[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]





                                        Impact Of Proposed
                                           Future Land Uses On The
                                               Indian River Lagoon,
                                3                 Brevard County

                                                       December, 1990
                                 4        5              FRELIN"NARY
                                    6                        D R A


                                               Indian River Lagoon
                                                   Sub-Basins







                                         9

                                   12         2
                                           13  4
                                       17   15
                                               6
                                      18                    Principal Investigator:
                                                               M. J. Gilbrook





                                Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
                                Coastal Zone, Management Contract CM - 272













                 IMPACT OF PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USES ON THE
                       INDIAN RIVER LAGOON, BREVARD COUNTY


                             A STUDY PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT TO THE
                       FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
                                    OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT



                                              CONTRACT CM 272


                                  DRAFT FINAL REPORT: DECEMBER, 1990



                                            PRELIMINARY
                                                D'R A F T



                                               Principal Investigator

                                                Michael J. Gilbrook
                                                   Section Chief
                                                  Special Projects



                                     East Central Florida Regional Planning Council
                                            1011 Wymore Road, Suite 105
                                               Winter Park, FL 327 89



                    Funds for this project were provided by the Department of Environmental Regulation, Off-ice
                    of Coastal Management, using funds made available through the National Oceanic and
                    Atmospheric Administration under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended.




          REPORT DOCUMENTATION
                 PAGE     
              
          4. Title and Subtitle                                                                                                       5. Report Date                 
              Impact of Proposed Future Land Uses on the Indian                                                                         December 1990
              River Lagoon, Brevard County                                                                                            6.

																						  8. CM-272	
          7.  Author(s)																			 10. Project/Task/Work unit No.		
              Michael J. Gilbrook                                                                                                    11.Contract(c) or Grant(G) No.
                                                                                                                                	    (C) NA89AA-D-CZ 228 
          9.  Performing organization Name and Address                                                                                  (G)                                          
              East Central Florida Regional Planning Council													
              1011 Wymore Road, Suite 05                                                                                             13. Type of Report & Period Covered

																						     Final	
              Winter Park, FL 32789                                                                                                  14.  

                                                                                                                                   


          12. Sponsoring Organization and Address                                                                             
          U.S. Dept. of Commerce/NOAA                         Dept. of Env. Mgmt.
          OCRM                                                Coastal Management                                    
          1825 Connecticut A., N.W.                           2600 Blair Stone Rd.
          Washington D.C. 20235                               Tallahassee, FL 32399

          15.Supplementary Notes






          16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
              The Growth Management and Land-Development Regulation Act of 1985
              (Chapter 163, F.S.) required that all looal governments in Florida
              prepare comprehensive plans which outline thier intended growth pattern
              over a ten year period. Central to the comprehensive plan is.the
              Future Land Use Map, which pictorially represents the local.government's
              growth strategy. Unfortunately, although each comprehensive plan
              undergoes review by the Regional Planning Council and the Florida
              Department of Community Affairs, no mechanism exists to examine the
              combined effect of all local plans in a county on natural resource                                                                             
              This study used PC ARC/INFO, a Geographic Information System (GIS), to
              examine the impact of the proposed future land use scenarios in Brevard
              County on vegetative cover, flood plains and stormwater pollution loadings
              in the Indian River Lagoon watershed. The analysis revealed that the
              Indian River Lagoon watershed within Brevard County will experience
              significant losses in natural vegetative cover and floodplains if the
              area builds out as proposed. Despite the imposition of stormwater
              pollution treatment standards by many local governments, the increased
              development within most sub-basins will cause pollutant loadings to
              the Indian River to increase.

          17. Document Analysis  a. Descriptors





		  b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
                Coastal zone management/Growth Management/Chapter 163, F.S./Chapter 9J-5,
                F.A.C./Brevard County/Indian River/Geographic Information System/GIS/
                PC ARC/INFO /Habitat loss/Floodplain encroachment/Stormwater pollution
                loading

             c.COSATI Field/Group
           18. Availability Statement                                                                     19. Security Class(This Report)                21. No. of Pages
                                                                                                             Unclassified
                                                                                                          20.Security Class (This Page)                  22. Price
                                                                                                                                                                     
       (See ANSI-Z39.18)                                          See Instructions On Reverse                                              OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
                                                                                                                                          (Formarly NTIS-35)    
 







                                   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

            The Growth Management and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985
            (Chapter 163, F.S.) required that all local governments in Florida
            prepare comprehensive plans which outline their intended growth
            pattern over a ten year period. Central to the comprehensive plan
            is the Future Land Use Map, which pictorially represents the local
            government's growth strategy.       Unfortunately, although each
            comprehensive plan undergoes @-.review by the Regional Planning
            Council and the Florida Department of Community Affairs, no
            mechanism exists to examine the combined effect of all local plans
            in a county on natural resources.

            This study examined the impact of the proposed future land use
            scenarios in Brevard County on vegetative cover, floodplains and
            stormwater pollution loadings in the Indian River Lagoon watershed.
            The PC ARC/INFO Geographic Information System (GIS) was used to
            manipulate digital maps of existing land use, future land use,
            jurisdictional boundaries and floodplains in order to generate
            areal coverage data.    The resulting analyses revealed that the
            Indian River Lagoon watershed within Brevard County will experience
            significant losses in natural vegetative cover and floodplains if
            the area builds out as proposed.       Despite the imposition of
            stormwater pollution treatment standards by many local governments,
            the increased development within most sub-basins will cause
            pollutant loadings to the Indian River to increase.









                                   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

           The following people were helpful in the preparation of this study:
           Mr. Jim Cameron, SJRWMD, provided the Indian River Lagoon watershed
           files in AI format.     Mr.. John Higman, SJRWMD, agreed to allow
           Florida Institute of Technology to organize their existing land use
           digitizing schedule so as to best benefit this project's timeline.
           Mr. Higman was also responsible for allowing the ECFRPC to use some
           "pre-release" versions of the Indian River existing land use data.
           Dr. Hillary Swain, Ms. Anne Jackson and Ms. Vicki Larson of FIT
           were all very helpful in feeding land use data to us as it became
           available.   Finally, Mr. Jim Stoutamire, FDER, deserves special
           consideration for his assistance as contract manager for this
           project.









                                       INTRODUCTION

            Florida's Growth Management and Land Development Regulation Act of
            1985 (Chapter 163, F.S.) requires that all cities and counties
            prepare a comprehensive plan which is consistent with the State
            Plan (Chapter 185, F.S.) and the appropriate Comprehensive Regional
            Policy Plan (CRPP) .   To ensure compliance, the Florida Department
            of Community Affairs established minimum criteria to be met in the
            preparation of local comprehensive plans.         Rule 9J-5, F.A.C.
            identifies the type of data to be collected and analyses to be
            performed as a prelude to the development of goals, objective and
            policies.

            Local governments located within the coastal zone must prepare a
            Coastal Management Element as part of their plans. One of the
            priorities of the element is to restrict development where such
            would damage or destroy natural coastal resources.          Plans f or
            coastal areas, like those of all local government comprehensive
            plans, must also have a Conservation Element which provides
            additional protection to natural resources.           The background
            analysis requirements for the Conservation and Coastal Management
            Elements include assessment of Future Land Uses on the following:
            (1) floodplains [9j-5.013(l)(a)2.1 and areas subject to coastal
            flooding [ 9J-5. 012 (2) (b) ] ; (2) vegetative cover [ 9J-5. 012 (2) (b) and
            9J-5.013(l)(1)5.11     including   wetlands     [9J-5.012(2)(b)     and
            9J-5.013 (1) (a) 1. 1 ; and (3) impacts to water quality and        the
            accumulation of contaminants in sediments [9j-5.012(2)(b)].

            In April and May of 1988, Brevard County and the fifteen           (15)
            cities located within the county submitted their revised
            Comprehensive Plans to the Department of Community Affairs. These
            plans were the first in Florida to be submitted under the new
            growth management legislation and provided an early indication of
            how local governments would approach the management of future
            coastal development and the protection of coastal resources under
            the new law.


            The review of these plans revealed a major shortcoming in terms of
            their ability to assess the full effects of all proposed
            development on the Brevard County coastal zone. Each comprehensive
            plan assessed only the impacts caused by development located within
            its jurisdiction. This process failed to account for concurrent
            impacts from proposed development in adjacent jurisdictions.
            Future impacts in any given jurisdiction were measured against
            existing conditions, and not the condition which would exist if all
            proposed development      in the    county were to materialize.
            Consequently,    the   cumulative    impacts   of   development     and
            re-development plans on coastal resources in the county were not
            adequately addressed.

            The purpose of this study was to assess some of those cumulative
            impacts for the Indian River Lagoon watershed within Brevard
            County.   By using PC ARC/INFO, a Geographic Information System








           (GIS) , digital maps of existing land use, future land use, and
           floodplains could be overlayed.   The results of the GIS overlay
           analysis, combined with other forms of computerized data
           processing, would help to reveal the impacts of Brevard County's
           collective future land use plans on the natural habitat,
           floodplains and stormwater pollution potential for the area within
           the Indian River Lagoon watershed.









                                       METHODOLOGY


            STUDY AREA


            The study area included those parts of Brevard County within the
            Indian River lagoon watershed, as described in Steward and VanArman
            (1987). Federal properties (Kennedy Space Center, Cape Canaveral
            Air Force Station and Patrick Air Force Base) were excluded from
            the analysis because these areas are not subject to the Local
            Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation
            Act  (s. 163.3161, F.S.).       In order to provide more useful
            statistics for the stormwater pollution loading analysis, the
            Indian River watershed was further subdivided into twenty (20)
            sub-basins per Steward and VanArman (1987)          A list of the
            sub-basins appears in Table 1.

            OVERVIEW OF GIS ANALYSIS

            This study was conducted using PC ARC/INFO, a computerized
            Geographic Information System (GIS). A GIS allows for the use of
            computer stored, digital maps in a spatial analysis, similar to the
            way a computer spreadsheet conducts a numerical analyis. Using a
            GIS, digital maps may be electronically modified, combined and
            overlayed to produce new information in a way which would be
            difficult if not impossible to do by any manual method.

            The use of a GIS involves several distinct phases. The first is
            data collection, whereby the data one wants to use in the study are
            organized in a fashion suitable for input into the computer. The
            next phase is data capture.     In this phase the data are entered
            into the computer system in a form suitable for analysis.        This
            step usually involves a digitizing the data using an electronic
            "tracing" tablet, although other forms of data capture (such as the
            use of remote sensing data) are also available. Editing errors and
            re-organizing the data into meaningful data themes or layers also
            occurs during the data capture phase. The analysis phase follows
            data capture.    Various GIS procedures are employed during the
            analysis phase in a planned series of steps, often referred to as
            a model, which are designed to produce the desired results. The
            model for this study will be described in greater detail below.
            The last GIS step is the output phase, which involves the
            production of both tabular data and hardcopy maps.

            GIS HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE

            Software. The study employed several software products. AutoCAD
            version 9 was used to digitize spatial data and export files into
            DXF (Data Exchange File) format for importation. into the GIS. The
            GIS used for this study was PC ARC/INFO Release 3.3, including the
            supplemental release dated 10/ /89. Tabular data exported from PC
            ARC/INFO were analyzed with R:base version X.X, and SPSS-PC+
            version X.X.








            Hardware. A Compaq Model 386/20 microcomputer served as the
            platform for PC ARC/INFO. The Compaq was an 80386 chip-based, 20
            MHz machine equipped with a 60 Mb hard-drive and a 20 Mb, 5.2511
            Bernoulli cartridge drive. The 60 Mb hard drive supported two, 30
            Mb partitions, one for programs and one for data.     The Bernoulli
            cartridge drive was used for data exchange between computers as
            well as data backup. AutoCAD functions employed both the Compaq and
            a Wyse Model 12 (80286 based, 12 MHz) computer. The Wyse was also
            equipped with a 5.25" Bernoulli cartridge drive.       Calcomp 9100
            digitizing tablets were used for original data entry using AutoCAD,
            but editing in PC ARC/INFO employed a separate Genius mouse.
            Hardcopy plots for both AutoCAD and PC ARC/INFO were made on a
            Calcomp 1043 high-speed, 8-pen plotter.

            GIS DATA ENTRY AND FORMAT

            Data Collection. Since the data were collected from a variety of
            sources in various different ways, the data collection process is
            described under GIS DATA THEMES for each data layer.

            Data Capture. Except for those cases where map data were obtained
            in a digital format from another agency, data were digitized by the
            ECFRPC using AutoCAD.    Paper manuscripts were calibrated using
            Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates. For digitizing
            from USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps, corner UTM coordinates were
            obtained from digital (AutoCAD) quad boundaries whose corner
            coordinates were calculated from the original latitude/ longitude by
            the Florida Resource and Environmental Analysis Center (FREAC) .
            Floodplain maps were calibrated using either quad corners, or the
            coordinates of section line corners digitized from 1:24,000 USGS
            quadrangle maps by FREAC.

            Map data were digitized directly into USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
            boundary files.     The use of quadrangle files formed using
            calculated corner coordinates ensured perfect edgematching of
            quadrangle borders.   Polygon borders were digitized individually
            using the AutoCAD polyline function; polygons were not "closed" in
            AutoCAD as separate entities. Each polygon was labeled by one or'
            more alphanumeric text strings on either the same layer as the
            polygon boundary, or on a special, separate layer. For example,
            future land use polygons appeared on Layer 10, and their labels on
            Layer 11. All polygon intersections were completed using AutoCAD
            "snap'! functions (i.e., either "end of" or "near to"). Polygon
            boundary lines were snapped to quad boundaries and to the ends of
            polygon boundary lines from adjacent quads. To ensure consistent
            use of a county boundary between all files, the Brevard County
            boundary was digitized from 1:24,000 USGS quad maps in AutoCAD and
            inserted into each quad, as appropriate. Floodplains, future land
            use and jurisdictional polygons were terminated against the county
            boundary.

            Floodplain and future land use data were maintained in separate
            AutoCAD drawing (DWG) files by USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle.       Files
            were named using a three letter prefix to indicate the data theme








           (i.e., 11FLD" for floodplain and "FLU" for future land use),
           followed by a three digit index number (e.g., "FLD-04211). Figure
           1 illustrates the USGS quads used in the study, and provides an
           index to the quadrangle numbers.

           AutoCAD to PC ARC/INFO Conversion. DXF files were generated using
           the AutoCAD DXFOUT command. File names followed the same naming
           convention used for AutoCAD drawing files, except        that names
           carried a "DXF11 rather than "DWG" file extension. In   addition to
           the FLU and FLD files, a series of DXF files containing
           jurisdictional (11JUR11) boundaries (i.e., city, county and federal
           property lines) were generated from line work stored in the FLU
           drawing files.

           DXF files were converted into PC ARC/INFO "coverages" using the PC
           ARC/INFO DXFARC command. A coverage corresponded to a single DXF
           file, and used the same naming convention (e.g., the coverage for
           floodplain quad 42 was "FLD-042"). To complete the conversion into
           PC ARC/INFO format, polygon label information from the DXF file was
           associated with its proper polygon in the PC ARC/INFO coverage
           using various relational operators within PC ARC/INFO (e.g.,
           11JOINITEM11) . This last step transfered the text label in each
           AutoCAD polygon to a value in a. new PC ARVINFO "item" (i.e.,
           database field) generated for that purpose.           For example,
           floodplain identifiers ("UP," "FL" or "N.I.C.11) were stored in an
           item called "FLD-TYPE."

           Despite the care taken to snap lines together at intersections in
           AutoCAD, conversion of DXF files to PC ARC/INFO coverages resulted
           in coverages which contained numerous incomplete (i.e., "dangling")
           polygon lines, presumably as a result from mathematical rounding
           errors in the conversion process.      Polygon "node" and "label"
           errors were corrected using the PC ARC/INFO ARCEDIT function.
           Finally, edgematching of polygon boundaries across quads was
           assured using the PC ARC/INFO EDGEMATCH program.

           GIS DATA THE S.


           The study required the use of six different GIS "layers" or
           "themes." A theme represents a single kind of spatial information
           for the county: floodplains, future land use, existing land use,
           stormwater pollution loading, federal properties or watershed
           boundaries. Except for watershed boundaries, each theme consisted
           of a number of separate PC ARVINFO quad-based coverages which
           together cover the entire county (or, at minimum, the study area)
           The watershed theme consisted of a single coverage which contained
           watershed sub-basins, and was used to subdivide the remaining
           themes during the analysis. Each theme is described in more detail
           below.

           Floodplains.  The 100 year floodplains ("All Zones) were digitized
           directly from FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Floodplains
           were labeled 11FL11 and upland (i.e., non-floodplains) areas were
           labeled "UP." Areas outside Brevard County were labeled "N.I.C.11








            for "Not In County." Floodplains were digitized for the entire
            county, except those areas within the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) or
            Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS).    Floodplains digitized
            within Patrick Air Force Base (PAFB) were later removed using the
            UPDATE procedure (see Federal Properties, below)          Floodplain
            designations were stored in the item 11FLD-TYPE.11

            Future Land Uses. Future land use maps were obtained from the
            adopted comprehensive plans of all local governments in Brevard
            County. Due to the large scale (i.e.,   'small size) of many of the
            maps, supplemental maps ata smaller scale were requested from the
            local governments.    Once adequate maps had been obtained, the
            future land use designations of the maps were simplified to a
            common coding system (Table 2). This simplified scheme represents
            the minimum future land use categories required in local government
            comprehensive plans by the Florida Department of Community Affair's
            "Minimum Criteria Rule," s. 9J-5.XXXX, F.A.C.

            Polygons representing areas of common future land use were
            transcribed to tracing paper overlays registered to USGS 1:24,000
            quadrangle maps.   In those cases where the absence of features
            (e.g., roads) on the USGS quad map made the identification of a
            future land use polygon boundary impossible, the polygon's
            boundaries were generated by scaling from known locations on the
            source and quad maps. Municipal boundaries were also identified and
            drawn on the future land use overlay. Future land use designations
            were stored in the item "FLU-TYPE."          No future land use
            designations were recorded for the area within KSC, CCAFS or PAFB.

            Stormwater Pollutant Loading. The stormwater detention/ retention
            level of service (LOS) for each jurisdiction was obtained from
            Drainage, Conservation or Coastal Element of each comprehensive
            plan (Table 3).   Each local government was assigned a pollution
            control rating based on its required level of stormwater treatment:
            I = Retention, 2 = Detention and 3 = None specified.           Local
            governments which specified a drainage LOS in terms of a design
            storm but had no local ordinance requiring stormwater treatment
            evidently only required that developed areas drain adequately.

            Local government jurisdictional boundary polygons were stored in
            the JUR series of PC ARC/INFO coverages. Each polygon was labeled
            with the name of the jurisdiction, which was stored in the
            "JUR-TYPE" item.  The treatment level code (item "SW    TREAT") was
            related to each local government polygon in the JUR coverages using
            the relational JOINITEM command.

            Existing Land Uses. Existing land use data were obtained from the
            Florida Institute of Technology. FIT prepared existing land use
            maps for the Indian River Surface Water Improvement and Management
            (SWIM) project under contract to the St. Johns River Water
            Management District (SJRWMD).    The maps provided to ECFRPC were
            intermediate products which had not yet undergone final quality
            control and editing. FIT and SJRWMD agreed to provide the data to
            ECFRPC on the understanding that the data may contain minor errors








           or other discrepancies. Furthermore, ECFRPC agreed that the data
           would be used for this project only, and would not be
           re-distributed. Nevertheless, these land use maps constituted the
           most recent and detailed land use available for the Indian River
           lagoon watershed in Brevard County. Minor errors in the shape or
           identification of polygons were considered insignificant for the
           regional scale analysis conducted here.

           Using 1989 black and white aerial photography obtained from the
           Florida Department of Transportation, FIT transcribed land use
           polygons to Mylar overlays registered to 1:24,000 USGS quad maps.
           Polygons were labeled using Level III codes from the Florida Land
           Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FDOT, 1985).           FIT
           provided XX quads to ECFRPC in PC ARC/INFO EXPORT format.          FIT
           provided ECFRPC with copies of the original quad overlays for      the
           remaining XX quads, and ECFRPC digitized them in AutoCAD and used
           DXFARC to convert them to PC ARC/INFO format.

           Following importation of FIT's existing land use coverages from PC
           ARC/INFO EXPORT format, the coverages were renamed to the ECFRPC
           quad naming convention using the prefix I'ELU.11 Since the existing
           land use coverages were digitized using Florida State Plane, East
           Zone coordinates, quads were transformed from State Plane to UTM
           coordinates using the PC ARC/INFO PROJECT command. Some of the FIT
           quads were digitized using "hand digitized" quad boundaries, rather
           than boundaries created from calculated corner points. Although
           EDGEMATCH was used on these quads to join quad edges, some polygons
           did not match properly across quad boundaries.         However, the
           resulting discrepancies were considered insignificant for this
           regional scale analysis.

           FLUCCFS Level III land use codes are three-digit numeric values.
           The first digit indicates the general, or Level I, land use
           category (e.g., '160011 means "wetlands") .   The second, Level II,
           digit provides more detail (e.g., 1161011 means "wetland hardwood
           forest"), and the Level III digit indicates the most specific
           identification (e.g., 1161211 means "mangrove swamp") .     Land use
           designations were stored in a character item called "LANDCOVER."
           In order to perform operations on the land use maps at Level I or
           Level II, it was necessary to create a numeric item for the land
           use code. The PC ARC/INFO command REDEFINE was used to generate a
           three digit, integer item called 'ILC" which contained the same
           three digit, character information stored in LANDCOVER. Later, LC
           could be tised to RESELECT polygons based on Level I or Level II
           designations using logical operators (e.g., "greater than," and
           "less than").

           Federal Properties. The boundaries of federal properties (i.e.,
           Kennedy Space Center, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Patrick
           Air Force Base) were converted from AutoCAD to PC ARC/INFO as
           quad-based coverages using the prefix "FED." These coverages were
           used to replace detailed floodplains or existing land use polygons
           with a polygon representing the federal properties using the PC
           ARC/INFO UPDATE routine. In essence, the FED coverages were used








             to "cookie cutter" the federal lands out of the floodplain and
             existing land use coverages to exclude them from analysis. The
             UPDATE procedure required that the item specifications in the FED
             coverages match exactly the items in the coverages to be updated.
             Consequently, FED coverages contained the items LANDCOVER and LC
             for updating ELU coverages. The codes 11991,11 1199211 and 1199311 were
             used to signify KSC, CCAFS and PAFB, respectively. Copies of the
             FED coverages for quads 92 and 105 were generated using a FLD-TYPE
             of 11PAFB11 for use in updating the floodplain coverages for those
             quads.

             Watershed Boundaries.    The Indian River watershed boundaries as
             described in Steward and VanArman (1987) were obtained from the
             SJRWMD in PC ARC/INFO EXPORT format as a single' coverage.
             Following importation into the ECFRPC PC ARC/INFO system, the
             boundaries were transformed from State Plane coordinates to UTM
             using the PROJECT command. A new'item, 11CZM   - BASIN," was added to
             the coverage for assigning integer values to each sub-basin. The
             PC ARC/INFO RESELECT command was used to create a new coverage
             called 11BR-BASIN11 containing only those sub-basins in Brevard
             County.   Figure 2 illustrates the twenty (20) sub-basins which
             comprise the part of the Indian River watershed which falls within
             Brevard County.    Table 4 provides a brief description of each
             basin.


             GIS MODELING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURE

             Pre-Analysis Preparations. Several preparatory steps were needed
             prior to conducting the actual GIS analysis. These steps were
             essentially the same for each data theme. First, the PC ARC/INFO
             UPDATE command placed polygons representing federal properties
             (KSC, CCAFS and PAFB) from the FED coverages for quads 043, 044,
             054, 055 065, 067, 078, 079, 092 and 105 into the appropriate ELU
             and FLD coverages. Next, individual quad-based coverages for the
             FLD, FLU and JUR themes were assembled into a single, large
             coverage using the PC ARC/INFO MAPJOIN command. The PC ARC/INFO
             SPLIT procedure cut those coverages into coverages corresponding to
             the 20 Indian River lagoon sub-basins in the BR-BASIN coverage.
             Coverages were named according to the sub-basin number (e.g.,
             "FLD-BO111 for floodplains in Basin 1) . Finally, sliver polygons of
             area less than 1,000 m2 (approximately 0.25 acres) were removed
             using the PC ARC/INFO ELIMINATE function. The entire process is
             illustrated in Figure XX.

             In the case of the ELU coverages, the approximately 20 Mb of hard
             drive space on the Compaq 386/20 or Bernoulli drives was
             insufficient to hold the large temporary files which PC ARC/INFO
             required during the MAPJOIN process.      To reduce the size of the
             contributing quad coverages, new quad coverages containing land use
             data only within the study boundary were created using the PC
             ARC/INFO CLIP program. Unfortunately, the files were still too big
             to MAPJOIN directly even with the extraneous land use removed.
             Consequently, we disaggregated the BR-BASIN coverage into its
             constituent sub-basins using the PC ARC/INFO RESELECT command.








              These individual basin coverages (named BASIN-XX, where "XXII
              equalled 110111 through 112011) were used to CLIP the ELU quads,
              thereby creating sub-basin "fragments" from various quads. The
              "fragments" were combined into complete sub-basin coverages using
              MAPJOIN. This process is illustrated in Figure XX.

              Vegetative Cover Impact Analysis. This step required the detection
              of changes in land use between the ELU and FLU coverages.                   A
              Quattro spreadsheet was generated containing all the codes used for
              the ELU coverages' LANDCOVER item in a single column. In another
              column, designated I'ELU   -TYPE," alphabetic codes were assigned to
              each   LC    value    using    a    "collapsed"     (i.e.,     generalized)
              classification scheme like that employed for FLU coverages. New
              value names were generated for those LC codes which had no
              corresponding FLU    TYPE code (e.g., "RANGE" for the 300 LC codes,
              "FOREST" for the 400 codes) .         A listing of the correspondence
              between LANDCOVER and ELU    - TYPE codes appears in Appendix A.           An
              additional column, 11SWR  -ELU, 11 was also generated in the spreadsheet
              table at this time.         It will be described further under the
              Stormwater Runoff Impact Analysis section.

              Using a variety of software tools                 (Quattro,    R:base and
              Wordperfect), the Quattro spreadsheet containing the LC and
              ELU TYPE values was converted into an ASCII comma-delimited file.
              This file was imported into PC ARC/INFO using the ADD FROM command
              to create the "SWR     ELU.DAT11 table.     The data within SWR ELU.DAT
              were added to the PAT. files of each ELU-BXX (i.e., suE-basin)
              coverage using the PC ARC/INFO ADDITEM and JOINITEM commands.

              Following completion of the JOINITEM procedure, the ELU and FLU
              coverages were overlayed using the PC ARC/INFO UNION command to
              create a series of DLU (i.e., "Difference in Land Use") coverages.
              The DLU coverages contained all the items found in each of the
              contributing ELU and FLU coverages.          A new item, FLU    -DIFF, was
              generated within the PC ARC/INFO TABLES module to mark those
              polygons for which ELU-TYPE and FLU-TYPE differed.             A series of
              logical selections (Table 5) identified those polygons which would
              not change in land use/land cover; those polygons were assigned a
              FLU -DIFF value of 'IN" for "No" change. The remaining polygons were
              assigned "Y" values.      Land uses which would not change included
              those for which existing and future land use types were the same,
              as well as those areas proposed as future conservation ("CON")
              sites. Wetlands, water bodies and highways in the existing land
              use data took precedence over future land use assignments which
              don't include these categories.

              To complete the analysis, area data for polygons in all DLU
              coverages were output into ASCII format using the PC ARC/INFO DUMP
              routine.    These data files were imported into SPSS PC+, which
              generated cross-tabulation tables between existing and future land
              use categories.      The CROSSTAB function provided row, column and
              cell totals- and percentages for the combined area of polygons which
              fell within each combination of existing and future land use types.
              These data were used to determine how much natural vegetation








            currently existed in each watershed and how much would remain
            following complete build-out of the future land use plan.        The
            cross-tabulation matrix also allow 'ed for comparative analysis of
            the various types of conversion (e.g., how much forest land was to
            be converted to residential, commercial or industrial use) .       A
            separate cross-tab analysis was conducted for those records for
            which the future and existing land uses differed (i.e., FLU_DIFF
            11yel) .

            Floodplain Impact Analysis. The DLU coverages from the Vegetative
            Cover Impact Analysis were overlayed with the corresponding FLD
            coverages for each sub-basin using the PC ARC/INFO UNION command to
            create DFL ("difference in floodplain") coverages. The area data
            for each polygon in the DFL coverages were output into ASCII format
            using the PC ARC/INFO DUMP routine. These data files were imported
            into SPSS PC+J, which generated cross-tabulation tables between
            floodplain category (11UP, 11 11upland" or 11FL, 11 "f loodplain") and both
            existing and future land use categories.      The cross-tabulation
            analysis provided an inventory of how much f loodplain area remained
            undeveloped under existing and proposed build-out conditions, as
            well as what kinds of land uses occurred within flood prone areas
            under existing and proposed conditions.      A separate cross-tab
            analysis was conducted for those records for which the future and
            existing land uses differed (i.e., FLU-DIFF = "Y").

            Stormwater Runoff Impact Analysis.    As was previously described
            (GIS DATA THEMES, Stormwater Pollution Loading), stormwater
            treatment codes ranging from one (1) to three (3) were assigned to
            each local government jurisdiction based on the level of treatment
            required in its comprehensive plan (Table 3) . An INFO table called
            11SWR CODE.DAT11 containing the jurisdiction name ("JUR-TYPE") and
            stormwater code CISWR CODE") was generated from this list.       The
            SWR-CODE values were @ittached to jurisdiction polygons in the JUR
            coverages using the PC ARC/INFO JOINITEM command.

            Next, the twenty JUR sub-basin coverages were overlayed with their
            DLU coverage counterparts to create the SWR series of coverages.
            The DLU coverages already contained a "SWR     ELU" item which was
            added to the ELU coverages from the "SWR      ELU.DAT'1 table (see
            "Vegetative Cover Impact Analysis," above). The SWR   ELU item held
            the generalized land use codes used in the assignment of pollution
            loading factors (see below). SWR   -ELU codes were related to their
            appropriate Level III land use code (i.e., "LANDCOVERII) in the
            SWR ELU.DAT table, and consequently assigned to each polygon in the
            ELU coverages based on the LANDCOVER value. Following the UNION
            operation, a series of logical selections (Table XX) were used to
            assign the value of "SWR FLU" to each polygon based on its proposed
            future land use type.

            The area data for each  polygon in each SWR coverages were output
            into ASCII format using the PC ARC/INFO DUMP routine, then imported
            into a series of R:base relational database files. R:base files
            were named using the same convention as the PC ARC/INFO coverages
            from. which they were obtained (i.e., "SWR-BXX, " where "XX" was the









            sub-basin number from "01" to 112011).

            Pollutant loading rates (kg/ha/yr) for various land uses were
            obtained from SFWMD (1990) and ECFRPC (1985).     The data from the
            SFWMD (1990) study were more detailed, providing a break-down of
            loading rates for more land use categories than were reported in
            ECFRPC (1985) . Furthermore, the SFWMD study provided loading rates
            for orthophosphorus, total zinc and total lead which were not
            provided in the ECFRPC report. Consequently, this study used the
            SFWMD loading rates, with some supplementation by the ECFRPC data.
            The loading rate data appear in Table XX.

            The pollution loading rate data were imported into an R:base file
            called "SWR LOAD.tv  Two copies of SWR LOAD were generated within
            R:base, "Eff LOAD" AND "FLU LOAD" for existing and future land use,
            respectively. The LAND -USE@_item in each file, whose values matched
            those used in the was renmaed "SWR         -ELU" or "SWR-FLU" as
            appropriate.   Using these items, the two pollution loading data
            tables were independently matched with the R:base files for each
            sub-basin using the R:base INTERSECT command. Two sets of output
            files were obtained by this relational operation:        a series of
            stormwater pollution data files based on existing land use
            (IIESW-BXX"), and a series based on future land use ("FSW-BXX").



            MAP PRODUCTION AND OUTPUT


            Vegetative Cover Impact Analysis.

            Floodplain Impact Analysis.

            Stormwater Runoff Impact Analysis.









                              RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


           NOTES ON THE METHODOLOGY.


           Computer Limitations.


           Importance Of Macros.


           VEGETATIVE COVER IMPACT ANALYSIS.

           Statistics on the cross-tabulation of generalized existing and
           future land uses appear in Table XX.       Appendix XX provides
           cross-tabulation results of the detailed Level III existing land
           use codes against future land use type for those polygons which
           changed land use. .

           FLOODPLAIN IMPACT ANALYSIS.

           Statistics on the cross-tabulation of flooplain type against
           generalized existing and future land uses appear in Table XX.
           Appendix XX provides cross-tabulation results of floodplain type
           against the detailed Level III existing land use codes against
           future land use type for those polygons which changed land use.

           STORMWATER RUNOFF IMPACT ANALYSIS.

           Estimated stormwater pollution loading values for existing
           conditions appear in Table XX.   Table XX provides the pollution
           loading estimates for the future land use scenario.









                            LITERATURE CITED




I



           f@



                                              APPENDICES











                                                                                                                                  NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY



                                                                                                                                  3 6668 14111417 5