amining the effect of the governmental
zoning action.
Is this the beginning of a trend? Two
points would say no. First, the decision
was 5-4, so that only one justice would
need to change his decision. Second,
the Court may not have many, if any,
zoning cases before it for quite a while.
In the interim, the state courts will con-
tinue to hand down zoning decisions
which examine both the intent and ef-
fect of local ordinances. They now have
a brand new Supreme Court decision to
cite as support in their heightened
scrutiny.


LAID USE ABSTRACTS...


Libby Howland Research Assistant/Library


Gibbons, Boyd
S WYE ISLAND
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1977
227 pp. $10.95.
Informal analysis of a land develop-
ment controversy through a recording
of local people's thoughts, emotions,
and behavior. The locale is an unde-
veloped 2,800-acre island on Mary-
land's eastern shore, where the luxuri-
ous homes of retirees and weekenders
mingle with dilapidated farmhouses
and laborers' shacks. The reason for
the battle is Jim Rouse's proposal to
make Wye Island into an open space,
waterfront village. Rouse grew up in
these surroundings and he loves the
area. His reason for the Wye Island
project was "to demonstrate how sen-
sitive shoreline development could
protect the environment and still ac-
commodate the growing numbers of
families flowing across the bay bridge
in search of a place in the country."
But few county residents trusted
Rouse's carefully and scientifically
formulated plan; most were emotion-
ally opposed to development of any
sort. Gibbons criss-crossed the area,
talking to oystermen, farmers, and the


rich, recording the shore's stiffening
attitude against growth. At a county
commissioners' zoning hearing the in-
siders' antipathy to outsiders was
voiced: "Y'know if we require
developers to cluster their houses and
leave a lot of open space, it will only
attract a lot of outsiders over here to
live on the Shore-better we stick to
our ordinary subdivision grids and
discourage people from moving over
here." After many months the county
commissioners still gave no sign that
they would amend Wye Island's
5-acre zoning, and the economy was
squeezing the Rouse Company. It fi-
nally abandoned its Wye Island plans.
In this account, which combines his-
tory, personal observation, and lively
descriptions of the shore's inhabitants
and lifestyles, Gibbons examines the
motivations that gave rise to this par-
ticular anti-growth fight: "To protect
the environment? There is much of
that, particularly the esthetic one. Fear
of higher taxes? That also. But there is
more to this discontent than concern,
real or imagined, over potential
ecological abuse and higher taxes. It
is the resistance to change brought on
by new people moving-or threaten-


ing to move-in. The desire of people
to exclude others is what fueled the
opposition to the Rouse project ..,
and it is what much of the fight over
growth is about throughout this country."

Allan, Leslie; Kuder, Beryl; and
Oakes, Sarah L.
PROMISED LANDS, Volume 2:
SUBDIVISIONS IN FLORIDA'S
WETLANDS
New York: INFORM, Inc., 1977
542 pp. Illustrated, glossary. $20.00.
The second in a three-volume series
indicting the operations of the land-
sales industry. (See Urban Land,
March 1977, p. 16, for a description of
Volume 1.) Uncontrolled development
of the once-celebrated, unique tropi-
cal wetlands of Florida has produced
ambiguous rewards for residents and
newcomers. This volume presents
findings on nine subdivisions, all
claimed by their marketers to be "new
communities." Five development
companies are involved. Among the
conclusions are that (1) environmental
planning has improved over time, the
most recently begun subdivisions hav-
ing been relatively well planned; and
(2) none of the subdivisions followed


july-august/urban land 77 25


-- ~- 11











"good" consumer protection prac-
tices, while two were rated "fair" by
virtue of providing relatively complete
basic services to lot buyers. The
smallest of the nine subdivisions is 16
square miles with a projected popula-
tion of from 12,000 to 16,000, and the
largest is 185 square miles with a
projected population of 600,000. In
contrast to the sparsely settled south-
west covered in Volume 1, the impact
of poor development practices goes
well beyond the subdivisions' borders
in Florida. Since most of the subject
developments were started, the ability
to perform sound environmental plan-
ning has vastly increased, along with
the apparent need for this, yet only
one of the subdividers "appeared to
show any consistent tendencies to-
ward adapting to changing environ-
mental knowledge." Each subdivision
is scrutinized separately in this report,
and an appendix offers general
guidelines for consumer and environ-
mental protection practices at large-
scale subdivisions.

Moskowitz, David H.
EXCLUSIONARY ZONING
LITIGATION
Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing
Company, 1977
399 pp. Bibliography, index. $17.50.
Outlines a general strategy for the ju-
dicial redress of exclusionary zoning,
a strategy derived from an analysis of
zoning litigation that has recently
been brought before the federal courts
and the state supreme courts of
Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Mos-
kowitz argues that exclusionary zon-
ing litigation has concentrated too
much on housing projects rather than
on future residents, on specific sites
rather than on exclusionary patterns,
and on local rather than on regional
interests. The book begins with a dis-
cussion of the divergence between
zoning theory and zoning practice-
"myths in the world of zoning law."
The parties involved in a typical sub-
urban land use conflict are then
enumerated, with the argument being
made for granting standing to future
residents, either by themselves or in
alliance with developers. The choice
of forum-federal or state-is ex-
plored. And next, the choice of legal


theory-due process, equal protec-
tion, other constitutional and statutory
rights, and the right to travel-is con-
sidered. Separate chapters are de-
voted to exclusionary zoning issues in
the Pennsylvania courts (their deci-
sions "are cited more frequently than
those from any other state or federal
forum"), and the New Jersey courts
("the most progressive state in the na-
tion in analyzing the issues raised by
exclusionary zoning ordinances"). The
choice of appropriate relief, determin-
ing fair share, and regional housing
allocation plans conclude this discus-
sion of how the proponent of
nonexclusionary housing "should load
his gun" for litigation.

Popenoe, David
THE SUBURBAN ENVIRONMENT:
SWEDEN AND THE UNITED STATES
Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press, 1977
275 pp, illustrated, index. $19.00.
Comparison of the Swedish and
American suburban experience and
the sociological consequences of dif-
ferent residential environments. Post-
war housing shortages of similar
magnitudes in both nations spawned
suburban growth. In the United States,
the private homebuilding industry
(aided by federal financial subsidies)
produced low density, automobile-
oriented suburbs that were "a world
apart from the city." In Sweden, direct
national and local government in-
volvement produced high-density,
relatively self-contained, public
transportation-oriented suburbs which
were a true extension of the city.
These virtually opposite residential
environments came to be inhabited by
people who were quite similar in
major sociological respects (class,
employment, family size). This study
focuses on two "typical" suburbs-
VIllingby, outside Stockholm, and
Levittown, outside Philadelphia. It de-
scribes in detail the physical and de-
mographic characteristics of these
two communities. "No single residen-
tial environment can work well for all
types of people; the range of human
needs and interests is far too great.
Yet Vallingby provides a close en-
vironmental fit for a, surprisingly wide
range of individuals and families"-


young families, older families, empty
nesters, singles, young couples with-
out children, pensioners. It is
heterogenous, with an urban flavor
most U.S. suburbs lack, yet with a
natural environment that produces an
almost rural feeling. Levittown, on the
other hand, works well for self-
sufficient families, but provides little
sustenance or support to the family
which is not self-sufficient. Popenoe
concludes with a discussion of policy
implications for urban housing and
development, finding the Vallingby
model worthy of emulation.

Portman, John, and Barnett, Jonathan
THE ARCHITECT AS DEVELOPER
New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company, 1976
198 pp. Illustrated, index. $22.95.
Three essays on the possibilities and
need for creating a working relation-
ship between the art of architecture
and the practical necessities of real
estate development. In Why John
Portman Became an Entrepreneur as
Well as an Architect, Barnett notes
that "the architectural profession, for
all its theories and aspirations, has
had only a marginal influence on our
everyday surroundings, which are
formed by the real estate market,
operating in a context of government
regulation and public works construc-
tion." Architect John Portman decided
to become a project developer as
well. As a designer he sees pos-
sibilities in situations that conven-
tional investors deem unpromising,
and as an entrepreneur he has dem-
onstrated that there are practical,
commercial returns from creating the
large and splendid spaces that are
normally only considered for heavily
subsidized, image-promoting
buildings. The Portman method is de-
scribed, with profusely illustrated
examples from many of his projects.
In An Architecture for People and Not
for Things, Portman defines his con-
ception of architecture and the
architect's role in society. If architects
understand growth patterns, market
conditions, and feasibility, they will be
able to design the city and not just the
individual building, to coordinate the
physical environment. In How Ar-
chitecture Improves Real Estate-And


26 urban land/july-august 77











' the Other Way Around, Barnett points
out the implications for the design
process in each of Portman's seven
aspects of real estate development:
(1) urban structure and growth pat-
terns; (2) marketability; (3) economic
feasibility; (4) total development cost;
(5) projection of income and ex-
penses; (6) financing; and (7) man-
agement. "The purpose of this book is
to explain the basic principles of
Portman's designs and the proce-
dures needed to implement them." It
is a this-is-how-Portman-does-it book,
and Portman says "it is not all that
difficult."

Godschalk, David R. et al.
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES OF
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Chicago: The ASPO Press, 1977
295 pp. Bibliography, glossary.
$17.95-list; $15.95-ASPO members.
An attempt to combine legal knowl-
edge and planning knowledge "so as
to point the way toward local growth
management practice that would be
both socially responsible and con-
stitutionally defensible." A discussion
of basic constitutional challenges to
growth management practices which
includes chapters on due process,
taking, regional general welfare,
equal protection, the right to travel,
and environmental protection. A sec-
tion is devoted to illustrative growth
management programs-cases drawn
from actual practice and simplified to
highlight the constitutional issues.
These cases include urban fringe
growth management by a medium-
sized city, coordination of the de-
velopment of suburban townships by
a county within a large metropolitan
area, preparation of a growth man-
agement plan by a small city on a
fragile barrier island, and regional
growth guidance by a council of gov-
ernments. The book concludes with a
discussion of current policy issues,
the relationship of constitutional ques-
tions to the management of growth
rates, types of growth, the location of
growth, and the quality of growth. The
authors assess the potential evolution
of growth management over the next
10 years. This study "demonstrates
that growth management can be a so-
cially constructive policy instrument if


it attempts to affirm the positive spirit
of the constitution. On the other hand,
it is possible for localities to try to use
growth management as a guise for
denying constitutional protections and
undercutting the rights of affected par-
ties." A responsible planning and
management process leading to a
growth management program that is
affirmative, environmentally sound,
and fiscally valid depends on a solid
understanding of the constitutional is-
sues likely to arise.

Untermann, Richard, and Small,
Robert
SITE PLANNING FOR CLUSTER
HOUSING
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, 1977
306 pp. Illustrated, index. $22.50.
Applies "current theory and informa-
tion on cluster housing, human needs
in housing, and site planning to an
action-oriented format intended to aid
professionals in designing and im-
plementing housing developments at
any scale." Low rise, medium density
cluster environments are emphasized,
along with the goals of reasonable
cost, amenity preservation, open
space conservation, efficient opera-
tion, and personal privacy, identity,
safety, and accessibility. There are
two sections, small sites and large
sites. The site planning process,
specific site analysis, house analysis
and concept development, site sys-
tems (open space, housing, and circu-
lation), site concept development, and
cluster concept development are cov-
ered. In the small site section, the au-
thors deal with housing located on
small land parcels within built-up
areas that have existing
infrastructure-areas for which it is
relatively easy to develop site use
concepts. On large parcels of land in
less developed areas there are few
manmade site determinants on which
to rationalize design decisions. Good
site organization must be guided by
the natural environment and by visual,
functional, and user need factors. Re-
ducing costs, zoning, and ownership
regulations are considered a part of
the implementation process. Over 600
drawings and photographs illustrate
the cluster design concept.


Land Use

Litigation

Course of Study

Offered


The second ALI-ABA course of study
on Land Use Litigation: Critical Is-
sues for Attorneys, Developers, and
Public Officials will be offered Oclober
20-22. 1977 at the Crown Center Hotel
in Kansas City Missouri The course
is cosponsored by the Urban Land
Institute.
The purpose of Ihis second course of
sludy is to provide practitioners wilh an
update of the major areas of court in-
volvement in land development and its
regulation Litigation strategy and tech-
nique will be discussed from the point
of view of attorneys representing de-
velopers. consumers, and various gov-
ernment agencies concerned with land
use planning Procedures at the local
level vested rights wetlands, shore-
lands environmental impact
statements growth management, ex-
clusionary zoning use of the com-
prehensive plan down-zoning, popula-
tion capping moratoria, and other top-
ics will be analyzed
Registrants for the course ol study will
receive a book of specially prepared
study outlines and related materials
The registration lee is $265 00, which
includes a set of study materials, and
admission to all sessions the recep-
tion, and three luncheons
For further information write Donald M
Maclay. Director. Courses of Study.
ALI-ABA. 4025 Chestnut Street.
Philadelphia. PA 19104 or telephone
215 387-3000


july-august/urban land 77 27


~ __








LETTERS...


Editor:
In the January 1977 Urban Land,
Jerry Trimble, Director of the
Pasadena Redevelopment Agency,
wrote glowingly of a proposed new
three-block, enclosed, air con-
ditioned, retail shopping mall to be
interposed in the Pasadena civic cen-
ter between the public library and the
civic auditorium, an axis designed in
the late 1920s to remain forever open.
My own economic analysis is quite
different.

The Agency has offered to buy the
necessary 15 acres, relocate the 166
businesses, demolish the buildings,
and construct an underground and
two surface parking structures at a
total cost of $52 million, over $40,000
per parking space if interest is in-
cluded. (All the cost and revenue fig-
ures I cite are taken from Pasadena
Redevelopment Agency, Downtown
Redevelopment Project, 1976 Tax Al-
location Bonds, Series A, November
16, 1976.) It will then lease the air
rights to a private developer who will
invest $42 million in a structure de-
signed to house Penney's, the Broad-
way, the May Company, and assorted
smaller stores.

Penney's and the Broadway are al-
ready in Pasadena, but their sales
have been declining, partly because
their facilities are old and are located
where parking is inadequate, and
partly because the market is now also
served by newer stores such as Sears
and Fedco in Pasadena and shopping
malls in contiguous cities. Pasadena
is less a regional shopping center
than it was in the 1950s, a change
which was inevitable and cannot now
be altogether reversed. Within
Pasadena itself, the market declined
in the late 1960s when several
thousand families were displaced by
freeways. The population of Pasadena
today is about 115,000.


Unlike other commercial redevelop-
ment projects, the proposed retail
center will not pay for itself. The
Agency optimistically projects that
new property and sales taxes gener-
ated by the center between 1978 and
1999, the lifetime of the bonds sold to
finance the parking structures, will
amount to $54 million. During the
same period, however, the Agency
will pay out $52 million in principal
and $71 million, more or less, in
interest. The present value of antici-
pated future tax revenue discounted at
71/2 percent is only $24 million. In
short, the Agency will borrow at 71/2
percent to.finance a return of 4 per-
cent.

Repayment of retail center bonds will
use all the tax increment after 1970
from sound redevelopment projects in
the entire 340-acre downtown rede-
velopment area (e.g., BankAmericard
and Parsons), strictly private projects
such as the Hilton Hotel and the Tele-
phone Building (both built before
there was a downtown redevelopment
project), and inflationary gains in
property values. The Agency projects
a total tax increment from the
downtown redevelopment area by
1999 of $77 million if the retail center
is not built. After 1980, 83 percent of
this would be shared roughly 40-60 by
Los Angeles County and the
Pasadena School System. The rest
would go to the city of Pasadena. If
the retail center is built, these funds
will be needed to pay off the retail
center bonds. Thus, county and
school district (as well as city) tax-
payers will be heavily subsidizing the
developer and his tenants.
Part of the sales of the retail center
will be diverted from stores located
elsewhere in Pasadena. With a stable
population and slowly rising real per
capital income in the Pasadena area,
there is no way that new stores can be
profitable except by taking sales away


from some existing stores. Thus, the
retail center will have the effect of
causing deterioration elsewhere in
Pasadena.
But these and aesthetic concerns are
waved away by Agency planners and
their cadre of downtown business
supporters. Proposals for less expen-
sive, lower density, aesthetically more
pleasing improvements are ignored.
Last fall over 5,000 people-10 per-
cent of the registered voters of
Pasadena-signed petitions request-
ing a referendum on the retail center.
This was over 35 percent of the
people who actually vote in city elec-
tions. But a bare majority of the
Pasadena city council decided to
change the method of financing the
center from lease-revenue bonds, sub-
ject to referendum, to tax allocation
bonds, which can be issued at the
sole discretion of the Redevelopment
Agency.
Since then, there has been a sort of
blackout of public information. Many
citizens still believe that the retail cen-
ter will produce tax revenue in excess
of bond payment commitments. Pro-
ponents argue that downtown im-
provement requires an enclosed mall
because of "multiplier effects" never
overtly stated, analyzed, or compared
with those available from alternative
projects. They rely heavily on a
7-year-old proposal by an architec-
tural planner paid for in large part by
downtown business interests. The im-
plications of his proposal for the entire
city have never been analyzed.

In October, the Agency rushed ahead
to sell bonds and to begin acquiring
property before an announced citi-
zen's law suit could be filed. (This
precipitous move will cost taxpayers
over a million dollars in higher interest
charges, for interest rates declined
shortly thereafter.) The law suit, now
before the court, argues that an en-


28 urban land/july-august 77











vironmental impact report is now re-
quired, in part because the Agency
proposes an expenditure twice that
specified in an earlier environmental
impact report in which the retail cen-
ter (15 acres) is discussed as part of
the (340-acre) downtown redevelop-
ment area. Who knows what the court
may find?


Many citizens feel that the Pasadena
Redevelopment Agency has ceased
to serve the people. The redevelop-
ment process is being used to further
the ambitions of a small group who
identify the welfare of the city with
their own. It is not unusual for local
government to behave in such a way.
But it is unfortunate that the rede-


velopment process has been so sub-
verted, for, as people become cynical
about redevelopment, they will op-
pose it even when it is warranted.

Robert W. Oliver
Professor of Economics
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, California


Did You Know That...


ULI members strive to establish sound
land use practices by sharing their ex-
pertise with others. This premise is the
basis for the development of ULI's
Panel Service Program.

Over the past 30 years, city planning
O commissions, chambers of commerce,
redevelopment authorities, private de-
velopers, and public agencies have
asked ULI to help them solve complex
land use problems. By identifying op-
portunities, applying innovative ideas,
and recognizing pitfalls, ULI's members
can help local sponsors create viable
solutions to difficult land use and de-
velopment problems.

ULI's experts are drawn from the volun-
tary leadership of the Institute's six
Councils: Commercial and Office De-
velopment, Industrial, New Com-
munities, Recreational Development,
Residential, and Urban Redevelop-
ment. These Council members donate
their time to serve on a panel.

The sponsor of a ULI panel prepares
the necessary background information
and data relating to the assignment so
that when the panel members arrive on
site, each has a basic understanding of
the problem to be analyzed and evalu-
ated. Within five days, the panel must
arrive at workable solutions, outline op-
* portunities for the use, reuse, and de-
velopment of land, and recommend
economically feasible implementation


programs. On the fifth and final day of
the on-site investigation, the panel or-
ally presents its findings and recom-
mendations to the sponsors.
Panel assignments may include any
facet of development or redevelopment.
In 1972, ULI conducted a panel in
Beaumont, Texas. The sponsors report
that within 5 years, all of the panel's
recommendations have been im-
plemented, which has resulted in revi-
talizing half of the city's central busi-
ness district. Previous panels have in-
cluded planning and developing for
residential, office, retail, industrial, cul-
tural, recreational, or entertainment
uses; and marketing, financing, zoning,
land assembly, circulation and trans-
portation studies.
ULI recently conducted a survey on the
effectiveness of its Panel Service Pro-
gram. Here Is what a few of the spon-
sors reported:

Barry Humphries, formerly Vice Presi-
dent of Central City Development Cor-
poration, Beaumont, Texas: "In my opin-
ion the ULI Panel Service is excellent,
and Beaumont, Texas is one of its best
success stories. We could not have
asked for better results."

Evan Zieger, Vice President for Finan-
cial Affairs, Samford University, Bir-
mingham, Alabama: "The great wealth
of information which the panel put to-
gether 'under one cover' has been of


inestimable value. The University fol-
lowed through on the panel's recom-
mendation to employ a development
consultant, and he has used the panel's
report on a daily basis in performing his
work."
lan S. Munce, Executive Director,
Skagit County Development Associa-
tion, Burlington, Washington: "The
panel members pulled no punches.
They pointed out that most of our weak-
ness and lack of growth resulted from a
definite lack of necessary cooperation
and coordination between organiza-
tions. The specific recommendations of
the panel have been embodied in our
overall economic development
programs."
John W. Galbreath, John W. Galbreath
& Company, Columbus, Ohio: "We have
used them [ULI panels] on one or two
other occasions for our projects, and
they were equally well received. If we
need this program in the future, I will
always look to ULI for its advice."
ULI is committed to efficient and effec-
tive land use practices; any problem re-
lated to land and its usage can be
evaluated and analyzed by our panels
of experts. Panels are generally charac-
terized by a straightforward, impartial
approach which becomes a catalyst for
unified, effective action. Each panel as-
signment is a look-over-the-shoulder by
experienced professionals whose busi-
ness is to make things happen.
For more information about ULI's Panel
Service Program, call or write Jerry S.
Church, Director of Membership Ser-
vices, ULI-the Urban Land Institute,
1200 18th Street, N.W., Washington,
D.C. 20036. 202/331-8500.


july-august/urban land 77 29


i ~ ~~ I_ ~I_ ~I~ I







If you live here
If you plan to visit here
If you do business here
or
If you know someone who does

Saql

Francisco


Minneapolis

How About a ULI Project Brochure?
ULI Project Brochures are your personal guide to key develop-
ment projects in seven major cities.
Prepared for ULI meeting attendees, Project Brochures contain
background information on projects of interest in the meeting
site area.
Industrial, commercial and office, new communities, residential,
urban redevelopment, and recreational development projects
are all included.
Each brochure contains a description of the project, cost, time-
table for development, and names of key members on the de-
velopment team. Extensively illustrated with photographs and
maps.


That is a lot of information for $5.00!
Quantities are Limited. Orders Will Be Filled on a First-Come,
First-Served Basis.


City
Minneapolis, Spring 1973
San Francisco, Fall 1973
Kansas City, Fall 1974
Los Angeles, Fall 1975
Washington, Spring 1976
Palm Beach, Fall 1976
Atlanta, Spring 1977


Pages
140
279
153
165
217
188
240


Projects
Included
48
95
52
53
48
40
68


Price
$5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
*Y


City
Minneapolis, Spring 1973
San Francisco, Fall 1973
Kansas City, Fall 1974
Los Angeles, Fall 1975
Washington, Spring 1976
Palm Beach, Fall 1976
Atlanta, Spring 1977


Price


SHIP TO:


Name


Company


Street


Total Order $_


District of Columbia residents add 5% sales tax.
0 I am a member of ULI.
o I am not a member of ULI.
O Payment enclosed $
O Bill me (orders over $10 only).


State


O Ship 1st class, bill for extra postage and handling (regular
4th class takes 4-6 weeks delivery).
Please Note: Orders under $10 must be accompanied by payment. Otherwise such orders will be returned to sender. Canadian
Mexican, and foreign residents add 10 percent to cover additional postage and handling.


,3
o


a

r



s
cJ

s~


ORDER FORM


Quantity


jh
~s~-"- C3~

'... f3

ten

O S





















Hear


it again


Audio cassettes of over 20 sessions of the 1977 ULI Spring
Meeting in Atlanta are available to those who were unable to at-
tend, or for meeting attendees who want to listen again to the
speeches. These cassettes, recorded live throughout the entire
meeting, are available at $6.00 each, plus a one-time charge of
$1.25 for postage and handling. To order, simply send in the


Cassette
Code
Number Session


appropriate code number for the cassette(s) you want, along
with a check or money order for the total amount made payable
to Bauer Audio Video, Inc., 31 Peachtree Place, N.E., Atlanta,
Georgia, 30309 (404/881-0000). Payment must accompany or-
der. Cassettes can only be ordered from Bauer Audio Video,
Inc., not from the Urban Land Institute.


Cassette
Code
Number Session


ULI-1 "Mistakes Made and Lessons Learned"; The
Headache: Panther Valley, Allamuchy, New Jersey;
The Patient: R. Gordon Mathews; Diagnosticians: R. T.
Crow, Emil A. Hanslin, Arnold M. Kronstadt, Richard
W. Miller, Gillis G. Pratt, Jr.
ULI-2 "How to Make the Deals"; Panelists: C. M. Ballard, Jr.,
R. J. Boyle, J. S. Dailey, A. C. Kemper, B. McCoy, T. F.
Murray, M. G. Smith, Jr., T. G. Cousins, G. D. Hines,
H. A. Hogan, Jr., H. S. Jensen, E. Johnson, K. Kelley,
M. F. Kelly, I. R. Ransen, J. W. Rouse.
ULI-3 "Directions in Resort and Second Home
Development/Time Sharing"; Carl Burlingame, G. Mor-
ris Hamm, William Ronk.
ULI-4 "The Omni-Putting the Package Together: The Com-
plex, the Components, the Catalyst, the Process";
Thomas W. Ventulett, Jr.
ULI-5 "A New Twist to the Public/Private Partnership";
George M. Brady, Jr., Arnold M. Kronstadt, Joseph E.
Vitt.
ULI-6 "Long-Term Lease Capitalization and Other Items Af-
fecting the Corporate Owner and Developer"; Robert
M. Hermance, Thomas C. Perkins, Marvin Kenigsberg.
ULI-7 "New Products/Directions in Resort and Second Home
Development/Legal Aspects: Exchange Programs-
The Vital Extra Dimension"; Jon DeHaan.
ULI-8 "New Products/Directions in Resort and Second Home
Development/Legal Aspects of Time Sharing"; James
T. Nighswonger, Stuart Marshall Bloch.
ULI-9 "Finance Breakfast-The Capital Outlook from Several
Perspectives/Capital Sources Overview"; Andrew F.
Brimmer.
ULI-10 "Public/Private Joint Ventures: What Makes Them
Work on the Local Level?"; Kenneth Hubbard, Nell D.
Surber, Eugene B. Jacobs, Melvin Mister, I. Rocke
Ransen, Nicholas V. Trkla.


ULI-11 "Recycling Industrial Properties. Or Making Silk
Purses from Sows' Ears"; C. Lincoln Jewett, Donald C.
Kunian, Alexis P. Victors.
ULI-12 "The ABCs of Developing a Tennis Complex: Market-
ing, Planning, Financial Aspects"; Robert H. Dedman.
ULI-13 "The Planning and Other Challenges of an Energy-
Impacted New Community: Wright, Wyoming"; Robert
E. Huff, E. C. Kobs, Jr., John B. Turner, Jr.
ULI-14 "A Case Study of the Development of a Residential
Project: Part I"; Dean Morrison, Paul O. Reimer.
ULI-15 "Case History of an Equitable Sharing of the Public/
Private Roles: Marina Del Rey, Los Angeles County,
Calif."; Victor Adorian, Lawrence M. Cox, Bruce P.
Hayden, Barry K. Humphries, Joseph Straus, Jr.
ULI-16 "Industrial Development for Almost Any City"; Jon Q.
Reynolds, Robert A. Alleborn.
ULI-17 "Operations Aspects of Peachtree World of Tennis: A
Country Club for Tennis Players"; John W. Schwab.
ULI-18 "A Case Study of the Development of a Residential
Project: Part II"; William F. Caldwell, George S. Writer,
Jr.
ULI-19 "A New Community Grows Up: A Perspective on Co-
lumbia on the Eve of Its 10th Birthday"; James W.
Rouse.
ULI-20 "Shopping/Commercial Theme Centers: Changing
Views and Combinations: Old Chicagotown,
Bolingbrook, Illinois"; Harold S. Jensen, Michael C.
Clark, James McCarthy, Angus G. Wynne, Jr.
ULI-21 "What the EPA 208 Regs Will Mean to the Developer";
Walter Grosyk, Ronald L. Campbell, Allan L. Farkas,
Paul O. Reimer, James Sharp.
ULI-22 "Continued Development in an Atmosphere of Growth
Management: The Legal Approaches (Or How to Get
Your Project Built)"; John T. Hazel, John F. McAlevey,
Robert T. Anderson, Norman A. Cortese, Adam
Krivatsy.


july-august/urban land 77 31


_ _1 I_ __ ___ _~




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs