A METHOD FOR DETERMINING-"THE; use — y "POTENTIAL OF LAND." Thesis For fihoiDggm O! 'M. U. P. mam 5mm UNIVERSITY ~ "Richard A: Maifby? 1965' """flfl'lTi‘JEfEWLWE'LWJIWu L W. I “I 1. “9&5; AW 1’ r. I r‘ f b . ,1 ‘s3 “'51?“ :5. five ABSTRACT A METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE USE POTENTIAL OF LAND by Richard A. Maltby Uncontrolled urbanization has been noted often by planners, conserva- tionists, agriculturists, and public officials as a common phenomenon of the mid- century. Its character and the problems it poses in terms of conflicting interests of resource use and the incompatibility of land uses can only result in an undesirable and costly environment for man to live in. These problems may be caused by ineffective local land development ordinances and plans, but essentially they result from inadequate knowledge of what our land resources can support in terms of various types and intensity of development. Local planning officials and legislative bodies could better plan for and reasonably control de- velopment if their land use plans and zoning ordinances were based on a knowledge of land resource use capabilities. The purpose of the thesis is to develop a study method whereby the use potential of land areas can be noted in advance of ultimate development. The study is concerned with the deve10pment of a method for detecting the suitability of natural resource and man-made features for support- ing agricultural, recreational, residential, and industrial develop- ments. This is accomplished by collecting and analyzing data on soils, ground water, surface water, land drainage, topography, highways, railroads, and utilities, and viewing them in combination Richard A. Maltby with one another against a set of land use deve10pment criteria. Upon subsequent evaluation of the combined natural resource and man-made features, a land use potential model can be constructed. The model can be used as a guide for formulating local land use plans and legal de ve 10pme nt c ontr 01 s . Both the analysis of data and the construction of the use potential model were aided in part by superimposing a system of grid blocks upon the study area base map. The grid blocks correspond to the quarter sections of the original land survey. All the data were plotted on the study area base map by filling in each grid block according to the predominant characteristic of each natural resource and man- made feature. Similarly, the various use potentialities of land in the study area are grapically shown by filling in those grid blocks that contain the desired combination of natural resource characteristics and man-made features, to satisfy each land use development criteria. The study procedure involves eight steps, which are: One, determina- tion of the location, size, and shape of the planning region for which the study method and model may be applied; two, construction of the study area base map,including a superimposed system of grid blocks; three, design and preparation of the data inventory sheets; four, col- lection and analysis of natural resource data and man-made features; five, formulation of land development criteria; six, preparation of a Richard A. Maltby program for the desired combination of natural resource characteris- tics and man-made features in accordance with the deve10pment criteria; seven, matching the various natural resource characteristics and man-made features in each grid block in accordance with the program established in step six; and eight, application of the study findings found in step seven onto the base map, which results in a grid-block pattern of various use potentialities of land in the planning region. The study found that it is possible to study natural resources and man- made features in combination with one another in order to find their composite use potentialities. The study did not reveal, however, the use potential of all grid blocks. Approximately 42 per cent of the study area is noted as having ”vacant" use potential, as defined in the thesis. This may be the result of four factors in the study method: One, the land deve10pment criteria; two, the priority of assigning various po— tential uses to the grid blocks; three, the definitions of the four land uses; and four, the types of and manner in which natural resources and man-made features were studied. It is felt that the development criteria and definition of uses were the two variables which most af- fected the vacancy. This may happen in other studies as well, since one planner’s definition of a land use or of deve10pment criteria may , be different from that of another planner. In using the study method, it will be important to clearly understand the local preferences for Richard A. Maltby land deve10pment criteria, since the use of natural resour ces and man- made features is related to the social and economic value placed on them. A METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE USE POTENTIAL OF LAND BY Richard A. Maltby A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER IN URBAN PLANNING School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture 1965 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer is extremely indebted to Charles W. Barr, Professor of Urban Planning at Michigan State University, who served as thesis advisor in this academic effort. Many thanks are due for his thoughtful comments and suggestions in preparing this work. A sincere appreciation is extended to all faculty members of the School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture for their guidance and interest in my entire graduate studies. I wish to express my appreciation to the staff members of the Washtenaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission who were helpful in discussing subjects related to this thesis and directing me to various sources of information. To my wife, George-Ann, I wish to extend special acknowl- edgment and thanks for her personal interest and encouragement throughout the preparation of this thesis. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . v LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . vi INTRODUCTION . . . . . 1 Purpose of the Thesis. . . . . 3 Basic Assumptions . . . 5 Definitions . . . . . . 7 Imposed Thesis Limitations . . . . . 13 CHAPTER I. Study Procedures . . . . 17 Problem Approach Used in this The sis . . 17 A Hypothetical Land Use Potential Model . . 23 Application to Planning . . . . 28 II. OTHER STUDIES RELATED TO THE THESIS . . 34 Federal Housing Administration Engineering Classification of Soils for Residential Development. . . 34 Clayton Township Soil Resource Use Suitability Study Prepared by the Soil Conservation Service . . . . . 35 City of Wixom Soil Resource Use Suitability Study Prepared by a Planning Consultant Firm . 37 Kweder’s Land Classification for Residential Development-~A Master's Thesis . . . 39 Pitkin’s Proposed Method of Preparing Soil Capability Classifications for Non-Agricultural Uses--A Master’ s Thesis . . . 41 Rutgers University Planning Service Concept Study for Planning in Rural New Jersey . . 43 Wa shtenaw County Planning Commission Study of Natural and Man- Made Capacities for Development. . . . . . 46 iii CHAPTER III. NATURAL RESOURCES, MAN-MADE FEATURES AND DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA . Description of Natural Resources Description of Man-Made Features Land Use DeveIOpment Criteria IV. CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACTUAL LAND USE POTENTIAL MODEL FOR THE CHELSEA STUDY AREA Purpose and Scope . Actual Model . . . . . Individual Potential Uses . . . Combination of Potential Use Types V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Review of Problem Approach . Conclusions . . . Recommendations for Further Research and Study. APPENDIX A Eight Maps Showing the Locations of the Individual Potential Uses in the Chelsea Study Area APPENDIX B Classification of the Soil Series of the Chelsea Study Area According to Their Capability and Permea- bility Ratings APPENDIX C Analysis of Natural Resources and Man- Made Features of the Chelsea Study Area . . . . APPENDIX D New Transportation Networks and Drainage Systems as Inputs into the Land Use Potential Model for the Chelsea Study Area . . . LITERATURE CITED . . . OTHER REFERENCES iv 9 Page 49 49 78 84 97 97 98 100 107 111 111 114 118 122 131 135 141 142 146 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Factors to be Considered in Determining the Use Potential of Land . . . . . . 2.7 2. Perrnissable Physical, Chemical, and Bacterial Water Qualities . . . . . . 61 3. Relation of Stream Order to Stream Length and Mean Dreainage Basin Size in the United States . . . 64 4. Classification of Rivers and Streams in the Chelsea Study Area . . . . . . . 65 5. Population Capacity of Utility Systems in the Chelsea Study Area . . . . . . . 84 6. Program of Land DeveIOpment Criteria . . . 87-92. 7. Difference Between the Number of Existing and Potential Use Grid Blocks . . . . . 100 8. Number of Primary Potential Use Grid Blocks That Can Support Secondary Potential Uses . . . 108 9. How Potential Use Grid Blocks Are Presently Being Used . 109 10. Combination of Potential Use Types . . . . 110 11. Classification of the Soil Series of the Chelsea Study Area According to Their Capability and Permeability Ratings 1.31- 134 12. Analysis of Natural Resource Characteristics and Man- Made Features of the Chelsea Study Area . . 135-140 13. New Transportation Networks and Drainage Systems as Additional Inputs into the Chelsea Study Area Land Use Potential Model. . . . . . 141 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 1.7 . 18. Base Map and Grid Block System of the Chelsea Study Area Data Inventory Sheet . A Hypothetical Land Use Potential Model Agricultural Soil Capability Soil Permeability . . . Ground Water Supply Potential Lakes . Rivers and Streams Land Drainage Woodlands (per cent of grid block covered) . Size of Woodlands Degree of Slope Wetlands Highways and Roads Railroads Central Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Systems Land Use Potential Model Compared with Existing Land Use Pattern Potential Intensive Agricultural Use Areas . vi Page 20 24 29 54 58 60 66 67 70 73 74 77 79 81 82 85 101 123 Figure Page 19. Potential Extensive Agricultural Use Areas . . 124 20. Potential Intensive Recreational Use Areas . . 125 21. Potential Extensive Recreational Use Areas . . 126 22. Potential Intensive Residential Use Areas . . . 127 23. Potential Extensive Residential Use Areas . . . 128 24. Potential Intensive Industrial Use Areas . . . 129 25. Potential Extensive Industrial Use Areas . . . 130 vii INTRODUCTION This thesis is concerned with finding ways to detect, in ad- vance of land development, the capabilities of certain land resources to support rural and urban uses. With urban settlement patterns ex- panding outward, and rural lands becoming dotted with intensive urban activities, it is necessary to know the types of studies that could be undertaken to facilitate orderly development. This the sis is concerned with one of the many types of studies. Artur Glikson apprOpriately expressed an idea as to how to cope with the expanding urban settlements when he implied that the responsibility of guiding urbanization should be directed to regional planning. 1 Study methods regional planners could use to help facili- tate the proper location of urban activities involve investigations into soil properties, studies of means to preserve natural resources, man- agement of water resources, requirements of industry and communica- tions, structure of population, and calculation of the residential and recreation area needed per person. Glikson’s concept of directing land use development incor- porates the idea that the location of land activities should be based upon the use potential of land resources. In planning for urban settle- ments , he say 5: 2 The first task will be a land classification, consisting of two different surveys: The one is a classification of actual land use as established by contemporary social and economic in- fluences and technical skill. The other is a classification of land according to use capabilities based on its natural charac- teristics. In studying urban settlements, it was traditional to regard them as separate entities of their surrounding rural lands. Today, at least in the United States, separation of urban settlements from their outlying rural areas when making plans for their future deve10pment must be considered artificial; as to the planning of expanding urbani- zation the ability of certain natural resources to support urban type land uses must be taken into consideration. Outlying urban activities are evidenced today by new recreational facilities, airports, express- ways, housing, and industrial complexes. These additions to the countryside are not necessarily attached to the compact urban center in the pysical sense, but they are integrated to some extent through social and economic and, in some cases, political interests. These scattered urban activities indicate that more emphasis must be placed upon environmental resources planning. They also suggest that the planning for urban activities that may locate on rural lands must be based upon the natural capability of land, since in many cases the serv- ices and facilities that are provided in an urban area are absent in the rural countryside. Therefore, a knowledge of the use potential of rural lands is necessary in order to make rational decisions on the 3 types, location, and intensity of new urban activities locating in rural areas. Re sponsible planning authorities will not be able to judiciously frame policies regarding development, unless they formulate their policies upon, as Glikson believes, a classification of land according to the land capabilities based on resource characteristics. Purpose 5% the Thesis The writer recognizes two basic approaches to classifying land. One according to the actual use of the land and another accord- ing to the land's capability or use potential. This thesis is concerned with the latter approach and more specifically with the deve10pment of a method for determining the use potential of land. The thesis is based on the premise that certain natural resources, viewed singly and/or in combination with one another and in combination with certain man-made features, can provide a suitable base upon which land use plans can be formulated. For exam- ple, by analyzing and matching the conditions and characteristics of soil, land form, surface and ground water, wooded areas, and wetlands in relation to such man-made features as highways, railroads and utilities, a determination of the use potential of broad land areas can be ascertained. Use potential in this context is primarily an indication of the relative adaptability of certain lands to accommodate various uses. Thus, the matching of factors by placing one upon the other for a given area of land and then relating the combined factors to develop- 4 ment criteria will determine the potentiality of land for various uses. The uses of concern here are agriculture, recreation, residential, and industrial. Eight steps have been taken to develop a method whereby the use potential of land can be determined. They are: 1. To review other studies concerned with natural re- sources, particularly as they relate to this the sis. 2. To formulate a hypothetical land use potential model and explain its application to planning. 3. To present some problems of land development and re- source use, particularly the conflicts that arise from incompatible use of resources. 4. To list and generally define the natural resources and man-made features that are employed in this study. 5. To list and generally define the land use types with which this the sis is concerned. 6. To research and prepare the land development criteria that are needed for the subsequent evaluation of natural resources and man-made features in supporting land uses. 7. To construct an actual land use potential model for a specific locality with respect to the land use definitions and criteria, natural resources and man-made features, and the framework of the hypothetical model as presented. 8. To compare the results of the actual model with the existing land uses of the study area. Basic Assumptions In developing the study method and land use potential model, it is necessary to make some major assumptions. They are generally: 1. The Probable Character of Urbanization The present patterns of urban settlements will continue to expand outward upon rural and vacant lands. In some cases the ex- pansion will be uniform and pysically attached to the old urban centers. In other instances the patterns will be characterized by a composition of interspersed agricultural, residential, industrial, and recreational uses. 2. The Problem of Resource Use Allocation The problem of resource allocation to certain land activities will become more acute and require judiciously founded public policy. Particularly troublesome will be the use allocation of surface and ground water supplies, soils, forests, watersheds, and areas encom- passing unique and scenic terrain. In addition, more demands will be placed on transportation facilities, particularly highways and freeway interchanges, as new urban activities develop outside the urban utility service districts. Thus, in some instances, planners will be required to formulate policies on use allocation of resources near certain trans- portation faciliti e s . 6 3. The Public Acceptance of Planning in the Future Public responsibility for providing comprehensive planning will be increasingly accepted, the various planning agencies being di- rected toward a more uniform, if not total, environmental resources planning approach. Environmental resources planning will be based on the capabilities of land and water resources to support deve10pment. 4. That Certain Natural Resources and Man-made Features can be Evaluated and Measured in Terms of Use Values Most natural resources and man-made features have measur- able values, although the techniques for measuring the different values in combination with one another have not been appropriately perfected to warrant their application to urban planning. 5. The Comprehensiveness and Sc0pe of the Practice of Planning The practice of both urban and rural planning has increased considerably in recent years. However, their "comprehensiveness” is questionable. As traditionally practiced, urban planning stops at the city limits or at best at the limits of the utility service districts of metropolitan areas. As more urban activities locate outside and be- yond these fringe lines, planners will be required to bring into their studies and planning programs the elements of environmental resources planning. The practice of urban and rural planning should and will in- clude studies on land capacity and use potential as related to local and 7 regional social and economic values. The comprehensive development plan will then be based, in part, on the use potential of land to support various types and intensity of development. The basis for this determi- nation is the suitability of resources to lend themselves to development. De finiti on s The following definitions are given for the purpose of this study only: Use Potential of Land In this thesis, use potential of land means that a certain land activity can be programmed for location on a parcel of land in possibil- ity only, and not in probability, or planned or actual state. The use potential of land is supported by evidence strong enough to establish presumption, but not strong enough to prove the land's actual use in the future. Grid Block System In this study the writer chooses to use the quarter sections of the original land survey as the basis of a grid block system. The reason for this is that the original land survey and subsequent record- ing of land parcels has played a significant role in how land has devel- oped and to some extent how natural resour ces have been and are being used. Observers may note that even the highway network of today fol- lows remarkably well the section lines of the original land survey. 8 Most of the remaining wooded areas, particularly in the Midwest Region of the United States, are interestingly situated in the center of the mile square sections. Each quarter section represents one of 576 grid blocks su- perimposed upon the Chelsea study area base map. For the purpose of this study all grid blocks are assigned 160 acres each. About 95 per cent of the total number of grid blocks range in size from 150 to 165 acres. There are 12 grid blocks that contain 80 to 100 acres each. All information on natural resources and man-made features of the study area is graphically portrayed on a series of base maps by filling in the grid blocks with appropriate symbols. Similarly, the use potential of all land areas is shown on another series of base maps by filling in the grid blocks with symbols. These maps are found in Appendix A. Intensive and Extensive Agricultural Uses The general range of agricultural operations consists of truck gardening, including vegetables and fruits; general croplands, including cash grains, cereals, grasses, and legumes; pasture; and forestry. For the purpose of this study, an intensive farming operation may depend on irrigation water. The means of distinguishing between an intensive and an extensive agricultural operation is generally subjective, depending on, 9 of course, the amount of capital return, soil capability, and fertility. It is very difficult to draw a precise line between intensive and exten- sive farming enterprises because of the considerable overlapping of operations on farms in general. Barlowe has stated: The high productivity and value of some farm pastures to- gether with the fact that they are usually intermingled with cultivated fields logically favors the combination of arable pasture with crOpland as a type of land use. Arable farm land usually commands a higher priority than either graz- ing or forest land and accordingly has first claim on the areas suitable for these uses. This suggests a wide variation of the kinds of farming Oper- ations within an intensive agricultural use classification. Similarly, Barlowe classifies extensive agricultural uses as encompassing graz- ing and forest uses, as well as the barren and waste lands. For the purpose of this study and as a suggestion that may be incorporated in regional planning studies, the distinction between an intensive and an extensive agricultural use classification is based on type of farming. Intensive agricultural includes truck gardening, vegetable, flower, and fruit raising; and extensive agricultural includes arable pasture, general crops including cash grains and cereals, and livestock raising. Intensive and Extensive Recreational Uses Most lands can be used for recreation purpose s,and among several land areas more than one recreational use can be Operated and properly managed. However, when this is the case, certain factors 10 should often govern the decision as to the intensity of use. The number of persons using a recreation facility and the degree to which land and water resources are depleted are two major factors to be taken into consideration. Intensive recreational facilities may include fairly large tracts of land, are generally in close proximity to cities and smaller settlements, and are directly ”user-oriented” for day use only. Intensive recreation facilities include major types of activities such as swimming, picnicking, hiking, golfing, horseback riding, fishing, and boating. Extensive recreational areas may include the same activi- ties as listed above. When they do the intensity of use is much less. In addition to intensive uses that may be found in an extensive recrea- tion area, such activities as camping, sightseeing, bird watching, hunting, trapping, wildlife habitat study, winter sports, and pleasure driving are common and appropriate functions. Extensive recreational lands are apprOpriately considered "resource-based” for users staying in the area for more than one day. That is, they are left in their natural state while intensive recreational areas are considered "user-oriented, ” and are man-made, with or without the assistance of a natural setting. 11 Intensive and Extensive Residential Uses The essential factors defining intensive and extensive resi- dential uses of land are the method of disposing of domestic sewage waste and the number of dwelling units per gross acre of land. Many studies have indicated the suitability of soil to absorb sewage effluent and, depending on the porosity and cohension of soil particles, that an acre of land can sustain from one to four single- family dwelling units without causing a hazard to the health and general welfare of the public. Thus for the purpose of this study an intensive residential use is defined as comprising five or more families per gross acre of land requiring central water supply and sewage disposal systems. Extensive residential lands have lower densities that gen- erally include less than five families per gross acre and usually depend on individual sewage disposal system and water wells. Intensive and Extensive Industrial Uses The distinction between an intensive and an extensive indus- trial land area is difficult to frame. The determination may be made from a number of factors; such as, the number of employees per de- veloped acre of land; the amount of water consumption and waste dis- posal, the tonnage and bulk of products; the transportation facilities required--whether railway, highway, or both; the amount of traffic generation; the degree of compactness and interrelationship of industrial buildings; and last, the external effects o —-+- —--—~ — —$—--+—-—— — ' :— _ __' __ %__._.‘..— L— r—-L——h———l——+h——4——d ooo so: on o ' 37o I 377 37 o . 37o I on I :7: Ian I no no ooo | o7 ooo I on no I on on low — I» -> w -;w- I; 1:. _ - —I- . _ I I , . .d—-——4‘., i "ago an I on o o I oo I on o I so: 4 no so? no - ooo ' ooo oOI I o: oo I404 coo I ooo 407 I ooo — mono — - ~ — _. _ 'o I __ __ _. _ _ I _ __ ‘3' h I ate-I- :o-I- ”Ton—I ~QZIIZLwr T ' «a «WI-4| 1 9 «711+ 'r—‘ _.-9«_§° 4 III . o Ino I . . ;LI 41.0.1» m . - '— —“ ——'m I \“ 1— ,434 I 430 up 43 «o 44I I 442 I u on I «o Iooo: 447 I44. w Iooo .53‘T‘RNJ\“ L“; --:|_-+——. -I—+ “+—+-+—+ \— _ __ __1__.—— ——I—m—Ia.<,._ —a_ JP." 'oooi 479 ' 477 I47o ' 5 Ion I47: I on 147. I 4 o I on I ooo IIoo7 I ooo I «o ‘9‘ I “3 .40! '4" 1W3 407 I —+_+_+_+ -- . so I oo I 407 I coo I coo I490 I I I on |4os :4” I no I I “7.1”. I“. 600' 5 I5 so: 604 no I 525 '-' 524' 2 I 522 I 6U I 520 I on on I on {on I!“ on I 3 ion II no I "f no lo 'ooo loos —+—-;—-+— .- - i—+~+—+— I . I 1 . 1::— , «,- --I 529 I530 osn losMs I 53 I 535 on I 537 Iooo 539 Iooo I 54 I194: ' so: I on I 545 I s 947 540 I 549 I 5 0 "I I“! \ -- - ——I~—— _ !— —:— J- —+-- 7 ‘-——+---‘ on 575 I o a I 573 ' fun I “LI so: 4' 5T :ooo ' so 554 I553 : __L__...L ——.A_— |___L'._. _. _ 1 E: I/2 I SCALE 2 IN MILES SOURCE: WI MAP: COUNTY METROPOLITAN PW CONN-I10?! 'ASHTINA' RICHARD A. MALTBY JANUARY I965 21 Step Four: Inventory of Natural Resources and Man- Made Features Information on the various characteristics of natural re- sources and man-made features should be mapped, using the base map with the system of grid blocks superimposed. Later the infor- mation can be transferred to the inventory data sheets for subsequent matching of factors. Step Five: Formulation of the Land Deve10pment Criteria Deve10pment criteria for a particular land use area should be determined with respect to the use's requirements for a. agricultural soil capability; b. soil permeability; c. water, either ground, surface, or both; (1. condition of land drainage; e. timber resources or woodland; f. type of terrain and degree of 510pe; g. wetlands; h. highways, roads, and accessibility; i. railroad facilities; and j. central water supply and sewage disposal facilities. 22 Step Six: Programming the Desired Combination of Natural Resource Characteristics and Man-Made Features, According to the Development Criteria Formulated in Step Five and Data Inventoried in Step Four. The program should be arranged to show: (a) positive fac- tors--those characteristics that are definitely needed to satisfy the development of a land use area; (b) negative factors--those charac- teristics that may be detrimental to the "success" of land use area; and (c) incorporeal factors--those factors consisting of character- istics immaterial and having no substantial consequence to the success of a land use area, either positively or negatively. Step Seven: Matching the Natural Resource Characteristics and Man- Made Feamres Accord- ing to the Program Designed in Step Six. Step Seven is the process of matching the desired combina- tion of natural resource characteristics with one another and with the required man-made features. This step may also be called screening as this is what is actually done. By scanning the inventory data sheets column by column for certain factors, a determination of whether a grid block has a particular use potential or several use potentialities can be ascertained. The scanning is best accomplished by construct- ing a scale on a piece of heavy paper for each use potential and match- ing corresponding dots on the inventory data sheets. 23 Step Eight: Application of Findings onto a Base Map, which Results in a Use Potential Model for the Planning Region For be st results in making the final portrayal of land use potential areas, a series of maps is suggested, each corresponding to the use in question. However, with appropriate pattern designs, a composite map can be constructed to show all use potentialities. The latter is beneficial to the user if he desires to show the various land use potential areas in a system of priority. An example of this procedure is presented in Chapter IV. _A_ Hypothetical Land Use Potential Model The purpose of this section is twofold: One, to present in general terms the elements in a land use potential model; and two, to explain the model's application to rural as well as urban planning. Elements Contained A land use potential model is the result of accepting a num- ber of assumptions on how various characteristics of natural resources and man-made features will affect patterns of land deve10pment. In this the sis, it is assumed that the basic attribute of land for agricul- ture is fertile soil, although there are other factors such as topogra- phy and drainage. The basic attributes of land for recreation are water and land form. Secondary factors such as accessibility and vegetation would also have a bearing. As for residential and industrial 24 hwmzm >m0hzm>z. ._. wmaof. <._.8 923083 gs flO Hg USED 92¢..— ab 39 ~> I a $40 . J I — unto—U I!“ N“. Jag—gash flap—HE 15002 ._<_._.zm._.0n. mm: 024..— 4z < muse...— *(BIUE do; do ><3ufldh OH EUU< fln—OJW hZHUu—Hn— o. Zia. aw”..— NO I n 240 .— nv'nno I N Jahmbazu H>~wZHPXH ><>¢~U~= HO<§D§§ MOE: < Pa... .H< OP EUOt. HEOJU .HZHUMHQ ON ZEH mmmd HUOU DZjQOOB 2 I a 31—0 .Jun'v-u'; JanHHXH ”5:.th 53Hm GZ< 58<3 .m r I a go 4 443.59de H>~m2flhzu 3O significance of a use potential model as an essential tool of land use planning can, perhaps, be best understood by recognizing five basic purposes of its application. They are as follows: 1. The model and its method of construction can provide a mechanical technique for the planning technician and commissioner in finding the suitability of land areas for agricultural, recreational, in- dustrial, and residential uses. The method of constructing a use potential model can help to delineate broad land areas for a variety of uses, rather than a single or ”best” use. The concept of multiple use planning can be given substantial support provided that various potential uses of the land are known. Under this concept an area of land can be evaluated from the vieWpoint of supporting a number of uses as long as the various uses have no conflicting interests of re- source use. 2. Land classification systems by their very nature require a knowledge of the land's inherent characteristics. The model presented can help in providing a frame of reference for the organization of physi- cal properties and limitations inherent in a given tract of land. Upon subsequent evaluation of the land's limitations and physical prOperties, a classification of its potential uses can be made. 3. In line with the above, the model and its method of construc- tion can serve to widen the planner's horizon regarding his ideas of 31 land deve10pment potential. A. use potential model can be used to help fill the "vacuum” between the planning processes exercised by the urban and rural planners. As previously noted, some urban planners stop with their process of planning at the city's edge. The rural planner is faced with the problem of locating urban activities on rural lands. The point here is that a vacuum exists between the two disci- plines, each using different tools to accomplish the same end--a well- ordered environment with deve10pment based on non-conflicting interests of resource use. 4. With regard to the first purpose, a use potential model can be used as a guide for the plotting of land use space needs when pre- paring land development plans. Upon the foundation of population and economic base statistical studies, future land use acreage needs can be allocated to those areas best suited for development. Future high- way route locations can be superimposed upon the model and the use potential of adjacent lands can be noted in advance of ultimate devel- opment. Similarly, future utility expansion programs can be tied into the model and decisions made for either intensive industrial or re si- dential development. 5. Lastly, the model may serve to reconcile future conflicts of resource use. Ackerman noted twelve possible conflicting surface 2 . . . . . water uses. They include industrial process, Inunimpal and industrial 32 supplies, domestic supply, livestock, irrigation, hydrOpower, indus- trial waste, municipal and residential waste, irrigation return flow, fish and wildlife, navigation and recreation. Some of these conflicting uses, if not all, could be reconciled in advance by preparing integrated water use plans based on similar principles of a land use potential model. Regarding the compatibility of a primary use with a secondary one, it is found that urban oriented uses are incompatible with agricul- ture, forestry, grazing, water management, and wildlife habitat areas. Rural agricultural uses were found to be incompatible with recreation, water management, and wildlife. As more urban activities locate in rural areas, more conflicts of resource use and the mixing of incompatible uses will occur. How these two problems can be solved is important. Perhaps, a tool such as land use potential model can help. With the aid of a model, the conflicting interests of resource use and the incompatibility of uses can be known in advance of ultimate deve10pment and then, through special site deve10pment designs, the two problems could be solved. 33 Footnotes Harvey S. Perloff and Lowdon Wingo, Jr. , "Planning and Development in Metropolitan Areas, ” Journal of the American Institute_o_f Planners, Vol. XXXV, No. 2 (May, 1959), p. 82. Edward A. Ackerman and George 0. G. L5f, Technology i_n American Water Deve10pment (Baltimore: The Johns H0pkins Press, 1959), p. 94. Marion Clawson, R. Burnell Held, and Charles H. Stod- dard, Land for the Future (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1962), p. 449. CHAPTER II OTHER STUDIES RELATED TO THE THESIS Known studies related to the thesis are few and of recent origin. Most of the studies deal with a system for classifying land for a single use. The studies are concerned essentially with soils and their characteristics and prOperties. Federal Housirg Admini stration's Engineering Soil Classification for Residential Developments An early report1 published by the Federal Housing Adminis- tration presents a method for classifying soils with respect to their general suitability for residential building sites. The purpose of the study was to prepare a comprehensive soils engineering method for the determination of behavior of soils with respect to foundations, streets, and roads, and other structural engineering purposes. The report discusses the limitations in applying soil classification systems; the characteristics and properties of disturbed and undisturbed soils; and the general engineering characteristics of soil components. The method employed for classifying soils for residential purposes was an adaptation of the National Academy of Sciences' 34 35 Unified Soil Classification System. 2 The adjustment of the Unified Soil Classification System was based on the identification of soils ac- cording to their textural and plastic qualities. Soil ingredients and the grouping of soils with respect to their behavior in a remolded or reworked condition was also considered. The limitation of the Federal Housing Administration method is in its doubtful application to the land use planning process as prac- ticed today. The method is highly technical and involved with engineer- ing aspects of on- site deve10pment. The application of the Federal Housing Administration's method will reveal the relative strength of soils for supporting buildings and structures on a specific site; how- ever, it will not aid in determining desirable locations, say, for re si- dential subdivisions. Classifying land according to one factor will not solve the problem of determining the suitability or use potential of a larger tract of land. Classification per se will give no more than a general idea of possible use and, therefore, any classification system that deals with only one factor should be considered as a starting point for further studies. Clayton Township Soil Resource Use Suitabili’ty Studj Prepared by the Soil Conservation Service Approaching the subject in a broader sense is a report pre- pared by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. 4 Although strongly relying on soils as the major factor 36 in determining the use potential of land, the study does include related factors, such as, t0pography, erosion, land drainage, and soil permea- bility. The report presents in general the physical characteristics of each soil group and each group's capacity to support the uses of agriculture, residential, recreation, transportation, and industry. For analytical purposes, the Soil Conservation Service subdivided Clayton Township into several geographical areas, each corresponding with one of six prescribed soil resource groups. Each soil resource group was described and rated according to an evaluation of its suitability for supporting each of the five major uses. The land features analyzed in regard to ability to support agricultural uses were topography, soil erosion, soil productivity, and surface water. With regard to determining the land's suitability for residential deve10pment, such factors as t0pography, soil perme- ability, land drainage, and feasibility of basement construction were considered. With regard to determining the land's suitability for recreational use the Soil Conservation Service placed emphasis on t0pographic features, native trees, and wetlands. For transportation and industry the Clayton Township study concentrated on the properties of soils for supporting heavy construction, although such factors as topography and land drainage are considered to a lesser degree. The study approach presented in the Clayton Township re- port is more closely related to the one of this thesis than that of the 37 Federal Housing Adrninisstration. The Federal Housing Administration's report deals with specific on- site engineering details. The Clayton Township report, while including some soil engineering aspects, is primarily concerned with the general use suitability of larger land areas. Moreover, the Clayton Township report includes the multiple use aspect of resources; i. e. , each soil resource group is rated ac- cording to its potential for supporting five major uses. The choice of use of a given tract of land still remains with the land owner and developer, but for general land use planning and the formulation of deve10pment policies by a local governing body, the multiple use suitability approach is encouraged. At least such public bodies as planning commissions and councils are not limited by engineering details (which are really the concern of private individuals and public works departments), and can approach the matter in a more objective and equitable manner. _C_i_ty_<_)_f_ Wixom Soil Resource Use Suitability Stigy Preparedbya Planning Consultant Firm A study similar to the Clayton Township study is found in the report Soil Resources _o_f Wixom. 5 The study method in the Wixom report is more useful for the purpose of this thesis than the studies mentioned above in that it lends itself, first, as a tool of land use planning, and second, as a survey technique for discovering detail characteristics and properties of soil resoxr ces. 38 With regard to land use planning, the Wixom study method includes procedures for describing land in general, analyzing major natural features, and rating the adaptability of soil. resources for sup- porting residential deve10pment, roads, large scale industrial and commercial construction, recreation, and agriculture. With respect to inventory of detail characteristics and prop- erties of soil resources, the Wixom report also includes a procedure for delineating soils into twenty-six different types and consolidating the soil types into seven general soil resource groups. This approach is similar to the Clayton Township study. The major land features and soil characteristics considered are topography, land drainage, depth of water table (not evaluated as to relative potential supply for domestic and industrial use, however), workability of soils, soil fertility and productivity. In summary, the Wixom report presents a general descrip- tion of the major factors governing the adaptability rating of each soil resource group. The multiple use aspect of resources, which the re- port empha sizes in its section on an adaptability rating, is de- emphasized in the final portrayal of research findings. The soil re- sources map and its accompanying table conclude with such statements as ”well-drained sands, well-drained sandy loams, well-drained loams, imperfectly drained sands, imperfectly drained loams, poorly 39 drained loams and loamy sands, and wet mucks. ” These are descrip- tive titles. What should be important and stated in the conclusion of a study report of this nature is not descriptive titles but meaningful explanations of the use potential of each soil resources group. Kweder’s Land Classification for Residential Development- -A Ma ster’ s The sis A study similar to the Federal Housing Administration's engineering soil classification for residential development is presented in a master's thesis by William Kweder. Kweder, in presenting a land classification for residential development, says that his study wasmdertaken (a) to determine what information is available for and useful in determining the effect of natural physical characteristics of land on the provision of adequate standards for urban residential water, sewer, and drainage utilities; (b) to determine a method of classification of land utilizing available information applicable to residential development; and (c) to develop minimum lot size require- ment guides based on natural conditions and contemporary standards for health and safety in relation to provision of adequate utilities for each land classification. Kweder deve10ps six residential land classifications, each differentiated by minimum lot sizes based on geological, topographic, soil, water, and drainage conditions. He found that reasonable guides to use for evaluating the adequacy of soils for urban residential 40 purposes are the soil management practices used in agricultural con- siderations. It is within the framework of the fertilizer requirements for agricultural operations that guides for. urban residential use of soils are prepared. Kweder explains that such information readily lends itself to interpretation for residential use evaluation and adap- tation. By evaluating each soil series, "penalty points” can be as- signed indicating each negative characteristic of a soil series in rela- tion to its effect on water supply and waste disposal systems for resi- dential development. In addition, Kweder uses an ”urban weighting system" for denoting primary ratings of natural land conditions for urban resi- dential use. These are based on soil texture and drainage character- istics. A numerical order of 0 through 5 is used and these are directly related to the texture of the upper three feet of the soil pro- file and the soil management group for agricultural purposes. A nu- merical order of 1 through 3 is used for weighting the drainage condition of the soil management groups. Finally, the two weighting systems are added together. The resultant numerical value indicates one of six primary ratings of soil for residential use. It is felt that Kweder's method for classifying land for resi- dential use is more applicable to planning than the one presented by the Federal Housing Administration. First of all, a considerable amount of soils information is available, which is in written and 41 tabular form, explaining various soil characteristics. Second, this information is easily converted to residential use evaluation, especi- ally the information in tabular form, and thus broad land areas can be delineated for residential use. Although the Federal Housing Ad- ministration's study seeks the same objective, a considerable amount of detailed technical work was done which gives one only an evaluation of on- site conditions rather than a measure of use value for broad land areas. Pitkin's Proposed Method of Preparing Soil Capability Classifications for Non-Agricultural Land Uses-ti Master's Thesis A useful and interesting method for determining the resource use suitability is found in a thesis by Pitkin. 7 He discusses the wide range of soil requirements and limitations for various non-agricultural uses, and presents a methodological procedure for preparing a land use capability classification. The method involves an evaluation of soils and t0pography only. Pitkin states that there is a need in the conservation and land use planning processes to allocate spatially the soil resources among the many competing non-agricultural uses according to the soils' capability to fulfill the criteria of each non-agricultural use. Pitkin emphasizes two points to accomplish this end. First, inventory and analyze the characteristics and properties of soils and land form, 42 and second, determine the criteria to be met for each non-agricultural use. His approach is one of fir st to indicate the characteristics and prOperties of soils and land form which may inhibit non-agricultural development and to define non-agricultural uses in terms of their requirements of soil resources and topography. To put his method into operation Pitkin first arranges a list of soil and land form features to be considered. These features are surface drainage, texture, permeability, droughtiness, fertility, subsurface drainage, surface flooding, depth of soil to bedrock and hardpan, rockiness, stoniness, slope, and irregularity of relief. He then outlines nine steps for preparing a non-agricultural use capability classification, which include: (a) definition of each non-agricultural use; (b) determination of the manner in which each soil and land form factor effects each non-agricultural use; (c) statement of the range of effects; ((1) determination of optimum relationships of each soil and land form factor to each non-agricultural use; (e) designation of a numerical weight as determined in step d; (f) summation of the numerical weights given to each soil and land form factor affecting each non—agricultural use; (g) ranking of all the summation weights in an ascending numerical order, to obtain a range of capability; (h) preparation of titles to express the summation weights as ranked in step h (e.g. , the words "Optimum, ” "somewhat restrictive, " “highly restrictive, ” and ”prohibitive” correspond with the Roman 43 numerical range of capability of I, II, III, and IV, respectively); and (i) determination of inconsistency in resource capabilities. Pitkin's method of determining use capabilities is highly technical, and involves detail soil engineering aspects. His inves- tigations are extensive in the way that various factors of soil and t0pography are analyzed. It appears that the underlying principle in Pitkin's methodology is: Given 3.3 adequatey detailed inventory pf soil and topographic factors pfa Specific site and _a_ knowledge pf the soils and topographic requirements pig particular non-agricultural use, _i__t can he readily found whether the site i_s_ suitable for the use _i_n_ que stion. The detailed techniques used by Pitkin are similar to those presented in the Federal Housing Administration report. 8 Neverthe- less, Pitkin's approach to determining use capabilities should be recognized as having a place in the land use planning process. If he had broadened the sc0pe of study to include such factors as inland water bodies, transportation, utilities, ground water supplies, and wooded or forested areas, his method would be more than appr0priate for planning purposes. Rutgers Universi_ty Planning Service Concept Study for Flaming i_r_1_ Rural New Jersey An equally impressive study of methodology, although lack- ing the detail of Pitkin's, is a conceptual approach to classifying land areas as to their be st use. 9 This conceptual approach is presented 44 in the report Rural Planning: A Concept Study for Planning i_n Rural New Jersey. The objectives of the study as listed are: One, determine the type of rural land being absorbed for urban uses and the effective- ness of the present planning tools in the rural areas, and two, deve10p new methods and techniques for land use planning in the fringe rural areas for the preservation of the natural resources and to permit prOper and well integrated urban growth. In respect to the objectives mentioned above, the methodo- logy is designed to present a qualitative analysis of the rural land being absorbed for urban purposes and to determine the most func- tional use of rural lands in the fringe areas. In addition, a planning model was constructed against which to deve10p and test _lpgil and financial aspects of the fringe area problem. 10 The study was struc- tured to cover only the use of fringe land for residential, commercial, industrial, public, and other urban uses and to determine the best use of newly develoPed and undeveloped areas in relation to geology, soil quality, available ground water, slope, and drainage. After this the model was compared with the existing land use in order to find the best natural use. As in many planning studies, the factors and methodology employed are strongly influenced by the particular philosophy of the planner. If one is predominately urban oriented in his planning 45 approach the value placed on natural resources for agricultural pur- poses is less than, say, the soil conservationist's or agronomist's value. Likewise from the perspective of a £u_ra_l_ oriented planner the value of natural resources for recreation or residential deve10pment is overlooked or underrated. The New Jersey study attempts to reconcile the different approaches by blending the two. However, after extensive surveys and analyses of natural resources, the New Jersey researchers still produce a method that expresses an over- rated value for agricultural use of resources. Nothing is said about other possible uses of a given tract of land if it is rated prime for agriculture. What should be found and expressed is the capability of land to support several uses--rural and urban alike. There would then be a chance for the various land uses to compete equally for natu- ral resource s,and governing bodies and planning commissions could more objectively determine land development policy in relation to the suitability of resources. The issue here is not that good agricultural soils should be unprotected from non-agricultural use. Once these soils are used for non-agricultural purposes, they are lost for food production. The main issue, it appears, is whether a single factor such as soil should direct the course of urbanizing settlements. 46 Washtenaw Coung/ Flaming Commission Study pf Natural and Man- Made Capacities for Development A study similar to the New Jersey study is presented in the report Preliminary Land Use Plan for Washtenaw County. 11 The Washtenaw County study is concerned with the capacities of se- lected natural resources for supporting four land uses-~recreation, industrial, residential, and agricultural. The study treats all the selected natural resources with equal weight. That is, if a given land area were found to have a high value for agricultural purposes, it was also rated as to its potential for supporting non-agricultural uses. The study recognized that certain features of land will influence new development and are therefore basic in the land use planning process. The method employed within the Washtenaw County study is based on the principle that land use capacities are derived by matching the factors which determine the suitability of land for vari- ous uses with the space and location requirements of the various land use types for which a plan is made. 12 To meet this end, Washtenaw County's study analyses various chacteristics of topography, soil, drainage, ground water, and surface water. It then relates each resource chacteristic to one another and to man-made features. An evaluation of the interre- lated natural resource and man-made features is then made, which is based on certain land development criteria (e. g. , space needs, 47 density, transportation, accessibility, water needs, etc.). The result is a map, referred to as ”Capacities for Deve10pment, ” and is a com- posite of deve10pment potentials for various land uses. There are other studies and methods of determining the use potential of land. It is not the purpose of this chapter to review all practical means or theoretical concepts by which expressions of land use potential are structured. However, the selected technical studies and methods presented above are helpful in placing this thesis in perspective with the number of other studies and, moreover, helpful to the reader in comprehending how far advanced the rural and urban planners are in the practical and theoretical areas of land capability studie s. Footnote 5 1. Federal Housing Administration, Engineering Soil Classi- fication for Residential Development, FHA No. 373 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, August, 1959). 2. Ibid. , p. xi. (The Unified Soil Classification System was developed by the U. S. Corps of Engineers and published by the Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, March, 1953). 3. Federal Housing Administration, pp. 511:. , p. 5. 4. Genesse Soil Conservation District, Soil Resources Inven- tory, Clayton Township, Genesse County, Michigan (United States Department of Agriculture, not dated). Mimeographed. 5. Vilican- Lemon and Associates, Inc. , Soil Resources pf Wixom (Wixom City Planning Commission, September, 1961). 10. 11. 12. 48 William G. Kweder, Land Classification for Residential Deve10pment. (Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture, Michigan State University, 1962.) Belmont R. Pitkin, A PrOposed Method pf Preparing Soil Capability Classifications for Non-Agricultural Uses. (Unpub- lished Master's thesis, Department of Conservation, The University of Michigan, 1960.) Federal Housing Administration, loc. _c_1£. Rutgers University Planning Service, Rural Planning: A Concept Study for Planningi_r_1_ Rural New Jersey. (New Brunswick: New Jersey Department of Agriculture, 1961.) Ibid., p. 17. Washtenaw County Planning Commission, Preliminary Land Use Plan for Washtenaw County (Ann Arbor: 1961) Ibid., p. 22. CHAPTER III NATURAL RESOURCES, MAN-MADE FEATURES AND DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Description pf Natural Resources Soils Soil information is one of the basic factors for determining the suitability of land for use. Information on soils is generally con- densed into a system which classifies like physical prOperties and behavior characteristics of the soil, such as, fertility, permeability, cohesion, texture, color, structure, internal friction, capillarity, elasticity, compressibility, shrinkage limit, and moisture content. Depending on the purpose of the classification system, most of these characteristics are expressed in group relationships and are identified by descriptive titles, numbers, letters, or a combination of the three. Soil classification systems can be obtained from the Soil Conservation Service of the U. S. Department of Agriculture; however, other organizations, such as, the U. S. Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Public Roads, and Civil Aeronautics Administration, have prepared standard procedures for classifying soils that fit each agency's purpose. 49 50 Considering the application of the various soil classification systems to land use planning only, the system devised by the Soil Conservation Service appears to be the most useful. The Soil Con- servation Service system is applicable to regional land use planning because it contains broad soil classifications and is easily converted from rural agricultural use to urban use. The other systems express soil properties in absolute rather than relative terms. They are generally applied to construction (e. g. , land reclamation, airports, highways, dams, and utility structures) and are “engineering- property” oriented. For regional planning purposes, it is assumed that all one needs to know about a soil is the soil's capability of supporting plant life, the soil's ability to receive water or its permeability, and the soil's stability or strength to support buildings. This study uses the first two factors. Agricultural Soil Capability In this study the agricultural suitability of soils is expressed in terms of the soil capability ratings prepared by the Washtenaw County, Michigan, District of the Soil Conservation Service in 1960. This agency up- dated a previous soils study conducted in 1930 by the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. 2 All soils in the County were placed in one of eight classes. The best agricultural soils are grouped in class I and the worst in class VIII. Descriptions of the eight classes are as follows: 51 Class I.--Land that is classified I has few limitations in agricultural use. It is considered very good land that can be culti- vated safely with ordinary methods. Its soil is deep, easy to work, holds water well, and is fairly well supplied with plant nutrients. The land is well suited to intensive cropping and is also good for grazing, forestry, and wildlife habitat areas. Class II.--C1ass II lands have some limitations in use. They can be cultivated safely when special conservation practices are applied to keep them productive. The special practices consist of soil conservation rotations, water control devices, and extra tillage. The soils can be used for intensive crOpping provided that the soil is treated with conscientiously applied conservation practices. The soil is also suitable for grazing, forestry, and wildlife habitat. Class 111. --Land that is classified 111 has permanent char- acteristics and certain qualities of soil that restrict its use for inten- sive cr0pping. In most cases special soil conservation practices are needed in order to produce good crops regularly. With prOper choice of crOps, proper timing of planting and tillage, and with appropriate conservation practices, the land can be safely used for the growing of general crops. Grazing, forestry, and wildlife habitation are also good uses of class III lands. Class IV. --These lands require very careful management. Soils making Class IV lands are best maintained in perennial vegetation; 52 however, they can be cultivated occasionally if treated with proper conservation measures. The number of years favorable for cultivated crops is limited, and, therefore, the soils should not be used for in- tensive farming. With adequate managerre nt the land can be used for extensive agricultural Operations, grazing, forestry, and wildlife habitat. Class V. --Land classified as V also has permanent char- acteristics and certain qualities that make it better suited to arable pasture, forests, and wildlife habitat areas. The major limitation is the kind of plants that can be grown. Class VI. --Class VI land is be st suited to limited grazing and forestry use. It has pronounced features, such as severe soil erosion, stoniness, and low water holding capacity. The land is also suitable for wildlife habitat areas as well as limited grazing and forestry. Class VII. --Lands placed in this classification are char- acterized by the severity of natural features and the complexity of conservation problems. The top soil is subject to erosion and is shallow. It is not considered good for cultivation and is be st used for forestry and wildlife habitat. Class VIII. --These lands are subject to severe limitation under either grazing or forestry use. They are not suitable for 53 cultivation and are best used for wildlife habitat areas, recreation, and water-yielding purposes. Soil Permeability Soil permeability must be considered because of the effects that industrial and residential sewage effluent can have on drainage basins, streams, lakes, and the health of the public. This is especi- ally so if the disposal system is based on principles of the individual septic tank system. Soil permeability may be defined as "a property of soil that allows it to transmit water . . . the rate at which water is trans- mitted by soils. ”3 The rate of water seepage depends on the size and number of the soil pores and the difference in the height of the ground water table. In determining the permeability of soils in Washtenaw County, the Soil Conservation Service and the County Health Depart- ment collaborated in a study which tested representative samples of soil for their coefficient of permeability. 4 The study concluded with a description of each soil series rated for non-agricultural use. The permeability ratings and their descriptions are as follows. Rating No. 1.--A11 of the soils rated No. l are generally acceptable for individual sewage disposal fields. These soils are generally sandy with no or very thin loam or clay layers that restrict the downward movement of water. Water is transmitted at a rate 54 FIGURE IV. AGRICULTURAL SOIL CAPABILITY O I f I lo 2 5 I.’ . ' " ' I I' h oflo. 4 _ . v- ‘1 tnfix I 0 ° 30 ° . oto o 4o | 4 ~ I _ . . . .' . + - Jr}:- ': .' . ' I 4o so I:- -, . ' .35 #' .. -; F.“.3 .4 .4H.] .3 "if . ' v}; . T. . .. on '3? . :4; .astsw°'.. ~ r 1" ' ' ' ° ° ° " " II5 I "/4- II I Io / LII-wintry: ' v LIto : In no I , on ~.—I. L_-M't"——. O 0.. \ ~\ : m I wag; I55 I In ' . . no u. i_ I -— + . :32: ‘2 i '7. ['3 rowoio I I.. + 2.1... '3 «It's I: on: ion Iit -!— 'uI-|I—".‘. . I | o 225 no I :I I no I no I m , o :I'. o "I... - 1|. - — L‘To $0 1'- too Iooo 4:: :03 to I . no on I: 1 too 5 ‘1 .3231 __ ,7». , . .0 .7 | '.'I - A; ,5 I. 'J' ' . 7'. - . 3.3 u a" | 30' 80. Io’: £4: . 44.4; - 'o o 0 o . o o‘i 1’- [/- —'T'——‘7' » . 0 I-\ .- in??? r z 7I54I 55:1 “Fox-[- 'I - ',I I5Io' 7 mol Is,| I ''''''' ' . . .l' . IICLI' ‘ -_ _F O 0 I O O O O 0-.“ I #‘ -_ ‘.|. -:L k _+—_— 4 (x 543,115 ‘3 o . .. 55 554 555 I 555 55d: 55 k5 I5oo F. _ , ‘“t“i “I gm ,rL_i__I--__4__L_4-1. . . I || 366 I 365 364 I 363 382 |36I _— __./‘i-- a 405 I 40o 407 I 405 IUI'L -— _—-‘F - l 4:2 l4n ”no. «vs-J ..... ‘*‘~~—L. T " __ _T_..... I 452 455%48N 455 ' I’ ’ ‘ —‘ _ ‘—_‘-’ _' ,452 IL4eI W 460; so 457 497 , 495 3499‘ 500: 5 505 504 -— ———:>——!>— _ —_,_I__ ‘ f‘ 5:? 505 one ;505\ ..r ‘ uni -—oo-?~1I" 545 I 549 ‘ 550 55I .552 . . ship, .1- __ ‘, 0.0 1 575 .‘Z'Zl 5 55 I 5 554 {555 : __Io_.0_o_L —‘—'L—'L ‘ L CLASS IV E-E!!L.T J OI/2l 2 SCALE IN MILES CLASS II CLASS VI g CLASS I“ RICHARD A. MALTBY mzfigfi’flgm‘: VSITJELZE‘V'C" J A N U A R Y I 9 6 5 55 of 10 or more inches per hour. Except for small depression areas on the surface of the land, the water table in No. l soils is more than 5 feet below the land surface. A water table higher than 5 feet, but at least 18 inches below the surface, may interfere with the proper functioning of a disposal system. Rating No. 2.--Soils that are rated No. 2 are generally suitable for individual sewage disposal fields; however, permeability tests have shown a range of dependability. The transmission rate of water through these soils is 5 to 10 inches per hour. It has been found by the Soil Conservation Service and the Washtenaw County Health Department that the Fox, Bronson, and Ionia soil series have a clay loam layer at depths of 12 to 30 inches below the land surface of sufficient thickness to restrict water move- ment. Such conditions may cause sewage disposal failure. At depths of more than 42 inches below the land surface, the Fox, Ionia, and Bronson soil series contain sand and gravel. The Ottawa soil series has variable acceptability for individual septic tank fields depending upon the depth the drain field is placed. This series has a sandy layer 42 to 66 inches thick that is generally acceptable for sewage disposal fields. Below the sandy layer there is loam, clay loam, silty clay loam, or clay that is generally not acceptable for disposal fields. 56 Rating No. 3. --Soils rated No. 3 need very careful exami- nation. Percolation tests and observations on disposal field perform- ance are usually required to determine the soil's suitability for dis- posal fields. The surface soil is sandy which frequently leads people to believe that the soils are adequate for sewage diaposal fields. The subsoil contains varying amounts of clay that restricts water move- ment to different degrees. Some soils rated No. 3 are acceptable for sewage effluent leaching purposes; however, many are not because of low permeability or a fluctuating water table close to the land sur- face. These soils generally transmit water at a rate as low as 2. 5 inches per hour. Rating No. 4.--The soils that fall under N0. 4 are gener- ally not acceptable for individual sewage disposal fields. Generally the clay content of soils rated No. 4 is sufficiently high to restrict water movement. This condition restricts water movement at a rate of between .20 and 2.50 inches per hour. Acceptable sewage dis- posal sites may be found in areas containing the Miami and Celina soil series; however, the Celina series may become saturated with water 18 or more inches below the surface for a month or so depend- ing upon the amount of rain. Special percolation tests are warranted as sewage disposal systems may fail for two or three months each year during wet seasons. 57 Rating No. 5. --The soils that are rated No. 5 are organic and are usually accompanied with a high ground water table. All of the soils that fall into this group are not acceptable for individual dis- posal fields. The main characteristic that renders No. 5 soils as un- acceptable is high ground water table or flooding. The water trans- mission rate is less than . 20 inches per hour. If the high water table can be lowered to an acceptable depth by using deep drainage ditches, perhaps some sites can be found suitable for sewage effluent leaching purposes. Ground Water Information on ground water in the study area was obtained from published doctoral dissertation. 5 The Washtenaw County Met- r0politan Planning Commission sponsored the project, and after it was completed constructed a map summarizing the supply potential of various aquifers and sand and gravel lenses. The County’s ”Groundwater Potential MapI' which this thesis uses, ranks all aquifers and sand and gravel lenses in one of four supply potential categories. These are: excellent, good, fair, and poor. Ground water aquifers are the only source of water supply in the study area. All wells are completed in glacial drift. Normally, bedrock contains water which is poor in quality (sulphate water) and is not usable for domestic purposes. Industries with certain 58 FIGURE V. SOIL PERMEABILITY 1.”-— WI. I6. I\T‘_;T‘IOI '5! 32'5'3I. I '1' 55 . .66 --+ _ I42 I IQI I93, I94 - -+' 245 g. :._ $in Fioflé}? '0. I255 254 .0. ‘ u ——T—_(- IZCOIZOOI ~ -'9 '7‘ ‘l - I 555/554: 33 VI I . ~ I 0 I540 §4I 54275 r74” ‘ 5'50 11:375-1 3’18 577 c. 359' 590 RATING I m”_ H J 0 VB I 2 RATING 2 SCALE IN MILES I RATING 3 SOURCE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE. WASHTENA' DISTRICT. MICHIGAN, AND 'MNT ENA' COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT RATING RATING RICHARD A. JANUARY 4 5 MALTBY I955 59 cooling requirements, however, may use sulphate water, which is pumped from consolidated rock aquifers. Generally speaking, glacial debris deposted in the deep bedrock valleys yield the largest volumes of water. Intermediate glacial deposits which lie between horizontal bedrock formations and the land surface may contain adequate supplies of water for extensive residential and industrial uses and for intensive agricultural irriga- tion. Shallow sand and gravel lenses may be adequate for these uses depending upon their size, elevation, and amount of annual precipi- tation. Surface Water Surface water bodies have many use potentialities, whether they are considered by themselves, singly, or in relation to geographic features of the land that surround them. How the surface water body is situated with respect to the land's soil capability and permeability, topography and wooded areas, and imposed man-made features will determine to some extent its potential use. In addition, the quantity and quality of water will be a determining factor and in most instances the real basis for use classification. Qualitative aspects of surface water have been studied at some length. The chemical, bacterial, and physical qualities of water embrace a wide range of determina- tions and are important considerations in the utlization of water for different uses. 60 FIGURE VI. WATER SUPPLY POTENTIAL GROUND _ ’ +w' I 75 I 75 I ——¥—-L II? | HI I .7 '49. - oo ./ i532 ‘, . ’3 7| 0 f 4) 70 I I'x -— \ non ‘ 6 V I'.¢llllt. a I 75.) 17 . r? O. .— was; fi 11.31;]: . . IOI;J. Inoo I45 I I4! —--+--— ‘ l43|l4l |I4I 'T T 4"“ ."l‘- ‘ 9+4 | 4 .8 ‘C I» I45'I4o I44 A “I 455 ' I' " —- . I a so 457 I |4sIl 450 i_- '5-; 1505 '504 :5 463 g 462 I J, 4503 475 499 500 52o I527 525 :—.- I __+___ 529 I550 55I 1 ‘2 EXCELLENT 0 NZ SCALE IN MILES Du nu nu nr RICHARD A. MALTBY "THE GROUND'ATER GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY Ol' 'ASHTENA' COUNTY AND THE UPPER SOURCE GEORGE R. KUN'KLE. HURON ”VII BASIN" I 9’65 JANUARY 61 Table 2 summarizes the desired maximum content of each quality in water for human use. Slight variations are permissable for fish, wildlife, and boating. Table 2.--Permissable Physical, Chemical and Bacterial Water Qualitiesé Quality Desired Maximum Factor Content Physical Turbitity l. 0 ppm Color 10. 0 ppm Taste not disagreeable Odor None Temperature 60° F. Chemical Solids 1000. 0 ppm Iron and manganese 0. 3 ppm Sulphates 250. 0 ppm Chlorides 250. 0 ppm Hardness 50. 0 ppm Lead 0. 1 ppm Copper 0. 2 ppm Zinc 5. 0 ppm Bacterial 20O Gelatin count, per cc. 200. 0 37° Agar count, per cc. 100.0 B. Coli Index, per 100 cc. 1.0 62 For most uses of surface waters, the physical, chemical, and bacterial qualities will be the governing factors. However, there are other factors that place limitations on surface water use. These are lack of accessibility to the body of water, variation in water level, and conflicts of both use and economic interest. 7 Another limita- tion is size of a water body. A small lake may be used by so many motorboats for excursions or water skiing that it may be quite unac- ceptable as a fishing lake for certain kinds of sport fish. Still further, excessive boating or fishing may actually reduce a lake's use for swimming. The type and condition of the lakeshore or streambank may even control the intensity of use for recreation enthusiasts by controlling their access and number. Surface water bodies with excessive bank erosion or adjacent muddy bottom lands can create too much turbidity for fish life or safe swimming, especially if the lake or stream is shallow. However, even if some limitations are apparent presently, more water in the future can be made available for recreation, indus- trial, and domestic purposes through a concerted program emphasizing a reduction in quantities of water used by industry (e. g. , recircula- tion of cooling water), control of sediment yield and soil erosion, increased treatment of waste discharges, low flow augmentation, con- struction of reservoirs and artificial lakes, and increased use of 63 waste waters for activities not requiring high sanitary and health standards. Noting the number of studies, it would seem that much attention has been paid to the physical, bacterial, and chemical qual- ities of water. Very little attention has been given the quantitative aspect, i. e. , volume of water, amount of land area covered by water, rate of flow, size of drainage basin, and length of stream. More in- formation of this nature would be helpful for making determinations of the water body's potential use as related to its surrounding land fea- tures. What is needed is a rational determination of relationships among these characteristics, such as, relating the size of a drainage basin to length of its main stream, volume to rate of flow, and amount of land covered with water to depth of water. Practically no data are available on these relationships, with the exception of length of main stream to the size of its drainage basin. The Outdoor Recreation Re- sources Review Comrnission published an interesting tabulation of figures when its staff uncovered a relation of stream length to the mean size of drainage basins in the United States. Table 3 is an adaptation of the Commission's findings. In reading the table, it must be remembered that the ”mean drainage area" does not reflect the actual amount of land surface, but the area on a horizontal plane. Therefore, watersheds that have excessively irregular terrain will have a much greater ratio of surface area to stream length. This 64 factor, however, would only be critical in small watersheds. Table 3. --Relation of Stream Order to Stream Length and Mean Drainage Basin Size in the United States Stream Order Average Length Mean Drainage Area (miles) (square miles) 1 l 1 2 2. 3 4. 75 3 5.3 23 4 12 109 5 28 518 6 64 2,460 7 147 11, 700 8 338 55, 600 9 777 264, 000 10 1,790 1,250,000 For the purpose of this thesis, all lakes situated in the study area were classified according to their sizes in one of six acreage groupings. 9 Rivers and streams were classified according to their lengths and the area of basin which they drain. No detailed inventory or appraisal of the chemical qualities, physical qualities, nor average depth or rate of flow has been possible in this study. The various size groupings for lakes are (a) less than 65 10 acres, (b) 10 to 20 acres, (c) 21 to 50 acres, (d) 51 to 100 acres, (e) 101 to 200 acres, and (f) more than 200 acres. Rivers and streams in the Chelsea study area are classified in Table 4. Table 4.--Classificafion of Rivers and Streams in the Chelsea Study Area Classification Average Size of Length Drainage Basin (miles) (square miles) Primarya (main river) 140 892 Secondaryb (tributary) 5- 12 23- l 09 Tertiaryb (tributary) 2-5 5-23 aActual length of the Huron River and area of drainage basin which it drained. bBased on the definitions used by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. Land Drainage The importance of data on natural drainage cannot be over- looked in determining the use potential of land. Natural drainage should be considered because of the effects probable floods may have on natural and cultural land uses. Edminster and Schilfgaarde state that ”excess water becomes a problem when it interferes with tillage, 66 FIGURE VII. LAKES .3 55'54I55I52: /" ‘ilII'J. II5 I II4 / I c.1VI—IIIVOITUJ 15o I29 125 ' I27 I44 °.v.‘l43I I42 | MI E}:-: , _.—- —__.- __.- Z; I. ‘ " MI-- , —+—- m."— "+5”— ‘ - "L - --'I IIIIIIIIIéfkb" ' _IT—‘—'—T— “__l__-‘._... I ’- AIi" -. I - I I50 m I I525. I55 I I54 "5 '“I' .I 1, tI...III'.....IIII'III WISE" _. ____ —-i—— + . ' . ‘ _ ' II :I II _;_'1.- g _____ mm“ II ”III” 2.. IIIIIII IIIII'III -. I77 ‘ I75 ‘I75 I73 I I72 I I IIIII‘IIIIIIIII'IIIII g-IIIIIIIIII.:ilI Imin "I“IIIIII'IIIIII I 7'; IIIIIIII I'III I I III I” ”IIIII' I TIIiII'II II'_-_—_-‘ __ ' 1- . ' 'LT-. ~T—- I . 7 2§5 I259 I250 gel III “I” I -. :91 ’— :-:2.-." I III-HI I 'I': - ' ' - 2' :. .4 - . \ —r-- — ‘ ”XI—I"! I‘III' . L I y- M . I 270 255 1255 I2 7 :. _ __ _ L. III. III... . _- -. , T . F .. -— II: . :' I u ‘ l '4‘ - '. I L g : ::' : I - ‘ I 1%.! . . 59“" ‘1. .— .1...— ”5 .73, '7‘. ' 4 I IO ‘ 2I5 I 2:4 I .53” a?“ _ - -' _ j 'u.l"'.___". ' '3? , I 225 I 222 I 22I I 220 I 2I9 O n" -- 505 r5Io ' II" " ~ - . - . . I '45—— - ‘ O P . . .- 7 —” . . ' 559 I550 “I ,' I ... o I O I - - . _ __—* __d I 552 isoI I .34 407—1405 ----- . . + . . . . ‘ ”‘9‘m-Ir‘ 1 2:4 I I ‘ _/.. ‘44l I 442 . 44 {444 I 445 44ol 447 445 W: 455 o _ .1. _ _ .L _‘_‘> I I .I__ I__ \ I, I —r— —7—— \\—-—- _ .___+____..-—— —T -—I --;r —- 474 @4751472 ‘47. ’ 4 0 . 459 I 455 '457 I 455 I455 ‘54 I ‘63 .“2 I4“ I “01 I“ “7 ( _ +-+_+——i‘ IJIINBALI' a+— fii—I—_ —— l ‘02. 455 I). 455 I 45 I457 .455 459 '490-1 . 492 I495 :494 I 495 ' 9 I 497 I 490 I ‘99 50°: 5 [502 503 504 I . I ~\ I. ~ 1:.'.°.:1>— -—- -§—4 — —9—- —— -_.:__-_T:_:.T; >- -¢— -—- —-4~ -— ' — —$— — ‘4’- __ r1-.— - 4. ‘ —-\: *_ — ——ll>- — _fgf . 1— - f '11- — l+‘ —‘ 4 525 I 527 525 . 525 '-' 524‘ 2 ”+1": :: MI I 520 I 5:9 5I5 35I7 I5I5 I5l ,5l4 .5I5 5I2 ‘ MO 509 505 150‘! 505 ‘ 505 - A -_ 3:, I I . . I , ~ I --+—-§—-+———*—— - ‘-+——--4————i—_ ‘ I -d. A- -+—-*"—‘ I I=:;-—¢ -_. ' ' . I), I f . I I ‘. 529 I550 55I I552\155 55 |5353536 .557 . 55o 559 1540 I 54 542 , 545 544 545 525 547 548 | 549 530 56' I352 11- ——. +—— -I>--—-+---r—— ‘——"——-f-'— -— —— _. —— I amino-o fl—T‘ —‘-'U-—-I*‘— " O. I. I C ”I II .. l I I 5.79 '57}: 5 4 I 575 I57I M5 ‘ 557 555 554 I 55 I552 q 55.: 550 l 59 5 \ 554 I555 :L 7.0.5 4.; _I. flfl_ _L__._‘ - ._.__ ‘ ’ s. - I ." N“~f-... . . I" I LESS THAN IO ACRES IOI TO 200 ACRES .;.;.;.;. IO TO 20~ ACRES MORE THAN 200 ACRES 2| TO 50 ACRES 5| TO IOO ACRES 35--.---I 0 ”2 I 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY 32%;...zfic’“°‘“""‘”°”““ SCALE IN MILES JANUARY I965 FIGURE RIVERS 55 | 52 I00 _+__ I II42 II4II +0.1” II45I II45 --L-— II57 I55, I54 I55I -+ 240| '245 -——H-— 204 I255 P... I255|25o I335 -_.L_ I 337 —--L _ I 3.4 305 . I 555 —--L I425 I 24 440 __+_ I474 I475 47II _..+.__ _._I l 457 I455I 459 I490 _-.f._.4.__.+___ |52II 520 I5I5 "+‘—‘-+--—-*I-—— I555 555 1557 I +—+ 477 I475 _.+... 479 4UI '— I4 _.+_._ 525 I527 525I 525 524I —+— ——+ 525 I550 55I I552 452I 455 575 575| 5 .J.__"L I575 1. 0 x/ N :2 2;____ o I/2 I 2 SCALE IN MILES 67 VIII. AND STREAMS —+ GSI "T I u. I25 'I27 |I24 I I IS? —_—I'_-_E I50II75 I72 I vs I2NII I I 220I2I5 I“ I 2C3 \ I 505 I5I0 : 5 7 5I5 I 355 I356 555 .555 I 382 SCI I 384 ‘30} I I404 405 I405 407 I405 4|! IOII 457: 455 0 I ‘65 454 I455 452 I _._.5._- I 452 |455 I494 “I—‘~L 5I5 I 5I7 I 5I5 497 I495 499 506 __--I_..- 554 I555 545 ' 4 I545 I :560 ' I I552 q SCI I__-_ n SOURCE HIGH“?! 'ATEI [BOUICIS COMMISSION PRIMARY SECONDARY TERTIARY RICHARD A. MALTBY JANUARY I965 68 land preparation, the deve10pment of plants and harvest Operations. "10 Excess water is also detrimental to some types of waterfowl and wild- life habitat areas, especially nesting places. And in urban and suburban areas excess water if not prOperly channeled to storm drains interferes with housing and industrial deve10pments. If natural drainage courses and their adjacent flood plains are left unobstructed, much of the excess water can be prOperly con- trolled through surface runoff, seepage, evaporation and by transpira- tion of water by adjacent vegetation. Land drainage conditions are created by a number of factors. A few are (a) type of soil, (b) character of terrain, (c) type of plant and tree cover, (d) degree of stream obstruction, and (e) type of drainage structures. The type of soil is important because of its corresponding water seepage rate or permeability. Beauchamp states that certain soils have different abilities to absorb water. 11 Clay and clay loams have very slow rates, silt and silty clay loams perform slow to moderately slow, sandy loams can receive water from moder- ately slow to a rapid rate, and muck and peat from zero to slow. The soil's water seepage rate also depends upon the soil's location relative to land elevation, the amount of rainfall, and the season. The natural drainage conditions in the study area are shown on Figure 9. Three types of conditions are expressed. Their descriptions are as follows: 69 Condition No. 1. --These lands have M drainage and are not subject to flooding. Lands that are rated No. 1 are suitable for all intensive and extensive uses depending, of course, on other factors. Condition No. 2. --These lands have is}; drainage but are subject to seasonal or variable flooding. Lands that are classified as No. 2 may be used, depending on other factors, for intensive and extensive agricultural and recreational uses. Condition No. 3. --These lands have ‘Loo_r drainage condi- tions and are usually subject to seasonal or even permanent flooding. The lands may be good for certain types of agricultural Operations such as truck gardening, provided that the flood waters recede before planting and harvesting periods. Such lands may also be used for recreation, but are considered inappropriate for either intensive or extensive industrial and residential developments. Woodlands The chief focus here is on the private, small woodlots that dot the landscape, rather than the large state or federal owned for- ests. The forested lands of the study area are small and scattered, mostly stocked with softwood species and mixed with ash-elm hardwoods. 12 Most woodlots are located near the center of the original mile survey sections, left over from the early timber cutting days. 70 FIGURE IX. LAND DRAINAGE :TTJ IMII'u 37 3 331,3 ' I44 I...~I43| :42 l |4|_ .. 233(290129 ‘-- 41*‘91’, 31+ I335 334. :-3’ 3 337 I3 . 342 l 3 i * “ “t: 334 333§3oz A31? s— GOOD SCALE IN MILES FAIR SOUICE: U . S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY . LT BY P 0 O R R ICHARD A MA JANUARY I965 NAPS. SOIL COPGERVA‘HON SERVICE. 'MHTENAW DBTRICI, MICHIGAN. AND VASHTENAW COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMBSXON 71 These wooded remnants later provided the necessary building mate- rials and fuel for the farmers who followed the timber industries and occupied the cutover lands. Today, most of these woodlots go un- attended. Although many of the woodlots are in fair condition, im- proved management practices could be performed. It has been sug- gested that improvements could be made by removing cull and dead trees, eliminating undesirable species, and trees of poor form, confining mature trees by selective cutting, protecting woodlands from grazing and fire, and planting trees on submarginal agricultural 1 lands. 3 All of these improvements if carried out would tend to increase saw timber yields as well as provide better nesting places for fowl, habitat areas for animals, and pleasant environments for certain recreation activities. Perhaps the best ways to use the woodlots, in light of their present condition, is for watershed management, soil erosion, and surface water control and ground water replenishment. The potential also exists for much greater use of the woodlots for recreation. Clawson, in Landfgr the Future, states: Forests have high value for recreation, watershed manage- ment, wildlife, sometimes for grazing and mineral, and these to a degree not often found for land used primarily for other purposes. In fact, the primary objective of much 72 ownership of small forest tracts classified as commercial forests, is not to produce wood fiber but to provide recrea- tion or in other ways satisfy the human values of land ownership. 14 In this thesis, woodlots are treated to their overall size and to the per cent of land area which they cover. Studies on the type of tree species and other characteristics of forests have not been possible in this thesis. In terms of per cent of land area covered with trees in a grid block, all woodlots in the study area are grouped in one of three percentile groups, which are: (a) less than 10 per cent coverage, (b) 10 to 30 per cent coverage, (c) more than 30 per cent coverage. The analysis of woodlands also includes the size of woodlots, expressed in terms of acre groups. The acreage groupings are (a) less than 30 acres, (b) 31 to 100 acres, and (c) more than 100 acres. Figures 10 and 11 show the locations of woodlands in the study area in terms of per cent of land acre covered and size of woodlots, respectively. Topography The topography of the study area generally slopes from a southeasterly to a northwe sterly direction. Elevations vary from 870 feet above sea level in the east to l, 100 feet in the we st. The southeastern portion of the study area is level to gently rolling; how- ever, for the most part the study area is characterized by gently WOODLANDS — PERCENT 73 FIGURE X. COVERAGE ‘I 9 °V ' I O I M. I" .2 z-M- =4 . I °I=I I° .. 2.. I“ ‘2 I O O O I O O _ i .L _ _ I o u ._ ,_, _ -._ —+- ¥:l'lO—” I":.’.'-.+P .. 3+ -. 9:0:o:_ 5...: 'q.t. 3.9 + . l I I .l o o o '0'. . o :23pr ”91:3“; gH. "bI' .. 1.13:} no 223 an :I I. 419.1,. 2:. "L4;: m o 4-3—0 ____g_ _ 9 o o _ _ NT” __+_p_p : 0.. 0- . W,I 245 Iii“: , .7 I14. 2 +4$30 2'3: '232 law 7 ' 3 I239 I240 33: r. N. u I I O. ' ‘ I3 O O _l O O. .W O .0....; — — — +0 0 0... . L 4‘1 0 o o o . o l zul ”I 33 I233 '3‘th 132—51. 279 273 33:. 273 274 i273 I: 34:”. no It" 2 7 :33 1 _V_4_1$§’__.f' r. 3.3.. I ”:1. | b 299 I 290 29 .531: so 309 I no I VT ‘ a o I O . 1324 i m 'o 3 iris: 7 _ + _ // .. i . . "(n-a ,3 0 SI 33 p ' 334 333 I 333 . i l — — 7 JILI-C'02~o-o-~b—— ‘ _ I o " I. o o 4 I o . . .1737: I37ll I BVOJI,}§€.€J.6§:I'§67 393 . _ _ ,/ I o" o o -0 o I - I.’ I \ o J 397 393 399 400 am 302 4038 I24“- - . . “fl. __ _ _ _ _ _ I g _D I o 0.: o w --I ”n are ‘ 44‘. toru.1[o:::o 0.01. ‘ I. / ' — :vl.v"“tW\. ' ‘3 g o T I 0.....I 4.1.3 '1’322'5?’ mas/’43 . P“? “" ' ”2 ' “ I4“ I “5 ”5 :49???" 6} 430‘ I? -‘ 432 I ° ‘3’ ’ ‘I' " ' P22: 4 ‘ ' — ‘3‘:§:'3'.';‘.:2'r.";t ' 4" -‘ “n _, — 45°51’36“; ’7 >1 F533??? "‘90:." 479 ‘ 1W3 :IfiV. I476 C413 x474 sz‘IS-i. 3:12'. 34:71.]! 4 0 I469 . 468 5467 ‘ 466 I 463 ‘6“ ' “53 3:4'PéJ'I6I' I: ’ —::'.:'Lo .L“ i 3'“— o' :.T.'. ’3‘. .. o H. . H. I I ..:u:.' 5.51 b7-34 ‘ f . .' . . 04 kai‘ ; 2:4. ‘I::’.'?:::.‘:?.’. ‘ 492£4nz 494 ::’?3:I ‘ 9 VH2: ‘98 ‘99 . 500 :.§. {3“ 5.02 50‘ '7? I; -_- f - _. _ -.V-:-,‘T I, tj- 67:" -, .:.:.:i,;.:.;:,..::?- ‘T .. . . 7 , ,- ‘ A cool-0’00. .‘oo..'.'. _‘32 lzsga: . 32: _|.3.20'. 3:9 sue ‘ 3:7 [Isle 13;. :.gt}'- 3I3 3I2 ‘3“ .99.: .333. 3:09.: 5W ': 99.3.. . ‘ _ I? :'_r'_. .0;l:_'" ? ”é...-= __.7 x‘\ ”km“... ‘_ ... '- . . . I\ 33 I33 I333 I 343 544 343 332 + - -.I— — ‘ , __ 4...... WWI-u E" Op ‘ ' o 37: I “my ‘362 q 33: 360 I 4*. __ “I Ol/2l 2 SCALE IN MILES SOURCE: WMH’I’ENAW COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING COHMBSION _-_ L_- LESS THAN IO PERCENT IO TO 30 PERCENT RICHARD A. MALTBY MORE THAN JANUARY I965 30 PERCENT 74 FIGURE XI. SIZE OF WOODLANDS r 1 L ‘ ' 9.. ‘ - I9 . _I _2_o_ h.+ 23 .1. 3o 29 29 I _ F 9?“ 7 9 9 79 I II... 7 394:3 .4 39:: -77 , I09 II II3 I II4 II Lg; I " 5"” “u 911947397919: I . 9. 2 I I3I I9 I29 I29 : I27 I29 I I .. - .fi‘ .usIV—L—I I37 1:99: m I I92: I99 I I94 I99 _+— '9‘. '4‘" —'I"-+ ‘ 9.:79. -- I90! I79 I :1 I77 I79 I79 I79 Mo); I — + — . ' 4' 99.97! '5“?— — 9 ‘72o7(I on 2 9 I I0 I2 m I m :I’ _+_ __ -_+_!_.L .. _—+ Luau-9:9—I‘ . 29I 227 I 229 ‘ '229I 229 I ml 220 l 2I9 I" m '— To? fi+— ,— o.r.. "I‘"J":V'; ‘1 I O . '. . 9 .9. 9.9 9. . ‘r , . 9 9 9. 9 . . '.' ‘ 4.9-“249'4' . \ 47 I 149 2 ~. 30 an 232 2 . . . . 7. I 9 :‘3 239 I 290 an 293 I'29 P " 3m“° ” — 4'- Ir-q- -* ' I .‘~- 9.9: II M K ‘ \fl :2. 97 I 99 I293 29H 9I ‘ "279 279 277 I279 (271924 274 3273 I. ’32 2 :270 299 I299 I2 7 299 2 .. ——I I‘. 7' - —f __F- - .9 4.: O . .}__ .9...‘.0.0 . ’. .. . —.:' . 9.0. .1__ __‘J—Tia \ \ | ‘ 9"4l 293 g 299 (£97 I' . :Izé I3oo 39:32:81': . .. .. . :j [T o T at] 309 I|3Io : G I 3'5}:- 9 . 9 ~ .‘F— _ . 59‘7th 9, ‘ . . . . 0‘. . 9 9 9 9 I 9 . .9. 9.9%:fi! / I6 I dl I324 9.9 §[;.:‘: . I .9. '9.m:9-::::.—'I'JVI I , — . . ‘ "II-99:49:: ... ’3' '3‘ 4.‘ 343 K349 347 M3 9 / . ' ' ° '. .I. . . . ,, | 3 o I , 33 . 334 333 I339 33 LS!" . r: fi'rrfi ,' "7 T — _ _ i./_ 4L __ — 4L ~ —.—. I - — Tn-J'r'r'. 9 . . . . .94— I9 . ' ”9 9 9.9.9.9.. p?q.}.§{z.. 37_ 73 . 374 ,- 3,3 372 ||3 37I 370,993“; » 399 $3971. 999-4 393 .339' ' '93. ' :4: '.'4~“" ‘\ 1 .9 9 9 / ”19.9.9 9 9 9 9 9.9 9 9 Li. .", A. ‘ W _ +. .:+_| I I 9 9“_‘fi. .; 9 9 9 . $493394: BSI. I 332 , 393 ‘ \4 I 393 , . - 397 399 399 400 40I '902 996 145(5951 409 407 [93919: 33.“??? .» ‘ If — —‘3‘ +. #1 r. -'. ‘1 "" _-._ - - , —‘+ , ' L‘ - -.~; .’. . . 9 9 9 Q , ‘ 9 9 9 9 I 9 9 9 9.9 I .' . ' 419 f 423 24 :f33. 'L'4zvi- '9'4*oJ-‘3° 471 4I'6 “2 I‘” 44%! I '9 9 9 9 9 o 1 0 . . ' l T ‘ -. 99 - ~ w: \ I 43‘6/‘1’43 44o ' 44I I:4§4{.I 44 4943-4943 I 447 449 Y9\\430 _1 '9' 3° 4‘59 _ . t {I - I ‘ ,_ ‘3‘. .__.. I 0 ' ' . _L“ . . . . 9 l— l 2 T __ _ _ __4&:Af. '4908 479 I M“-n.7.‘ 479 A73 I474 I“)? 4 o - 499 I 499 E497 ‘ 499 | 463 ‘6“ I ‘63 ”:99 ‘6' I “6&162 ‘57 "alt-3 , “HI .. ~ .. m».- —*‘ '* —-’-"‘-- . ' I 492 HSth'é'C‘I'I'IiSZfl 9 . 497 499 499 . 300:13’ '- i ' I — I —- - 3393.34: "3&3 Cf 7“ “ -—!::.:.—; 3.9.1.53: 9 9 9 9 9 I d b 9 a 9 9 9 9 9 3:9 3I7 :5l6 L'sI: .31}'. I3 13m ‘3“ 5m .30}: 39.9.3.3 ' I «£43 “311 339 I340 | 34 3:923: €543;- - 3 399 394 ' 39 I 392 (I 3m I 335; {i_L— _. ‘_,L.- I____L-___ ... 4 N > LESS THAN 30 ACRES o I/2 I 2 I SCALE IN MILES i 30 TO IOO ACRES MORE THAN IOO ACRES ”mummcom, RICHARD A. MALTBY 30%;?“ “m“ JANUARY |965 75 rolling to steep hills. Slopes of 10 per cent or more are found in the eastern and northern part of the study area. Figure 12 shows the predominate degree of 810pe per grid block. Each grid block is rated according to that degree of slope com- manding the largest acreage in the block. The slope analysis consists of five percentage groups, which are (a) less than 10 per cent, (b) 10 to 20 per cent, (c) 21 to 30 per cent, (d) 31 to 40 per cent, and (e) more than 40 per cent. T0pography is one of the major factors in the determination of land use locations. Hills, valleys and their corresponding degree of sloPe may impose limitations upon location and intensity of develop- ment. In some instances steep slopes are positive factors in satisfy- ing certain requirements, as regarding extensive recreation. With respect to highway planning and construction, the American Association of Highway Officials states: In the case of flat- land areas, topography in itself may exer- cise little, if any, control on location; but it may cause diffi- culties in some design elements such as drainage or grade separations. On the other hand, in rugged terrain the high- way location and certain features of design may be almost completely governed by the topography. 15 Normally, residential and industrial land areas require slopes of less than 10 per cent. With special site development design, however, low density, extensive residential deve10pment can be ac- commodated on slopes up to 20 per cent. The writer does recognize, 76 however, that residences can be located on slopes greater than 10 to 20 per cent, as is the case in certain districts of San Francisco, Calif- ornia, Cincinnati, Ohio, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. However desirable these districts may be, they do not represent the typical location or layout of the majority of residential areas. This study is concerned with the finding of land areas suitable for the prevailing trend of residential locations. Wetlands An inventory of wetlands is important to this study because of wetlands usefulness to programs for extensive recreation and water- fowl and wildlife habitat management. Wetlands when properly pro- tected and managed are also useful in extending the time of surface water runoff, thus helping to regulate the flow of streams. In many instances wetlands may be the primary source of river water. Often there is competition among these uses for certain types of wetlands. In some instances these uses even compete with agriculture, especially if the wetlands are capable of being drained. There are many types of wetlands. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service reported in a recent study that the continental United States contains twenty ecological types of wetlands. The classifica- tions of wetlands are based mainly on location, vegetation, water depth, salinity, and the growing season. 77 FIGURE XII. DEGREE OF 79 n3! Ni nut :23 ‘127 I 00*.le 1 l93 IIBQ RE» ,--, 1223l 222‘ 27c :21; 1274 '30:, SOII m.-.__.——. t524 323 — ~~——-- 37” 370A\369 sea K567 / ‘ ‘ 393 399 400 4C: §oz \ :444 I445 l I 469 i468 ‘54 466 1465 ‘53 492 !493 !494 .495 ‘ ‘ ‘ v 516 540 :54 LESS THAN IO PERCENT 3| no TO 20 PERCENT 2| TO 30 PERCENT L’r'\ a "*1 (3 |1’2 l 2 mamm‘ SCALE m MILES lzro SLOPE TB ) IT II, I“. Inga 4-- us: '154 i 220 Izuo -.+.——l — -+ 200 i200 la :00 {3:0 3azjissa _$__ _+__. $39 F300 _wl..- 364 383 cos [400 407 |400 4m ‘4“ 453 ‘.: tag. 460Tbgg 55 ——_r / is. .k’ sor Iso; .flf—T at m 503 — ~a... see 506‘ ‘549 i 55: ;552 . LJ‘ -. - . --. 554 :55: TO 40 PERCENT MORE THAN 40 PERCENT RICHARD A. MALTBY JANUARY l965 78 Wetlands are of many types: (a) wetlands that are not swamps, primarily seasonally flooded basins or flats, fresh water meadows and irregularly flooded salt marshes; (b) water areas not primary land consisting of Open fresh or saline waters, sounds and bays; and (c) genuine swamps classified into one of thirteen ecologi- cal types, including wooded swamps, mangrove swamps, shallow fresh marshes, deep fresh marshes, shrub marshes, bogs, saline flats, saline marshes, shallow fresh meadows, deep fresh meadows, salt flats, salt meadows, and irregularly flooded salt marshes. In this study various types of wetlands are not distinguished one from theother. Rather, the per cent of land area which they cover in a grid block is noted. Four percentile groups are mapped on Figure 13. The per cent of land area covered in a grid block and corresponding acreage groups are (a) less than 10 per cent coverage or, approximately, less than 16 acres; (b) 10 to 25 per cent, or, approximately, 16 to 40 acres; (c) 26 per cent to 50 per cent or, approximately, 41 to 80 acres; and (d) more than 50 per cent or, approximately, 81 to 160 acres. Highways and Roads Four types of highways are considered in this study. Their locations in the study area are depicted by the shaded grid blocks on Figure 14. The four types are limited access freeways, major hard- surface highways, minor hardsurface roads, and gravel roads. In 79 FIGURE XIII. WETLANDS fO/V “Ht—J?“ I o'\39 5a ‘ + MIVIL. l 57 I 55 I5 W" II . I” '--I’ _ -. 557/Of” ———+— : a. ”5.35 I. 249 | 290 | 25 :5" t - —+ WET IT ‘ [I g 555 554 i 5 ._ 7 - I3IB 7 o ' , 33 ~ . 334 353 I 356 $133 .33 5 7 o,‘\559 55;\557 565 E§§ .3. -‘ 35:5 _ . i: u uvc-I I'l’td ‘ 4 595 :5. .. 597 590 599 ' 400 .~.; 13L x f _ _5; ‘fién' 5:" _______ 24 I f2: i 422 4 ‘ 420 j4M T‘— _ _ _ 442 I 44 :444 I 445 44c; 447 44s I I 47: I4 0 I459 I 455 E457 466 .463 {H 225- 222I 22: I 220 | 2:9 I .l7|. --‘+ — — a I 259 Izoo 26: , Y ,' " —¢-— 274 5275 I “g” 270 3331”} 255 la I\.\Il. nu-onuu-f“ F.— ulvusll . . _- F' l I I 492 I495 I494 495 ‘ .497 “I’l‘99 |"0°: —+— ._—-4———-+- "" _— _‘Ti . ' I 2 I522 I52: I520 I 5:5 5:5 15:7 imc I5: 5:4 -5:5 5:0 50) _ g‘W—‘T—‘+— I udu T _ "z 55 3555 536 l 557 555 . 559 '540 |54 542 ' 545 E5 4 —«—-.$—-— ——‘——4 —- —— __ _. -— n‘ We . 557 555 564 55 55245 : _..J___i._‘ _4___ ___A__ ___L__ n I LESS THAN IO PERCENT O I/2 I 2 SCALE IN MILES IO TO 25 PERCENT 26 TO 50 PERCENT IOUICI: U. 8. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY “A"; 3011.. CONSEIVATION SERVICE. 'MHTIZNA' DBTMCT. MICHIGAN: AND human? COUNTY MITIOPOLZTAN 'MWG COME”! MORE THAN 50 PERCENT RICHARD A- MALTBY JANUARY 8O constructing the highway and road pattern on Figure 14, any grid block that is contiguous to or has one or more of the four types of highways traversing it was noted. All highways and roads are shown, with the exception of the freeway segments between interchanges. The reason for omitting the segments between interchanges is that they do not af- ford access to the facility. Land occupied by the freeway in the study area comprises about 400 acres, excluding the land used principally for freeway interchanges. The 400 acres were not suhracted from the total acreage of land in the study area. In indicating access to freeways all grid blocks that are contiguous to interchanges were noted. Railroads One of the foremost considerations for intensive industrial development is efficient transportation of raw materials and finished products. Although more industries are locating in areas not serviced with rail lines, it is still important to assume that a majority of in- dustries, especially the durable goods manufacturing type, will seek site locations near railroad facilities. Other industries may seek sites near limited access freeway interchanges and major hardsurface highways. The location of the rail line in the study area is shown on Figure 15. The shaded area includes all grid blocks that are either traversed by or contiguous to a railroad. O I/2 I 2 SCALE IN MILES IOUICZ' 'ASHTENAV COUNTY [0A0 coumxou 81 FIGURE XIV. HIGHWAYS AND ROADS 44: I442 __l__ FREEWAY INTERCHANGE MAJOR HIGHWAY MINOR HIGHWAY GRAVEL ROAD RICHARD A. MALTBY JANUARY I965 82 FIGURE RAILROADS XV. ' - - 51—4 - 0 2: 2 _.I. IT‘J‘ 25 I / 70 ‘ ‘ 7.2... 7 '15-1-545-Id\ 75 | 75 I 74 ‘..... .__I__ —-L \ . I I ‘~ ::7 1:5 H, / — _— ‘3 \J l :24 I I .2. ‘—c- "I"——Il—-— \ \ l ‘ :57 5a. I :50 :5: :55 . I :55 _. __ __5_ —— —‘2\ I a i I\ :50I I79 I I :77 ' :75 :75 :75 I :72 I I :70 I” —'+— 0+ 5555' _' +— \ I I 2:5 2:4 I ‘ I 207 I 05 2 9 :o :2 I I95I I94 : :95 I6: I I97 .99 2 20I(‘~2I 202 204 I 5 __ I = I ‘2 I2| 31+; +—d¥~ —--——+ —+ — —+-:-I - ——+ --.-v—-. : I \‘ / ° I T 255-1— 254C?l .252 I m :25 0 I22§I 25VI227 | 225 4 225l 222 I 2: I 220 12:92 I2 _ 2‘77 " “TL— '”-—= +— — — u. "I" — z’j - + I I ~ AA . ' {I245 +11; 47 I245 350 25: '252 If ' 255 259 I250 25: _2 255 at25 '—~I-~ ' ”L -- - -+ -I- r . ~~ -1 \ I I I 5 I I7 259I255|27 255 L254 I 25b LINLI 5I'I’I:‘ 275 277 275 I 275 I 274 a 275 2 2 |2 o —_ 2 I _ a;——— —I——— \- I’" __ _I —I ‘ I I I I I 5 5 I o c ' 259 | 290. 29 941 295 3 295 £97 I t 0 I 2, 30° 3°' 303 3 I I I I L _ -4 VLJ—‘T - '7 t-fi _; \g‘? I m __ _ I335 .E 3 9- 2 7I55I 5iI24|525 f" —. I — 5m“ 3733A I 3 3:2 I 3 3 I 3‘4 . 3‘3 .4 355 I336 3sdl 35. X9 I330 .- --I--§-— - .+-=-+—- . . —-I-- —4I—-——4—— I 554 555' 552 50 5‘5 1 577 5 5 I572 I57: I 570; 559 $3555 I 57 555 I555 554 I 555 552 :55: I '- ? —4> —) ‘imu‘ ._ I . '.' ‘d _ " i ”Cf/:25 557 I 555 559I 90 4 595 597 595 : 599 I 400 40: I 02 40 I404 405 l 405 407 I 405 La“ 'fl'll. ’ +— 4 —‘ 3*.' __L_—-+~—— _—’r — —— [III— ‘ __JI'-_“ 432‘ I I ~. . ‘ I I l _— 425 24 I 425 I 422 4 420 Iqrg 4:5 4:2 4:: ”urn-orb . as? . . . I "°* \a ‘L—\ ‘ + r 1 ’. | “ 4—.\ -- P-’— ‘ —‘v-' T 13; MALI: 454 I 455 440 44: I 442 I 44 I444 I 445 445' 447 I 4413“"‘536‘I 455915 I452 455 3'53“ 455 .455 I2- . _I_I_I_+ 2.- f “4,4-.. _- 9 _— rfm 5-.-, _ I l '450 475 A73 I474 I475 I 472 .47. I4 0 I459 I 455 £457 I 455 I 455 “5‘ I ‘53 ‘52 N" “5334,1150: ‘57 _ i —* —+— I —fl' + 1mum- ' " ° 4 0 -v: 455 I ,5 55 I 45 II457 I 455 I 459 I490 I I I 492 | 495 I494 I495 9 I 497 I 498 499 . 500: 5?! [5152 ' ‘14— ”t" “"r'r+—*+— ‘+~HL~-Ia—‘L' j" “—I*—-!C~*v-I~—+.w . . | I N 525 I527 525 I 525 ’524 '12 I522 I52: I 520 I 5:9 5:5 I 5:7 I5:5 I5: 13l4 I5I5 5:2 IVLII 5:0 50/6 5081,50“? - -= - “—41 .l I ‘ .2 ' _»« . I E —.. .I K —+ —I———l._ I If / ___ __ I, J I 529 I550 55: I552 KH.355 I554 I 555 555 I557 I555 542 I545 I 5 4 I 545 545I 549 I ”550 ' " ‘_‘I’ * “I __ I-c-IIMI ‘ —+_‘ —"—T I 575 575 I 5 4| 575' 5 . 557 I552 q 55: :55 55% 554 I555 2 .__1___l.. _L_—_L_-s.._&—— _ __L_.__L r 1\ I I E: o I/2 I 2 MICE: 'Mmm' COUNTY , 333w” SCALE IN MILES / RICHARD A. MALI-BY JANUARY I955 83 Utilities Utilities as defined in this study are limited to central water supply and sewage disposal systems. Of primary consideration in de- termining the use potential of land for intensive functions is the lo- cation of land areas that can be easily serviced with central water supply and sewage disposal systems. The existing and probable future utility service districts in the study area are shown by the shaded grid blocks on Figure 16. The shaded areas represent a ten- to twenty-year growth period, based on information obtained from the Washtenaw County Metropoli- tan Planning Commission and the villages of Chelsea and Dexter. The larger water and sewer system is operated by the village of Chelsea. Dexter's utility service district extends approxi- mately one half mile into the study area and includes about 480 acres. The Chelsea system can service roughly 2,880 acres. The capacity of both the Chelsea and Dexter systems in terms of population for 1980 are shown in Table 5. 84 Table 5. --P0pulation Capacity of Utility Systems in the Chelsea Study Area18 Municipality 1980 Planned Design (per capita) Sewer Water Chelsea 6, 500 7,300 Dexter Z, 550 4, 900 Both Systems 9,050 12,200 Land Use Deve10pment Criteria While the physical and locational aspects of a natural re- source may influence the choice of a land use type in a certain area, it is the desired combination of certain natural resources with man- made features in the broad sense that determines the potential use of land. In preparing the sets of develoPment criteria to follow, re- ports and articles prepared by urban planners, agriculturists and conservationists were used. Rather than present a discussion on land development cri- teria, a table has been prepared listing all the necessary characteris- tics of natural resources and man-made features of the study area 85 FIGURE XVI. CENTRAL WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL SERVICE AREAS + .— 37 I 33 I 3 I coil-TNT! 4%. " I—'I3'+ 2‘5I34I33I32 ' ‘ bl“ /—‘ I ”II: I— II3 | II4 .r‘I—L'TIIT'LQII TV: :29 I23 ' I27 I26 . I —— + — + —- 4L—uslv—FI I I37 044' I no I4I I 42;: I43 I I34 .—+-+— ——5— —-"-—+ - x” 02 I m '2 Iaol I79 I I I77 I73 I73 I I73 I I72 I I I" " "’ 0 nuv , — 4'— 2”; J31: 204 +—- co ' 207T ooIz 9 I I0 I - ‘w 1'3 I "‘ ‘2 0* VI - I | +19” ——-——+\r— +\‘=-- ——+ —§— 4 — - '“"."—"'. .. -~r 232 I w : 230522§>|>01127|223 - 4 I 223I 222' 2II 220 I 2w I 2w I ‘ —"¥— K. 'L‘_ ‘5'“- ‘+‘—+— —| ‘31.?” _+_-f_ '7'Ikg4o B‘ so 2'3I '232 la ' -- I 7 2? 239 I230 a'u "‘- 21‘203 L... _ _ __ V - _ - .— ' To \‘ OI!" ‘. -' ‘ T1+ T i: ' l _ -I' . $234 I 2&5 23 ’L_ a ._ I}: 276127;: I 274 227—3 2 270 —~— —. — \— V” . I 94I 223 2294 F97 I 90 : 2'3 30° __IL__1 I w: 310NT\369 : 334 I 363 362 :3“ - .. l ___l ~Ti ._/r' I 390 399 400 405 | 000 407 I 400 I ‘ I ‘ 337 3.8 389 90 39 LII-II. _ §L4/ _ , 1% I V /’ ______ — ....L —-—1——— - I . 420 - 4M 4I2 |4II __uo. «of, - p _ :43? 4 ‘4; :j NI I I 1 fi‘ & 'V / \ 443 443: 447 440 4:34» I432 433 fidm 433' J6 -_+___ lr__.I————T——”._.—f _. __.4 44.13443“ 433 I—-.I--+-. 4007: 479} V1: 477 I476 fl4 l "I 33 I 43 I 437 i +430 I 409 I490 l I | 492 I493 I494 I 493 497 I 493 499 50°: 5 I5 I ~ ~- ., -+— -—+—+—»+— —+-——L_-I__+ -4~ —-t- ——i~--I* -k—+I 329Mull—323's”g 324l 2 I322 I32: |320l3I9 3w {3:7 :3”; I3I 3I4 I3 I II so 300:3 I I l l I I .l .L 7 | ___ J-vn1v ' f I ' 529 I#2530 53! I332 33 Iss 539 I540 [54 542 543 544 S‘OIS‘SS 0 55I I352 — +—+——+——. . —+~— —- -—-,— -- F" ~I - "I” 576 I 575 | 5 4 I 573I ' 566 564:56L‘1362 q. SCI - - 56 l 5 554 '533 3 __J____L ._L. ‘ _.L_.__ __m_. .____i-_ __I___L 1 1 o n / ‘ H :5: mgxflmmwm I o "2 ' 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY All) mumm- COU‘NTY arr-aroma pm comm SCALE IN MILES JANUARY I965 86 needed by the eight uses. Table 6 summarizes the land development criteria according to positive, negative, and incorporeal factors of each of the eight potential uses. Positive factors are those that are definitely needed by a use for its prOper development; negative fac- tors are those that may be detrimental to the "success” of the use’s deve10pment; and incorporeal factors are those that are immaterial to the use. The table can also be used as a program for subsequent identification of the potential use or uses of land areas, simply by noting whether the land areas (i. e. , grid blocks) contain the pro- grammed characteristics. The capital letters P, N, and I stand for positive, negative, and incorporeal factors, respectively. In some cases the capital letters are accompanied by an asterisk. The asterisk indicates that only one of the several characteristics within its respective grouping (e. g. , Soil Permeability) will satisfy the land deve10pment criteria. All letters without an asterisk show that any of the natural resource or man-made characteristics may satisfy the land development criteria. 87 Q H Q H H H H H Z Z Z Z H Z Z Z Z Z Z Z H Z Z Z Z Z Z Z H Q Z Z Q Q Q Q H Q Z Z Q Q Q Q H Q Q Z Q Q Q Q H Q Q Z Q Q Q Q H Q Q Q Q Q Q Q H Q Q Q H wqusm bassnmofiuom mom a; $30 :> :30 F 2&0 .> wdeU 3 396 E 320 a 296 H mdeU 359%an :om .HVGH .HEH .mom .mom .oom .oom .Hm4 .Hm< .uxm was: wsxm as: Tim v.3 nsxm as: mama/w HmflcopoQ mmD UGQH Ho momtwh. moflmHHouomumSU ondumoh opmzudflz Head 9:50QO Haydn—NZ 393:0 quEmoHo>oQ pdwwH Ho Emnmonan .o 3an 88 Z H Z H H H H H HooQ * .H. 2 H 2 H H m m H .3er nH H m H H m m m H500 .H H m H H m m m EoHHmoxm HQHNB UHSOHHU z z z 2 H 2 H H m msfimm * * s. 2 H 2 H H H H H H, masmm 2 H 2 H H H H H m mung m H m H H H H H N 93st bHHBmmESm HHom .HVGH .UHHH .mom .mom .oom .oom .Hw< 8&4 .me .EH 5an .HaH .me .qu .me .EH a m H 0 Ho 0 a, .m moflmwnouomnmgo 9:5me ovmz L32 mmon< HmflaopoQ was. was: Ho momtnh Ham ooHSOmom HdHHSMZ 35380 .. - .o 2an 89 HH H H H H m *H m m issues H H H H m m m m. 38.80% H H H H m m m m imEHHnH HHdo mgmouum pad mnm>Hnnunoum3 custom H H H H Q Q Q Q monom oom Gwfi 982 H H H H Q Q Q Q memos com 8. 2: H H H H Q Q Q Q mouom ooH 0» Hm H H H H Q H Q Q monom om 0» HN H H H H Q H Q Q menus om 0H H: H H H H Q H Q Q mouom oH H85 mmowH 3G0 movaHunHoH—mg oomHHdm .HUHHH .HEH .mom .mom .oom .oom 8&4 Jaw/w .3an m .fiHH .finm .uHHH .3an .HGH .uxm .m .fiHH H m HV 0 0. mmofiw Hmflqoqu omD quwH Ho awning”. moEmHnouomHmHHU mag—dob. mpdSHnddv/H pad ooHSOmmm HandumZ 333qu - - .o 033. 90 H H H H Q H H H menus ooH 8.0m H H H H H H H H menus on ~35 muonH msoHHvooB Wm «Em H H H H m nH H z E8 Sm om as: 982 H H H H m m H H 38 3H on 8 oH H H H H H m H H 28 .8m 2 as: $3 owmnm>00 paproo>> z z z 2 H z z z quHsooHH. VH. H. * anodmanom o”— 0342an OH. HooFSm .mmdfimnp .HooQ z z z 2 H H m m maHHsooHH Braids o» «oonndm .owmanHHv HHNQ m m nH nH H H m nH qusooHH on .mmquSHv H500 * uw * * mcoHuHHodoU WWQHHNHQ 93.4 .65 .65 .mom .mom .oom .oom 8&4 .Hw< HH .me m .qu H .meH w .qu Ho .me o .qu n .pxm a. .EH 33333330 mdon< HmHuHHoqu omD Honda Ho monHiHH. onfiudoh muse/Huang paw ooHSOmom HandudZ smsqscoo - - .o 033. 91 H H H H H H H H Emu Sm mm 3 OH H H H H H H H H E8 Sm 0H :3... $3 mmmno>00 panic? z z z 2 H z z 2 ES 8H ow 52: 302 z z z 2 H z z 2 ES Sm 3. 8 Hm z z z 2 H m m z 38 SH ow 8 HM m z m 2 H m A H 38 3m om 8 0H m m m *nH H m m H 88 HRH 2 as: 33 gm gala] H H H H m H H H 38m 03 92: $on 3mm 3% .HvHHH .HEH .mom .mom .oom .oom .Hm< .um< .meH wJHHH HJXmH oJHHH Hodxm o .uHHH n— .uxm .m .fiHH moBmHHouodeHHU amok/w HmHH—Goqu omD Hound Ho moQHHH. shadowy. 0pm: .8334 Hood oUHSOmom HansudZ emsqsqoo - - .o 038. 92 H Q H Q H H H H 8.3%ka Hmmomma owmgom * * * * a. .w * * Hons QHQQSm H335 Hmfi—GoU H Q H H H H H H moHuHHHomQ pmonHHmm * * * * * * * V» H H *H H Q Q Q Q pmom Ho>mHO H H Q H Q Q Q Q Homom oodHHdmpHmHH .8ng m m m .H m m m m sassmfl momHHsmHEmHH .832 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q mwcmgououdH >m3moHQ mpmom paw mMMBHHwHHH Z Z Z Z H H Z Z «goo Mom om H35 v.82 a. * * * an * H H H H H H H H 38 8H om 8 cm ommno>00 c.9333 .HVHHH .UGH .mom .mom .oom .omm 8&4 .um< HHJNmH wJGH HJme oJHHH Hofime UJCH ndxm .m .uHHH moflmHHopomHmfiU mdoa< Hmfiqoqu omD H234 Ho mothH. 0.25de 063% L232 ooHHHOmom HmndudZ 3:23:00 - .. .o mHanH. 10. 93 Footnotes Portland Cement Association, Soil Primer, A report prepared by the Portland Cement Association for highway engineers. (Chi- cago: By the Association, 1956), pp. 10-29. J. O. Veatch, L. C. Wheeting, and Arnold Bauer, Soil Survey of Washtenaw County, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Series 1930 (Washington: U. S. Superintendent of Documents, 1930). Portland Cement Association, 22. 3111., p. 13. Washtenaw County Health Department, Description _o_f _S__oils for Rural Non- Farm Use, (Ann Arbor, Nlichigan: not dated) Mimeographed. George R. Kunkle, The Groundwater Geology and derology (_a_f Washtenaw County and the Upper Huron River Basin (published Ph. D. dissertation, The University of Michigan, 1960), Ann Arbor, Michigan: Washtenaw County Planning Commission. Adapted from Robert L. McNamee, The Surface Waters of Michigan--Hydrology and Qualitative Characteristics and Purifi- cation for Public Use (published Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Engineering, Research Bulletin No. 16. Mehasha, Wis.: George Banta Publishing Company, p. 15. Robert L. McNamee, pp. 23., p. 14. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Water for Recreation-~Values and @portunities, Study Report 10 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962), p. 4. Water Resources Commission, Report _og Water Resource Conditions and Uses _i_n the Huron River Basin (Lansing: Michigan Water Resources Commission, 1957), pp. 15-17. T. W. Edminster and J. van Schilfgaarde, ”Technical Prob- lems and Principles of Drainage," Water, The Yearbook of Agri- culture, 84th Congress, First Session, House Document No. 32. (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1955), p. 491. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 94 Keith H. Beauchamp, ”Tile Drainage," Water, The Year- book of Agriculture, 84th Congress, First Session, House Docu- ment No. 32 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1955), p. 513. Burton L. Essex, Clarence D. Chase, and Arthur G. Horn, Timber Resources, Southeastern Block Lower Peninsula, Michi- gan (Lansing: Michigan Department of Conservation, 1955), p. Z. Burton L. Essex, Clarence D. Chase, and Arthur G. Horn, 32. 223-: PP~ 6-7- Marion Clawson, R. Burnell Held, and Charles H. Stoddard, Land for the Future (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1960), p. 357. American Association of State Highway Officials, A Policy pg Geometric De sign gi Rural Highways (Washington: American Association of State Highway Officials, 1954), p. 53. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Classificationgf Wetlands gifly: United States, U. S. Department of the Interior, Scientific Report--Wildlife No. 20 (Washington: U. S. Government Print- ing Office, June, 1953) Washtenaw County Planning Commission, Preliminag Land Use Plan for Washtenaw County; and Finkbeiner, Pettis, and Strout, Sewagg Treatment Plant Improvements, Chelsea, Michigan, Report (Mimeographed), June 1956. Washtenaw County Planning Commission, _op. git. , p. 35. 95 Source materials for preparing development criteria for in- tensive agricultural use areas are: Raleigh Barlowe, Land Economics, (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1958), p- 153 A. M. Hedge and A. A. Klingebeil, "The Use of Soil Maps, ” _Sgi_1_, The Yearbook of Agriculture, House Document No. 30, 85th Congress, First Session (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1957), pp. 402-10; Washtenaw County Health Department, Description of Soils for Rural Non- farm Use (Ann Arbor, Michigan: not dated), mimeographed; Max M. Tharp and C. W. Crickman, ”Supplemental Irrigation in Humid Regions, " Water, The Yearbook of Agriculture, House Document No. 32, 84th Congress, First Session (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1955), pp. 252-58; Max M. Tharp, 92° gi_t_.; T. W. Edminister and J. van Schilfgaarde, "Technical Problems and Principle of Drainage, " Water, The Yearbook of Agriculture, House Document No. 32, 84th Congress, First Session (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1955), pp. 491-93; and Elton B. Hill and Russell G. Mawby, Types gi' Farming in Michigan, Agricul- tural Experiment Station, Special Bulletin 206 (East Lansing: Michigan State College, Sq) tember, 1954), p. 16. Source materials for preparing development criteria for extensive agricultural use area are: A. M. Hef , _og. git.; Joseph F. Sykes, ”Animals and Fowl and Water, ” Water, The Yearbook of Agriculture, House Document No. 32, 84th Congress, First Session (Washington: U. 5. Government Printing Office, 1955), pp. 14-18; and J. O. Veatch, Agricul- tural Land Classification and Land Types _o_f_ Michi gan, Agricul- tural Experiment Station, Special Bulletin 231 (Ea st Lansing: Michigan State College, October 1941), pp. 23-51. Source materials for preparing development criteria for intensive recreational use areas are: Outdoor Recreation Re- sources Review Commission, Potential New Sites for Outdoor Recreation _i_n the Northeast, ORRRC Study Report 8 (Washing- ton: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962), pp. 16-20; Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, gp. _c_:_it. , pp. 21-22; Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, 22. git” pp. 21-22; and Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, gp. git., pp. 16-20. 96 Source materials for preparing deve10pment criteria for extensive recreational use areas are: Outdoor Recreation Re- sources Review Commission, Water for Recreation--Values and Opportunities, ORRRC Study Report 10 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962), pp. 43-46; Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Potential New Sites for Outdoor Recreationig the Northeast, 92° git. , pp. 45-52; Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Potential New Sites for Outdoor Recreation_i_n the Northeast, 92. git. , pp. 45-52; and Samuel P. Shaw and Walter F. Crissey, ”Wetlands and the Management of Waterfowl, " Water, The Yearbook of Agriculture, House Document No. 32, 84th Con- gress, First Session (Washington: U. S. Government Print- ing Office, 1955), pp. 604-07. Source materials for preparing development criteria for intensive residential use areas are: F. Stuart Chapin, Jr. , Urban Land Use Planning (New York: Harpers and Brothers, 1957), p. 294; Washtenaw County Health Department, 22. git.; and F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., 32. git. Source materials for preparing deve10pment criteria for extensive residential use areas are: Washtenaw County Planning Commission, Preliminary Land Use Plan for Wa shtenaw County (Ann Arbor, Michigan), 1962, pp. 41; and Urban Land Institute, The Communihr Builders Handbook (Washington: By the Insti- tute, 1954), p. 19. Source materials for preparing deve10pment criteria for intensive industrial use areas are: F. Stuart Chapin, Jr. , gp. git., p. 292; F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., 92- g_i_t., p. 292; and Washtenaw County Planning Commission, gp_. git. , p. 38. Source materials for preparing development criteria for extensive industrial use areas are: Washtenaw County Health De- partment, gp. C_it., and F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., 22. git, p. 292. CHAPTER IV CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACTUAL LAND USE POTENTIAL MODEL FOR THE CHELSEA STUDY AREA Purpose and Sc0pe The purpose of constructing an actual land use potential model is to realistically apply the study method to a Specific locality, using the material presented in Chapter III. In essence the applica- tion of the study method is a means of testing the framework of the hypothetical model presented in Chapter I. There are essentially three groups of findings presented here. The first is the actual model which is based on the data pre- sented in Chapter III and on a priority system of assigning potential uses to land areas. The second group of findings concerns the eight individual potential uses and their comparisons with the 1960 land use of the study area. Appendix A contains eight maps, each showing the pattern of an individual potential use. The third group of findings tells the number of uses that all of the 576 grid blocks of the study area can potentially support. 97 98 Actual Model As previously mentioned, the purpose of the use potential model is to guide the planner in allocating his computed land use space needs for a particular growth period. For example, future extensive residential land acreage needs could be assigned to those grid blocks that have potential for such use. Intensive residential space needs or another use, if the potential exists, could be assigned in the same manner. In case of a conflict, i. e. , if any two or more uses could be supported by any grid block, a decision on one use would have to be made. In most instances the decision would be based on one or a combination of four factors. The four factors are: one, required Space needs for the use or uses; two, availability 'of resources in the planning region; three, transportation and accessibility requirements; and four, compatibility of uses. For theoretical purposes all conflicts of use assigned to any grid block in the study area were eliminated by applying an assumed priority of uses. The first use applied to a grid block ranks top pri- ority of assignment. The others rank in their respective order as listed below. First, intensive industrial; Second, intensive residential; Third, intensive recreational; Fourth , inten sive agricultural; 99 Fifth, extensive industrial; Sixth, extensive residential; Seventh, extensive recreational; and Eighth, extensive agricultural. Statistically, the model shows a decline in the total number of grid blocks that can support a particular use. The only exception to this decline is when intensive industrial and recreational uses are involved. Based on the assumed priority of use assignment, it is found that extensive agricultural grid blocks are reduced from 238 to 76; extensive recreational grid blocks from 202 to 129. Using the same priority system of use assignment to deter- mine the number and pattern of existing use grid blocks, there is found little correlation between existing uses and potential uses, indicating one or all of four things: one, that the study area has not developed substantially yet to warrant a good comparison of study findings; two, that the resources of the study area are not being used to their full potential (e. g. , extensive farming areas could be developed more in- tensively); three, that the land development criteria and study of natu- ral resources and man-made features presented in the previous chap- ters have not been prepared satisfactorily; and four, that the priority of use assignment is unreasonable. Table 7 illustrates the magnitude of difference between the number of existing use grid blocks and of the potential use grid blocks. 100 Table 7. --Difference Between the Number of Existing and Potential Use Grid Blocks Number of Grid Blocks that Have Potential for: Number of Grid Blocks that are Presently Being Used for: Intensive industrial 7 Intensive residential 12 Intensive recreational 12 Intensive agricultural 77 Extensive industrial 13 Extensive residential 6 Extensive recreational 129 Extensive agricultural 76 Intensive industrial Intensive residential Intensive recreational Intensive agricultural Extensive industrial Extensive residential Extensive recreational Extensive agricultural 33 6 35 58 84 254 Individual Potential Uses Table 8 gives the number of primary potential use grid blocks that can also support other types of potential uses. called secondary potential uses. tial grid blocks are presently ings not based on a use assignment priority system as used for the The latter are Table 9 shows how the several poten- being used. Both tables represent find- model but for the actual, resultant number of grid blocks found to have potential for any of the eight uses. It is the purpose here to present FIGURE XVII. LAND USE POTENTIAL MODEL COMPARED WITH EXISTING LAND USE PATTERN USE POTENTIAL MODEL EXISTING USE PATTERN _ BOIDIsn figii .445; ”I“? 2’1"”? ‘2 i. I I , x. I .\«. ' 'Al . 93 I . IIIIIV'r,+4 :I'I _‘77fi77 7V 7 ,7 7 7 -7... . 7 ,.._. I‘I V\,_, 7‘,_‘7'_I /I777 .4 _:‘ j _;7 ' ,—"-*T—- [)2 I—‘_1437,_I II4 + 2..“ ' L" L; I." _7 7 . L r‘ Kl 77:25.1: _+,_-|. \é’ ' ' __ ‘::"' f: 7.7 7 _ 77 . _ .7 ,, v "‘f‘i . ’A. (,n 7 :7 ’ .I44 5143142 I 1I4I1I (I4 . 5 , “DI ' I,I‘ :19? C I‘,\1_ ' . 'J“' ,' W ~ 8“" 47> I°.- ‘ II: ’ I\ _ 3:???) 7.1,)” ,4"I48I I49_ 50 ’f‘5| “CL." I— f. _ «,. 7. IIBJI TBOI I79 IIIT I “4 77 l I III fiI IIIII III“ ‘IIII 7’.“ II‘ét'II‘LIigfI‘g :gIJI'I' III III “-I 4 7I7-~I~' : ‘ "T 7-I I 77 TIII II ’ 7 I . COLllY I Iv 7 I I I " I-I‘r‘" " u.- {PU . ‘I I " ’- I 7 "‘1; 493’ , ‘94-‘44 7 _ I 2Io : I94; I95 Igfi'Q‘J . .y .. 2067,). $44.4. ‘7 L = , .. 42.12/05 . \057 207,,I 202312.371 . -7777 *7... 7 _.77—7 7/,, 7_7 II 223 22I I 220 I12|9 I - .. I”... ,7 ~ 230 “229)I 291 227 [,7 , _ . 7% , “‘ I237II 1,1777 1 ‘ ISL47~D \ ‘ [‘7‘] _ 7 77 7 ,,.. 77T_7ITST_77_7- 7 7 +v_+- ’72. “ I 6| , 62 I263 ~ ' . ,, ~: 7 3 2§8 259 260, 97?. 7&1577\ 7 ,77*+ _ -\ : :g5,.79_7:7I: -I 7 , .. .1 frfif +1 ~ 4 " i R?) ‘ ‘ ‘ 7.77:: , i __ ., i u , flu? 3,3. 7,1: '13 :1 o 7 i .1..\)_JJ ‘ n ’7. IT 288 28’ 'yaéI 7:34;] 270 277 276 I 2 I274 7 211‘ V‘ :‘L 2;?7 fl‘T 7 77 7 WI“ '4"‘II‘II7 ”of ”'4 III 300 3071: I IR: ' ' III , . 1933f; : tIZI :1: £924 323 I 322 $247 I,:«,I318 ,. , , _ 7 :: ‘IIIr :I'III-‘.‘)"¢'~ ,4 37 L ‘ 7 7 7 - , L ‘J, “Hz. 33:52:: ‘ . 7 . ~W v 7 l 7 , :I 445 446' 447 I2: II“ 27’4 450}; I I I I -; I ‘Ic's ; 4‘9 ...9.1.°444 445 ;._ ; . 454C452 453 :4‘5 : II I “tar“ “.....“i'.*‘-' 7777777” I 9* ~.-_ _77_ ' 7____ 447g __ IIZYKI ,‘ I 3;, ++ ++% I II " I ‘ . . I 791 468 I146? 466 4465 464 5.3. Tori. {>91 "4 + {I469 I 468 I : III 4647,}; 463 45.2I 7461 48074 -I- ‘ Iravsak‘ .: .490 I 9I I 492 I493 I494 'AQRI .I I ‘11 I I I 3482‘ 483 I I I i‘c“/J~vI—-Vk8 3 77I 492 I 493 i47’97477: 4 495 “I 774 I I5I7_ f5I6 isI 4 . 77_7I 5749 I, 542--543 ...I ’II 1“, 5I9 5I8 I5|7 5I6 .III' 5147.. . I r “I: I538<92‘539.: I552 SI SQI : 560 tail n INTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL EXTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL INTENSIVE RESIDENTIAL EXTENSIVE RESIDENTIAL INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL EXTENSIVE RECREATIONAL INTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL EXTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL RICHARD A- MALTBY JANUARY I965 102 some of the statistics resulting from the application of the study method. Appendix A includes a series of maps showing the individual intensive and extensive use areas (grid blocks) for agricultural oper- ations, recreational facilities, residential neighborhoods, and indus- trial centers. The intensive agricultural use potential areas total approxi- mately 15, 360 acres or about 17 per cent of the Chelsea study area. The pattern is interesting to note, in that the lands in and near the center of the study area are presently infiltrated with intensive indus- trial and residential deve10pments. Most of the lands having potential for intensive agricultural Operations are located in the southeastern part of the study area, where the terrain is relatively level and com- posed of soils suitable for the growing of fruits and vegetables. A few scattered areas are also found in the other three corners of the study area. How many of the 96 grid blocks that are suitable for intensive agriculture have potential for other uses? A surprising number. Sixty-three of the 96 grid blocks are suitable for extensive agricul- ture and extensive recreation. Even 10 of the 96. grid blocks are found to have potential for extensive industrial uses. The extensive agricultural use potential grid blocks are more numerous than those suitable for intensive agriculture. This is to be expected because the deve10pment criteria are not as demanding for 103 extensive agriculture as for intensive agriculture. The pattern is simi- lar to the intensive agricultural one, as can be seen on Figure 19 in Appendix A. The overall area for extensive agriculture is larger and more uniform in pattern, however, than that for intensive agriculture. Approximately 38, 080 acres are suitable for extensive farm- ing. About 41 per cent of the total study area can be so used; however, only about 20 per cent is presently being farmed. Perhaps, a major reason for this low percentage rate is the large tracts of land owned by the State Conservation Department for hunting and fishing purposes. Of the 238 grid blocks that have potential for extensive agri- culture, 104 of them are also suitable for extensive recreation; 33 and 24 of the grid blocks can be used for extensive residential and indus- trial uses, respectively. There is very little land suitable for intensive recreational use, unless more land that is suitable for extensive recreation were to be intensively developed with user-oriented facilities. As defined in this study, only 1, 920 acres have such potential and this represents about 2 per cent of the total land area in the Chelsea region. Twelve grid blocks are cited as having potential for intensively developed recreation parks. Nine of these are also suitable for extensive indus- trial centers. None of the 12 grid blocks, however, are presently being used for intensive recreation purposes. 104 The extensive recreational use potential areas are situated in locations similar to extensive agricultural use potential areas. Po- tential extensive recreation includes a large number of grid blocks forming broad land areas while intensive recreation includes a small number in scattered locations. There are a total of 202 grid blocks, shown on Figure 22 in Appendix A,having potential for extensive recreation. This number represents, on the basis of 160 acres per grid block, 32,320 acres, or about 35 per cent of the study area suitable for this use. Sixteen of the 202 grid blocks also have potential for extensive residential de- velopment. And surprisingly, 10 can be intensively used for industrial purposes; however, none are at the present. Compared with the existing uses, it is found that 31 of the 202 grid blocks are vacant; 55 are in extensive recreation deve10pment; and 77 are in extensive farming. Intensive residential use potential areas are generally confined to the center of the region, where the village of Chelsea is situated. The pattern of this potential use can be observed on Figure 23 in Appen- dix A. It corresponds closely with the existing and probable future water and sewer service district as depicted on Figure 16 in Chapter III. The two obvious factors creating the residential pattern are highways and utilities. The factors of topography, land drainage, and wetlands 105 are also important but tend to be secondary considerations. Within the Chelsea study area are 19 grid blocks that may be developed intensively for residential purposes. Seven of the 19 can also be used for intensive industrial uses. Compared with existing conditions, however, 15 of the 19 grid blocks are being used re sidentially; 5 are in extensive agricultural uses; and 4 have intensive industrial developments within them. The pattern of extensive residential use potential areas is a scattered one. There appears to be equal opportunity to locate low density residential subdivisions in any sector of the region, including its center. Comparing the locations of extensive residential areas with natural resource data presented in Chapter III, it can be assumed that the rural non-farm dweller can have his choice of environment. That is, he may choose to locate in the flat southeastern part of the region and live near intensive agricultural operations or on lands with rolling hills and with lakes in the northwestern and northeastern portions of the study; or if he enjoys fields of corn and other similar cr0ps round his home site, he may choose to locate in the southwes- tern part of the region where extensive farming operations may be situated. Although his choice of location may not be severely restricted, the amount of land available compared with the total acreage of the study area is. Of the total 92,160 acres in the study area, only 106 5, 280 acres, or about 6 per cent, has potential for extensive residen- tial use. If this study were to go into more detail regarding specific home sites, the resultant acreage figure would be lower, probably near to one third the area as shown on Figure 28 in Appendix A. Intensive industrial use potential areas include the least number of grid blocks compared with the other seven uses. All of the intensive industrial areas compete with intensive residential uses for the same locations. About 1,120 acres are involved, represent- ing about 1 per cent of the study area. Three of the 7 grid blocks that have potential for intensive industrial use presently contain industrial developments, and 5 include some intensive residential housing. The two major factors contributing to the grouped intensive industrial use potential pattern appear to be railroad facilities and central water supply and sewage disposal systems. These two fac- tors are crucial; but other factors such as topography, highways, land drainage, and type of soil are also significant. These latter factors are important to the determination of intensive industrial lo- cations only when central water supply, sewage disposal systems, and railroad facilities are present. The pattern of extensive industrial grid blocks is quite simi- lar to that of extensive residential. All four corners and the center of the region have from Z to 8 grid blocks arranged in irregular 107 groupings. Surprisingly the total number of extensive industrial grid blocks (25) is close to the number for extensive residential (33). The comparative number and location of both extensive residential and industrial grid blocks bears out the supposition that the rural countryside can receive industries that are decentralizing from com- pact urban centers as well as urbanites who want to become rural non-farm dwellers. Viewing the extensive industrial use potential grid blocks, it is found that all of them can support extensive residential uses; 24 of them can support extensive agricultural activities. Combination pi Potential Use Types How many land use types will any grid block support? At the outset of this thesis, it was considered important to find out how many land uses a given area of land would support. The reason for this is to provide information for the multiple use facet of regional planning. An agriculturist's Opinion that a certain area of land should be left in agriculture may be true depending on the location and the necessity to protect the area's vital resources for agricultural use. Urban planners, however, need to know what areas can support non- agricultural uses even if some of the lands are rated "prime" for agriculture . 108 .Ggaoo «mam m5. 5 woum 3 mm: Hmflcouom trades Lam may 3 pope/op 3303 3pm mo Meagan H30» 23 @33pr quflnopas mum “M5 mohsmfl Sflmsofihm N M N N. o o o m 1.93365 ofimsopfi mm N [mum m S v mm : Hmflsopflmom o>fimqofinm N a. m m 2 o 2 E Guamflmmm @3335 o S 3 2 mam o 3: 8 Hmaosmmsoom mzmcflxm w o w. o 0 Wm. NH m Hmaofisonoom 033355 3. 0 mm 3 S: 2 mm 8 3333?: 9,35pr OH m 3 1: mo m mo mmN Hondfidofinmzw ozmdoufi .65 .9: .mom .mom .oom .oom 3&4 .Hw< HmD 0px Ups 0“” I .“x O a 09x 0 a M H H “5 M u H H a. H AsHZHHOnm mmHmD AfiHZHHOnH Wm .pGH .oHHH .mom .mom .oo& .oo& .Hm< Jam/w H.308 mmka. sxm .EH .3 .EH .st .2: .35. .EH mMmD UZHHMHNH womb wdfiom Easemoana sum 33on EMU omD Hmflsoponm Bomuu d 3an 110 Unfortunately, not one grid block in the study area has the potential to support all eight land uses as defined in this the sis. Two grid blocks have potential to support seven uses and one can be devel- oped with six different uses. Table 10 lists the number of grid blocks that can support a given number of uses up to eight. Table 10. - - Combination of Potential Use Types Number of Potential Uses Number of Grid Blocks That Can Support Given Number of Potential Uses No use, or vacant 241 One use 175 Two uses 65 Three uses 71 Four uses 11 Five uses 10 Six uses 1 Seven uses 2 Eight use 8 None CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In summary, the problem which the study confronted is one of finding a technique for investigating and determining the adaptability of certain natural resources and man-made features for supporting various types and intensity of land uses. The problem is not one that would generally confront the layman as a social question but one that is, or should be, thought of by the planning technician and his policy makers. As urban settlements continue to expand outward upon rural and vacant lands, the bases of their development ought to be the “car- rying capacity" of the land including its soil, ground and surface waters, character of terrain, and land form. An evaluation of the ”carrying capacity" of combined characteristics of natural resources and man-made features results in a model of various use potentialities of land areas. Review _of Problem Approach In approaching the problem the writer first presented the definitions of land uses and the basic assumptions and limitations of the thesis. The definitions of agricultural, recreational, residential, and industrial uses were framed in general terms of intensity of 111 112 deve10pment. All factors that are needed for or influenced the devel- 0pment of a land use were classified in one of three ways: positive, negative or incorporeal. Second, the thesis presented a hypothetical land use poten- tial model, describing the various elements of which it is comprised, and explaining in broad terms its application to land use planning. Basically, it is felt that a land use potential model and the method of constructing one is a useful ”tool” for planning purposes and ought to be one of the key studies in preparing land use plans. Third, the thesis reviewed some earlier works on the basis that some meaningful adaptation could be employed within the the sis' study method. It was found that most of the other studies lent them- selves well to the problem but were restricted to evaluating one re- source characteristic for one use type. A few of the studies, how- ever, were concerned with more than one use but employed too few natural resource characteristics. Only two studies, the Rutgers University's and the Washtenaw County Planning Commission’s, at- tempted to formulate meaningful guidelines or models for preparing subsequent land use plans and legal land use controls. However, even in these two studies the prevailing development trends of each study area determined to a great extent the structure of their models. This thesis omitted the facts of growth trends in its study area and method, primarily because it was felt that more importance should 113 be placed on the ability of various resources to lend themselves to specific types of development. Further, it was felt necessary that growth trends should be omitted because the study was directed toward the finding of multiple use potentialities of land areas. Fourth, the thesis described in general terms the various natural resources and man-made features that need to be investigated and analyzed in order to evaluate land areas for their multiple use potentialities. It was found that it is meaningful to investigate the soil’s suitability for agricultural use as well as non-agricultural; to evaluate potential ground and surface water supplies; to determine the extent of forested areas; to analyze the terrain in terms of its de- gree of slope; to make judgements on the drainage condition and the probability of flooding on the land; to determine the extent of wetlands; to locate and classify the different types of highways and roads; and to locate railroad lines and the probable future service areas of cen- tral water supply and sewage disposal systems. Last, on the basis of the land use definitions and deve10pment criteria and an inventory of various natural resources and man-made features in the Chelsea study area, the thesis presented an analysis of eight land use potential types and a land use potential model, the latter based on an assumed priority of assigning potential uses to the 576 grid blocks in the study area. 114 Conclusions In reviewing the study method and the findings that resulted from its application to the Chelsea study area, it was found that not all of the characteristics are necessary for investigation and analysis in order to find potential locations for the eight land uses. These un- necessary characteristics are (a) size of woodlots less than 30 acres and (b) wetlands that have coverage of less than 50 per cent of the land area. However, the characteristics that are necessary for all of the eight uses, either positively or negatively, are (a) soil capability, (b) soil permeability, (c) degree of slope, ((1) land drainage and flooding possibilities, and (e) highways and roads. Without the application of a priority scheme of assigning uses to the 576 grid blocks, it was found that out of the 576 grid blocks or 92, 160 acres in the study area that (a) intensive agricultural po- tential uses can be assigned to 16 per cent of the land area, (b) ex- tensive farming can be assigned to 38, 080 acres or 41 per cent of the study area, (c) only 2 per cent or 1, 920 acres of the study area can be used in intensive recreation activities, ((1) extensive recreation on the other hand can be assigned to 32,320 acres or about 35 per cent of the study area, (e) only 3 per cent or about 3, 040 acres of the study area can be used for intensively developed residential subdivisions, (f) extensive residential development on the other hand can be assigned 115 to 5,280 acres or 6 per cent of the study area, and (g) intensive and extensive industrial uses can be assigned to 1 per cent or 1, 120 acres and 4 per cent or 4, 000 acres of the study area, respectively. These figures changed, however, when the priority scheme of assigning uses was applied. The percentage and usable acreage of the study area for use are as follows: (a) 1 per cent or 1,200 acres for intensive industrial, (b) 2 per cent or 1, 920 acres for intensive re si- dential, (c) intensive recreational remains the same with 1, 920 acres or 2 per cent of the study area, (d) intensive agricultural is down to 14 per cent or 12, 640 acres of the study, (e) 3 per cent or 2, 080 acres for extensive industrial, (f) 1 per cent or 960 acres for extensive residential, (g) extensive recreation is down to 22 per cent or 20, 340 acres of the study area, (h) extensive agricultural also de- creased and now remains at 13 percent or 12, 160 acres of the study area, and (i) 42 per cent or 38, 720 acres of the study area remain in a ”vacant” use potential classification. At the outset of this study it was presumed that the method would reveal a larger percentage, if not all, of the use potentialities of land in the Chelsea study area. As is noted above, 58 per cent of the land in the study area has potential for one or a combination of the eight uses, 42 per cent being vacant. The reason for this may lie in one or all of four major considerations in the study. The first is the manner in which natural resources and man-made features was studied; 116 second, the definition of land uses; third, the formation of develop- ment criteria; and fourth, the priority scheme of assigning uses to the several grid blocks. It is felt that the two factors that most affec- ted the vacancy are the definition of land uses and development cri- teria. One has only to provide additional access to the vacant grid blocks or assume that some of the land uses do not need direct access and the percentage of vacancy is reduced by about 50 per cent or 112 grid blocks. By treating additional highways and roads as a subse- quent ”input” into the land use potential model the number of grid blocks per use increased by (a) 0 for intensive industrial, (b) l for intensive residential, (c) 9 for intensive recreation, (d) 1 for intensive agriculture, (e) 0 for extensive industrial, (f) 45 for ex- tensive residential, (g) 43 for extensive recreation, and (h) 13 for extensive agriculture. This "input” results in 130 grid blocks or about 23 per cent of the study area in a vacant use potential- classification. Further, if one should after constructing a use potential model, plan to implementa program of draining several of the lands in the study area which are classified as poorly drained and subject to flooding, the per cent of vacancy is further reduced. By treating the construction of drainage ditches as another subsequent ”input” into the model, the number of grid blocks per use increased by (a) 0 for intensive industrial, (b) 1 for intensive residential, 117 (c) 10 for intensive recreation, (d) 10 for intensive agriculture, (e) 0 for extensive industrial, (f) 1 for extensive residential, (g) 0 for extensive recreation, and (h) 42 for extensive agriculture. The drainage ”input” leaves 66 grid blocks in a vacant use classifi- cation, representing about 11 per cent of the study area as not having potential for any of the uses as defined in this thesis. Table 13 in Appendix D contains information concerning the increase in the num- ber of grid blocks resulting from the transportation and drainage inputs. Other man-made inputs could be considered, such as re- forestation and the construction of reservoirs. These two inputs could create more potential land area for both intensive and extensive recreation purposes. Of course, by altering the development criteria of each use the amount of potential land available could be increased (or decreased), but this would tend to change the balance of the carry- ing capacity of the combined natural resources. For example, inten- sive agricultural use could be located in areas consistirg predomi- nantly of Class III soils, as well as Class I or II; extensive industrial and residential deve10pment could also be placed on soils having a permeability rating of No. 3 rather than being restricted to soils rated No. 1 or No. 2; intensive industrial plants may not need railroad services; or, the degree of slepe could be increased from a maximum of 10 to 20 per cent for intensive residential use, thus possibly 118 increasing the amount of land available for intensively deve10ped sub- divisions. However, it should be kept in mind that the various poten- tial uses are based on existing fundamental resources. The planner can project improvements onto these areas and by the same system foretell the types of land uses which should result. One of the major purposes of planning is the improvement of urban and rural environments, based on compatible relationships of uses and nonconflicting interests of resource use. Criteria are selected to promote this purpose. They serve to measure the adapta- bility of resources for supporting various uses and translate the use potentialities of resources into qualitative and quantitative terms. The criteria presented in this study are considered appr0priate for that purpose . Recommendations for Further Research and Study Programs of data collection, analysis, and classification particularly related to cultural land development have for many years been a strong feature of the urban and rural planners' work. A number of studies, containing from local to national perspectives on what types of land uses exist, the patterns they form, how they de- velop, and the problems the pose, have been prepared. From these studies have emerged several conceptual and practical proposals for better development of future urban settlements. However, much of 119 the planners' attention on planning for urban oriented activities has been given to the land only and to how it relates to other aspects such as transportation systems and capital rent returns. Generally urban planners have sought answers to problems of urbanization through studies concentrating on the economic and social determinants of land use and through public Opinion surveys and the interpretation of the public interest. The major emphasis in the planning process appears to be on pOpulation and employment studies, traffic surveys and pro- jections, economic base analyses, and land use location and space requirements. Recently, a few exploratory studies have been prepared showing how to interpret the land's capability or potential to support different uses. Most of these studies, however, have dealt directly with the land as a single factor. This study proceeds a step farther in that it devises a multiple listing of use potentialities of land using no priority, with water resources partly considered. In the future what should be considered in order to better understand land use development and plan for urban settlements is not land only but the interrelationship of land and water. As urban settle- ments continue to expand, it will become increasingly difficult to allocate water to all of the land activities. The quality and quantity of water and the location of its source will undoubtedly influence the types, location, and intensity of land deve10pment. There will be cer- tainly more demand for water-based recreation, industrial processing 120 water, municipal water supplies, irrigation, fish and wildlife, and domestic and industrial waste disposal. How these demands are satis- fied may be settled by economics, legislation, and riparian property rights. How these demands are interrelated without causing conflict- ing interests of water resource use, however, is another matter. As it is possible to construct land use potential models and land capability ratings, it may be logical to devise techniques for the construction of water use potential models and water capability ratings. This the sis does not encompass the essential aspects of water resources, but it is felt that if more exploratory studies were made on how water influences land development, more precise mea- surements of land use potentialities could be made. Insofar as practi- cable, urban and rural planners should conduct additional re serach into the circumstances that characterize water resource uses. Studies of water use potential classifications ought to be as important as studies of potential land uses, transportation, and urban economics in the planning process. For example, there may be established reasonable classification schemes for potential water uses of ground water aquifers, lakes, streams, rivers, reservoirs, and artificial lakes and wetlands. Certain lengths of streams could be classified, for example, as those in which particular recreation functions are safely accommodated with the dilution and transportation of either domestic or industrial wastes. Certain lengths of streams, depending on topographic conditions, soil 121 types and adjacent uses of land, could be classified as those which have potential impounding sites for low stream flow augmentation. Other lengths could be classified as water-based recreation, fish and wildlife, municipal supply, flood control, or a multiple combina- tion of the se. Lakes could also be given similar use potential classi- fications, including swimming, boating, resort, residential, or ground water replenishment. In conclusion, it is recommended that in the futur e urban and rural planners include in the planning process not only land but also water use potential studies. By making use of these studies, hopefully, all land and water uses in an urban settlement may be interspersed in their common dependency on the environmental re- sources of land, water, and soil. APPE NDIX A EIGHT MAPS SHOWING THE LOCATIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL POTENTIAL USES IN THE CHELSEA STUDY AREA 123 FIGURE XVIII. POTENTIAL INTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL USE AREAS A .e'.../\ J? H 3 ‘ I iINNT I I . f“rxf‘r~~fr— I‘ 5 I 6 ,I 77 9 51% '3 ‘ l6 '\ . ,_ __ . _ , _ +110; 11”” _ , - + stir 1 4 \ . I I I oI\5:/I/5:I I51I1-35» 55 i . 53 anon—4 N .- / —— _i— , I L9; I‘q—sl «1471+ F:- ..I. 5 I ‘ 50 IITSIm'r‘a ‘5I 54 10 i 7.3.. ~+—+H+N+. - . — r .~ +4.» NNNN I en I330 I .831. I I 7 . 55 I 54 i 55 I 52 :5: . 15 I 154 14 _1L I. 7 {f fg-Im-i—Lu! .13 _ ‘ -. — — Il- ~ I \ If . AT _ I ~ '1 ~ ‘4 l02‘tmI~ 4751:3408 7| L09 - ”35' . I II I H4 II? no H’: - 49:14, 7 p .51 I ,1" I II°'I"T"—"TIB'T . I ' I I *‘ I' I '15 :29 I2 I :21 I24 ..44' ‘.I45 I42 II4: II4 I59 I); _ . 454 It: I324Il3| ‘ . I I I :‘I: _I I ' ‘ I I -— 00.th I_ fi+_ .~ ' I I . 5o 7" ,. I . . _ I 55 :51 6... I :50 15: I 152 1< N ' If. +5» I531 55 ‘ I? I II I‘ I I I I7? 2 I76 :75 I .6 IE! > 180 I79 ”0 5 ISO 1 W H _ 7_ + ILJJ+ . ' $- + > ":1“ Ll.fll;—.0 , _, ‘ L0H . 4935129 20532017» 202 355) 204 Izo 5‘5, 2\o1, mm 29 I I0 “I _:,}_~ . HHxL’goLJ I, .l -, _ .I. H ‘ +1 I L __ “+1-4, _ . ‘rl: ’ o t I n 1 I I 1.3309113? 23. 2 “it 2340 252 I35; : 250 .225 225 | 221 I 225 4 , 225 2211220 I219 2'3 . 2'77 Wye—HI 5.4”?” H -— 24/4 ' 245 - 41 I246 250 _ N I2 :III, . ~+4~—- ICII-\; 255 I251!“ I 255 I 254 I 255 I252 2334464‘ 2 255 I259 I250; 251 2 3:.I255 I26 25 52.41"; _7 4% 4". xq’k ,+ _ ;£: ‘1 ‘1 211 I215: 215 .214§215I21["21I21o 259I255I215255 2 "“%:J+ I H \I ' x . 509 I 510 G" “amt; a "I2'5mI' 219 3. I ._Irv.HHI. «.JII, I ,t__., I 500 50: 502 32mg 555 ’ ‘T I 2591290 29 295 L391 H195 IL , 4 '5'4.‘T " 4 -_ . ‘1 — _. ,4_ _ 7‘ __ .. +__ >,, -0 I "\\ x I \ /' I 1,...‘...m"r\ 555I/534 :933\IH 5:? . ‘ 515/1411 5m I'M: I} x 5 4 ~14 . I I—I-otlv , _ ', "u_ _1____‘ "j (I o I . rII 3‘0 I QI 342 3 3 344 345 . 355 ‘ 355 339 I330 - 1 f—o (k \ 0 £154 - I __i - 1———4——1 I 1 I “ I‘ *1 I I I 552 I{1’50 cfiLDJI 5 5 . 51151;. 565 552 I55: / 'l . -1..- . __ .. , I a) I I o ‘0 {it , . r ." I 551 555 _ 7 11,342 I 595 i404 405 . 406 401 I 405 III'II ‘ ‘ I {’74,— '_ '+ 5 , ‘ —- ‘gngh—- —— —— — .— H. ,_ ' ' I . I . 4327434 _L 415 412 I4“ «Into-r f - L,430 ‘ /‘ -< > IL.' 5.- - —JI I414 I415 472 41. I4 *9 455" 411 I415 -;___ + 3 452. 455 3.46":- _ , - 525 525 '-' 524 "5’2 .~— 4 /{ —*»"O 55: I552I*555 I 55 Ni- - I“ ,. . , 4(5 Ti , 155! 45 455. 4 ,_ 47 I457 “(I 53: 560 359 l": -, H .HX‘.;_“__, IEEEEEIIZZZD O SCALE IN MILES ”2 I 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY JANUARY I965 124 FIGURE XIX. r’OTENTlAL EXTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL USE AREAS “ff; ~'-“‘_""T‘ u _» In? «3 I *1 ' + 1": f 1' "‘ 55 £51 ‘ “36 2|} 12M ' lkl".._.° l 4.‘ l _ I 3230 I 223 228 I 22? .2I 220 I 219 u " , , I— 7 __ , +5. I\ '\J I._.ar< 2% a 2‘I2I I 509 I510 259 I , ,__ I , _ . ' F ‘ - - ' , . . I I Mpg/95:1 NIVII- ‘ 355 356 359 I360 —N ‘_.4_ :51: 555 555 u-ud- ;. I ,. ' 'IflIixl‘ ' - 405) 404 405 " II 1 5 W _ __ I: 1 fl __ IAIVDI I ~_ 525 :1 552I‘555 554155—5W555 551 55559559 ( 551 555 . 558 'x ‘ __, E____ I 0 W I 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY SCALE IN MILES JANUARY I965 125 FIGURE XX. POTENTIAL INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE AREAS 1 101+ +2:4 I I .. C . 70 I 7. L- I I 9+ Ia: — W l o |99I 94 '9‘9I94I93I92 9I|90I79 79 77 79|79I.H u. I- -— + _ .4. IL-LAII - —- +— 4———l ;——+'— I "LI/99 | 9 . 0 I00 X I I I0! I II3 | II4 III9 II7 I In / I—— —I.._ __+ __ T — _‘I' +_ F..‘9:t9999753u_4v=" g— V I I44 OI.’ 43I I42 I MI I 4 3‘ I3I '3 I" II” I I27 I" I I I“ I 2' '" uréjI-fi‘f— .94 —-:-—-I-—4-—0~IL== _W —I———I--— \~\ I I49I I49 I I49l I49 39 I97 9-. I I90 I9I I 92: I93 I I94 I99 I | . I : I99 I 1.9.99 —+— —*-- -+-+— --:- --=-—+ 'T— "9 +9~ I9 I I9. I90 I I I I99 I9I I90I I79 I I I77 IITG I79 I73 I I72 I I 70 I” 243__;9 _ ......._.. — + _ 0+ WI _ _L— \ 99-99 I I \ I’SI I94 I I99 IT? I I97 2 20I9 I‘Izoz 204 I 9 I 207 I ml 2.9 I I0 I: 2I3 I2I4 I2 I2| I—+ 9 :42 - + CI"— -'--+ -+ - -+-§-* - —+ "mt—“I. 240I 9 7 239 234°I 32 I no :230 —.229>I 29 227 | 229 I 223 I :22 I 2| I 220 I 2|! I m 3.71 I - I ‘L . — —+-- :II— +—- —-I—— +—+— — -+—-I— I 1% 2 244 I 249 47 I149 2 90 2'9: I292 I} I 7 I 8 I2” I!“ 3" 3 "3 29 I 979-I9 '9' I "' " L—J‘T——f-— — —+ —- +_ l \‘ I 299 I 97 I 99 I299 [294 I 2R3 Ir2I9 9I 279 279 277 279 I 2 I274 [273 I 2 2 I270 299 I299 L2 7 299 2 ‘I *‘+‘ ’7L‘ '3" "I ”I‘— I‘ “ "I 1:1 "_LL:JI- \ 9 I I" I 200| 2, 931295 I; 29. £97 I go I 2 300 am :30! I 3 I 3 5 II 0 Iaw-I so! 309 ISIO I R “2‘5; 9.- «valr‘g 'i '_—}L—\-: — III' — ~—J———1 ._ _ ._V_.t__— 7. ,J/I: 335 |33I 99,32: 32;.I37I3‘I ,I24I323l3 I I I3I9I 7 3I4Ig3 - . 4 _ _I - I 7. I I I I | 3 I ' I I r I T T” ‘ Ir ' — "7 . l342—4—343 I 344 349 4 347 9 I3 I 39 L394] 399 I399 39 [399 R9 I390 '— _. _ -_+__—_ — , _ __ _ L..- __ — —— ———__I__-__ I 392 349 I 377 37 I I I I I I—.~ ol I 3 I 374 I 3 3_I_372 I37l I 370A\399 §399 I 97 39; I399 394 I393 392 I39I —: -I-»~- m- —— - 4 + _ I ‘- . HI ___I . I g . . _/ I. 9 397 I 399 399 I 90 | 3n 2_II—393 4 399 397 40 I404 409 I 409 407 I 409 _'03-" — —- — -+— ——I _ ’~'O — _. I _ .__—4 L4 30 4 I 49 |‘25 I 24 I 23T422 4 42: I4I3 4I:II-4II __.uojowiJI- I_ II ' I 'x-‘L T r“ " —+ I V'— 1‘— 43“ 434 | 439 439" 43 440 44I I 442 I 44 444 I 449 449 49 45b— ! 492 453*‘UN 499 I469 I I I I \ I—'-I--+_'TI +—-I_ —‘I__'+——+_'I‘ \—'— __II__+___—-I——-‘I———T——II--—-— — — ——— 4M, '4903 479M 477 I479 9 I474 I473 I 472 I47. I4 0 I499 I 499 [I497 I 499 I499 4“ I “3 I“! I “I I “0| 2'6; ‘57 -.+—‘I“ —+-+—+—+ '....... --+-~:--I—— Inn 492 I 493 )9 99 I 49 |I497 I 499 I 499 I490 I I I 492 I493 I494 I499 I I 497-I499 I499i 900. 903 '_ £99999_ ”___ __+__ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _. :__,._._ T.I. +++ ++W+..III- »# 929 l 927. 9294-929 - 924 2 I 922 |92I I 920 I 9I9 9I9 I 9n I9I9 IIBI I an I I3 ;9I2 I II no 9% I509 I909 __ __l__. _ _ __ _ _ __ l A I__ — A I— T I I + + + x f x “I "I , v. \ 929 930 33l+532—+ 33 I” 939 I937 I939 939 I340 I 94 942 943 I 944 I 949 I 9 . 947 949 I 949 I9 0 99I I992 -- - — —— —— - -__ ‘ —— “_.___I___. 979 97919 4 I 973' 964 I 99 I992 9 9m {990 I 99 9 394 I993 : _._J__._L _l_ _L_._ __.A__ I_.__l_ _ __ 1 o n I kI 0 W I 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY SCALE IN MILES JANUARY I999 126 FIGURE XXI. POTENTIAL EXTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE AREAS > [W‘ _ ,__,_-‘ I~fi-TLIfiT__ _ _ ‘5 UL ‘ _ _ Q _Q 9 _'3_ ' '5 {JG I I7 *5; I“ 2 23 29 .I L) k ‘ ' f," 3 I 3M 38 I 3*? 3:; j .asfxsz‘ , _ 4f? —\ so I7?" >-— an-no-IA —,‘ I2 'I28 ' I27 I26"_ n I {‘5 . '3‘—‘I{i - *9 ‘ + — 4* — . BV‘I“ up I46‘ I' _,_]~ I48I169 ‘ ,' ‘ 9 I I60 l6l IIIGZé I63 .. ‘ 1*", I 7 r: , __ -: _ X ‘ __ _: 7 _ I. 2 I I ° ' I92. I89 I90 I79 179 I I77 ; I75 I75 —+—~+‘:t¥“+ . O 240 .I a???“ ‘_ 237 ' 236$I 2 it 2345 I J .1? _ 230 122 §> [gar-227 "1" _" -— —¢— — 252 lqu 2 O .73“, 274 2M5 _ I a ‘- I V . OBI-.10: .tf — _+ _ T — I \I I l I I 293 go? 235 £234 276127.15 ‘ L—- w I r” 289 _-.——-n 363 'llfl‘lLt \ - -~ I 40;) ‘04 405 I 400 407 I 400 — —-— lll'Ll—‘———J—“ I- . . I I I 413 4:2 4:1 Wo-o-wvl‘ --¥ 1 A _gquL? 434 435 , ‘5 —a .74 —04 i o 4 352% 3 I IGGOQ‘WS'B’S 477 are Jr's 468F467 466 465 _ . . 485 48 <.—o _ _._ _A \V s .I 527 526 525’524 52 /I I. 1 4— ~1~ I q no": 48I ‘82 483 9 v J‘CIIC. 532 52II520 mg 'L _+ 7. 53‘5"}536 I 537 assi-99539 509 - . I . o 7 —o— 7—‘ . I 530 531‘532‘133 534 54,6 567 56_6__ ,.__: <'__ -__ 42‘ 562 q am ‘560 '59 ; A , 4,6— ,I-\ ELEM", l o I/2 I 2 SCALE IN MILES RICHARD A. MALTBY JANUARY I965 127 FIGURE XXII. POTENTIAL INTENSIVE RESIDENTIAL. USE AREAS I I02 I04 #03 V. _ _ 3 _. w _ _1. 1—4- -— F..‘ tvclluv'oaulr‘ I3; I) II37 5% I I3 ,I'- I I 32 I3I I29 . I20 I I27 I20 '2 _1_\ +—— —+:‘:\-“:I -— —+ ——+——4r—mv-—r—-- ~\ 0 - a . - 30 I37 0-.' I I30 m | "I5 I03 I I04 -»+3I::I-+ ,; I—L—.—+—+— - 5- ,_.-_+ \ V 3 I I23 I l J' I L102 I I0: I00I I79 I I I77 I73 I73 I73 I I72 I I I” “""" '—'° — + — 0+ couv' \I '_ 'L' _- $0th; 2005 zofiIIzoz 204 'L_I_ 0'207I oelzoiuo “m3 I112 {I}. _I._. _+_ :f— ——-—-—-—+ — _+_E_ — — sun-'0 ' 234C”l 232 1w : 230 :22): 231227 I 220 I 223 I 222 I 2Il 220 I 2I9 I m I +-- __2. w— I +- —| I“. -+--I— ' '1 f ' '43 ' = ' 39 I200 on 4. I 47 I249 2 30 23I 232 I2 0 2 g IJ'IIIMJI ’ — _ .I‘L —+ _ ' — — + 3" _+— w '1‘ . ' ' , V I l I 203 I 37 I u I 203 I204 I 233 ' 20 4 al'I’ 279 279 277 273 I 27 I274 [27: I 2 2 IE: 2::IL2:' : 7 . “° ~—+— —+——.— eé ~1—P— --— — ‘I *1 p.31- I209 I 290I '9'4l 2‘3 = 293 £97 I29“: '31" 30' I302 I 3 l 3 5 I OI—I'SIWI‘SW'J 309 I3I0 I . -— —+v*£f'/‘:tf "- ‘?:1"-/\fi:'" ‘tJ——-1 — - “’tf—f—7—‘rczfla I/ ‘ g 3 I ‘ I “'7’ 3;. I 24 I323 I3 I I /I3I0 ' 7 3:0 I 353/ ', — I —— a—InuI J I ' I I ——T‘——7’ "‘ % - 4:: '0 K\ I—I 339 I300 I __ 3 0 33 ‘. 334 333 I 330 33d'I 330 4 i I . r— -— -—+——-— -_I_4Lun—~»— ——I~—_—4__w_4__7 : \J . I I I I 332 0 7 370 I 377 37 37I I 370AI\309 E 300 I 37 344 I 343 304 I 303 I . 302 l30I ' I' _7 ‘;-‘--‘ 4 8‘ A}-.. / — l l I "'L‘4 __.J1-' i . .1 337 I 300 309 I £90 I 33I I 2 I 393 4 390 . 399 I 400 40I II 02 40 I404 403 | 400 407 I 400 I 3 I _ _ r“ ’_ . - d _ _ I __ _-.. S ‘szt‘m I—u-vn l \ 437T- “II’ +1—3- \>\_ ‘T— .__ _. 4— —— —— T | "wi— ‘ “4| % _I._ 2.430 4 rtIe I423 24 I V 23 420 3‘ 4 O l 4'! 4|! GI! wear-Ufm‘ — 1i '— T 94 “ 4—WM ‘1 " ' K I K—F 1— _TMLI. 434 I 433 43s“ 43 440 44I I 442 443 '440‘I 447 . 440\*"‘4’49 | 430 a I 432 453713N—\ 433' ”"I‘TIT +-—+~ ——I-—+——I—— E_Il--- .__ —~'r-— — — -——« I _ r-_ .__ ~.$— 7 $4003 479I} 477 I470 (,4 3 I474 I473 I 472 I 47. I4 0 I 409 I 450 If4e7 I 455 I 433 “44I-463 .«ziaou 130 437 V F— —- —— ~— «Ir+— +3 —+—+— +— + LEAN I I I 432 l 403 03 I 40 II407 I 400 I 409 I490 I I I 492 I 493 I494 I 493 I I ‘97 I 390 303 304 ll‘l‘.‘ I ~ I ~ — — —~-—+— -—+—I-+— —~+~4 _V93 ”t --7— ——+- 9 - _— ' I I 320 I 327T320 I 323' 324 I 2 “I 322 Hm I 320 l 3I9 3I3 I em '35:; I 3: 3I4 3 ‘3I2 II 300 ' 303 + E I , _+ + + l | I I I I I | _ __ .__ -7 - 7"- -_ __ __ _ 1 A. A "T_— —' -‘ 3 / fi— "" T . I 329 I330 33I I332\+~333 I 33 33s I 337 I334§339 I340 I 34 {342 I 343 I 344 I 343 I 3 33I I332 _- _ +-~I’—-I--" __+L_+-_ __ __ _ -_._ _ I __._I___. I Y I 374 373 I 3 4 | 373l 0 I 567 303 364 II 56 I392 q 30: :300 I 39 334 I333 : __J___L _L. _';.___L_ .__L___ .__..L_ I__._._.L'_ _ _ ¥ A 0 \ n T L\ 3:: ° ”2 I 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY SCALE IN MILES JANUARY I963 IL28 FIGURE XXIII. POTENTIAL EXTENSIVE RESIDENTIAL USE AREAS 2_I _+ -\+93 1— 4‘ ”$3“' «‘9‘ I I + r77 37|33I|30 3"I-3 3+ -k~%§.-—J— -+ I 3"III34I33I32 Ian I II3 | II4 \. .fi— —tu'—3377L3374_w: - . I29 I23 I I27 I23! I‘J. ' I "I- — IPIutav—r. \ I I30 I3I I 32 0 I33 I I34 .:'___+. I73 I I72 I I 0+ 09237' — "L’— : I95—Itf‘i6 I I97- KW 2w 20|(II 202 .Htm - ‘ \207 I 03I2;9 I IO ' - ‘ 2I3 I2I4 I! ( g _' 5 . J — T." _ '+ ' ‘ —‘ a . — —+- 'llI..—-l.| ¥hI}AD+ I—& I II, I3I . . J L" . ')2332I 2340I . 232+ I w : :230 .223” '\'I 227 I 22 ' - 223I 222 I 21220 I22 I m III: ' I V- _ 2” 47 I243 5:: I330 2;.2 1' '232 I2 —+ I 7 I33 I 23'?! 230 33I 2 I'- I3; ' I g.' ——I I ‘I — i ! +1.:\ 2333 ' 232-1 3I"I*’ - 279 239 I233 L2 7 751' G 233 18237 I 33 I 233 273 I 27 I 274 ‘273 I 2 I270 \ kj'—I—— —I——————-»‘.— \_ .' I In” . 4 _— -« — —-—r IL —'I 309 I3I0 I 239|29OI 29 9'4I293 5293 <32397| 93:2 A 3 I I302I3- 3 o '1‘ _ _ __ _" .0. -- II . ‘ T’J—_—T L >9 I vs T 7-3— a“ >’ ’ O I a .. ‘QI:= szai‘m J‘I24I323I3 I i l I ‘ ' I. “+ 3; I'll-0.3!! -= ——I—-——-—. ' 3. .34 333 I 333 330| 333 $9 I330 __°.I_4L__. - ‘ ~ —- --—— —-‘—— ' I I :W'I37 I I 3701\339" $333+" 333 I 333 334 I 333 332 I33I I I III 24 ——i_'. I 40 I I404 403 I 403 407 I 403 < 3 . , ’ , 7 ' "T“ ‘. -v- —— _—-‘% I, _ XI, I ' K ' q — I 4I3 4I2 I 4H 44' “0 ~ 6 I ,; Inorwtn I in... ‘ \ \_ ‘ - I’ I“ .__ wh— ———I——I—\—J “1.13.1. 434 I 433 433° 444 | 443 I443' 447 443 my I432 433 3! 3 I ~ . ._ij I , . _:‘_ __.. . 7d \_._ ——LL— “+— <— ’7‘. _ —- P - -- p— —- —-4 '4305 479I3M 477 I473 3 I 474 I473 I 472 '47. I4 0 I439 I 433 E437 I 466 I433 “‘ I “3 “2 I ‘5' “0| 5' 497 ~ I _. _ _ .. . _ ~ >«-r—I- —+—4-I— —+ M” 14* —- ' 43I !432I 433 433 I 43 I 437 : 433 439 I490 I . I 492 I493 I494 I 493 I 9 I 497 I ‘90 I499. 500: 5 I5 503 50‘ I « I ‘ tfir- _II-+. I—wI-—v+v—+-~ ——+—~I..I~-+r I- — T‘”*-—I*-% —I— I——+- . 323 I 327 323 I 323' -324 I12 "I 322 I 32I i320 | 3I9 3I3 I 3I7 I3I3 I3I I5l4 I5I3I 3I2 I‘ll MO 30 303 IT 303 I303 ‘-"- Ir- /.__./I %-+—+~—I—— I If I 3 ¢ '1"“’" “7’ I "I 'I '\' 329 I330 33I |33M33 I 33 I 333 333 I 337 133323.339 I340 | 34 'j 4 I 343 . 3 "I 347 548 I 549 I {£0 55' I552 -—- - -< I- "I I ___ F" _—+"j‘ — , ,, - _ 433'".- *’—— ,‘-+ "‘————I‘——' . I I I I 373 373 I 3 4 I 373 I 37I IAIO~+ " 3 I 337 W . I332 d 33: I 330 39 33 I 3 334 I333 : -.J___L L 1_. - _J___L_.g_J.:V I -__.L-_ _. __ __ 1 1 .. ° 4V7.\ n I / I I‘ /N> (.__ 0 NZ I 2 RICHARD A. MALTBY SCALE IN MILES JANUARY I965 1129 FIGURE XXIV. POTENTIAL INTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL USE AREAS I'“ § 2‘, It I SII: MATH fl; ILILLI ' I“ 4‘ ~ ,' 49 l 47%|” {)3 " I:43I 44 I 43 wII -I-- .°."I .- I_ I.{.——+ WIRE—#6 3571' + +2175: \ 3M {I‘m 30 29 I 29 6 TOI I vnunnc “_H‘m” I ‘ if. _I___. 4% . {NE—3: - I Jr 7|, 1» 1L IEIIIIIS I IN 7:3 INC.‘ II7 II"; T‘ T \ II — vs — __ _L_ ._ — ‘3 _‘ 0‘ nu vo-I T-v— ' ‘ ”IT; II3? gr; I I3 I'I? I\ ' T‘s/Wm I3 II2‘9—TI29 I I27 I23 I I I24 I I I2, -c- gi%+—' +~+:w— —+—+— “Wfl—“ +~+— 3:3 ,. DIG 33 I37 9-.' I I30 um I «52;; I33 I I94 I I33 ' 7 I I" I , 7'. .. .__-..‘ 1-4- 42 figs—I . V—I—. —+—+— —-5— —-,_——+ I". a I~\3 J | , I 77 ‘ 73 I73 I73 I72 I e I III; I IégbL. 92 I9: 20+”: Wig-II I “MI I _+_ 7: I99 % 2 ZOIC: 5202 96 204 I o I 20M 00|2 9 I '0 '1 2'3 I“ I2 Igl‘. :1—+——- —+———Cy— ——'-——-+ -+-— — —-I>—§—