Land management in the Lake Ontario basin / by James M. Wolf

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

I
loastal Zone
nformation
Center
-SEA GRANT

GREAT LAKES

C=>
MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS

SERIES

COASTAL ZONE
INFORMATION CENTER

LAND MANAGEMENT
IN THE
LAKE ONTARIO BASIN

JAMES Me WOLF

Cornell University
Ithaca, New York

/NEW YORK STATE SEA GRANT PPOGRAM
99 WASHINGTON AVENUE

ALBANYs NEW YORK 12210

HD
211 December 1973
aN7
W65
1973

LAND MANAGEMENT IN THE LAKE ONTARIO BASIN

James M. Wolf

Cornell University
Ithaca, New York

A Member of the New York State Sea Grant Program
A Consortium of the State University of New York and
Cornell University

U. S.DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA 2234 S0UTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON,SC 29405-2413
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413

Property of CSC Library

The work upon which this report is based and its publication and
distribution were supported by funds provided by:

The New York State Sea Grant Program, the United States Department
of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;

The United States Department of the Interior, Office of Water
Resources Research, as authorized under the Water Resources Research
Act of 1964, as amended; and

The Institute of Water Resources, United States Army Corps of
Engineers.

F 0 REE W 0 R D

One of the major tasrks before us as we move into the end
of the present century is bridging the gap that persists
between the generation of new knowledge at a rate,..un-
matched in human history and the effective application
of this knowledge to pressing social and environmental
problems. As population grows, industry and agriculture
expand and resource consumption increases., the residuals
of production and consumption place.ever greater stresses
on the physical environment. Nowhere is this more evident
than in the Great Lake!� Basin.

We in North America have reached that.pQint at which
envirom-nental quality has taken its place in the arena
of public issues. Citizens are now applying pressures
on their governments as a means of defending certain.
values that had lesser priority in earlier days. While
recognizing that a.beginning has been made, the facts of
the matter are that we are not managing well our natural
resources and that progress will continue to be slow and
halting unless the requisite political will for some
fundamental changes emerges.

There are a number of common factors that account for
our inability to respond more effectively to the challenges
to managing not only our water and land resources, but
other social problems as well. A listing of a few of the
more significant factors affecting resource management
include: the diffused public interest; differing views
about'national priorities; inadequate legislation and
enforcement; special interest politics; fragmentation of.,
responsibilities within and ainong governments; and
organizational jealousies. These e 'lements operate indi-
vidually and jointly in ways that seriously impede public
programs that are designed to yield effective management
of our resources.

There is, however, a more fundamental contributive factor
and that is our failure to modernize the institutional
structure. The institutional problem is defined as that
of determining what kinds of government organizations are
needed and how these organizations should be related to
each other in order to achieve the most effective manage-
ment of the natural resources of the Great Lakes Basin at
the lowest possible econornic, political and social costs.
There is, of course, an existing institutional apparatus
involving all levels of government in both Canada and the
United States. This present structure, however, is not
the p--coduct of any United br-ates - Canadian long-term
plan for the Great Lakes Basin. On the contrary, the

present mix of govern-mental deoartments, agencies, boards
and cc.,mm, issions simply evolved- over the years at a rate
and to an extent th@t were determined by the changing
limits of Political feasibility in each country.

For the past two years, the Water Resources and Marine
Sciences Center at Cornell Universitty has been engaged
in a series of studies of the institutional problems in
the Great Lakes Basin. Perhaps the most important con-
clusion of our studies is that the present institutional
structure for resource management in the Great Lakes
Basin is inadequate and is in need of fundamental revi-
sion.

The Cornell project focusing on the institutional problems
of the Great Lakes consisted of three related yet distinct
research efforts.

The first commenced in early 1971 when a group of twenty
graduate students representing a wide range of disciplines
investigated the water and related land management problems
of the Lake Ontario Basin. The approach of this graduate
seminar was to attempt a comprehensive, multiple resource-
use investigation which included an examination of the social,
economic and political factors peculiar to the Lake Ontario
Basin. The objective of the group was to consider the need
for, and the formulation of an improved management scheme
for Lake Ontario. A background report (350 pages) was
prepared and a summary report, The Management of Lake
Ontario - A Preliminary Report 'Proposing an International
Mana5ement Organization was distributed to the Governors
and Provincial,Ministers Conference on Great Lakes Envir-
onmental Problems at Mackinac Island, Michigan in.July
1971.

The summary report concluded, among other things, that
the improved management of Lake Ontario (and by extension,
all of the Great Lakes) would require either a substantial
strengthening of the International Joint Commission or the
establishment of an altogether new binational agency to
supplant the former in the Great Lakes Basin. The report
recommended a joint Canadian - United States study in this
matter and, as an interim action, a reference to the Inter-
national Joint Commission authorizing the Coriunission to
establish on a trial basis a management office with rather
extensive coordinative responsibilities for the water and
relaited land resources of the lower lakes region.

The graduate student group sought, in effect, a strengthened
binational apparatus, pref,-@rably one based on the existing
International Joint Commission, authorized to carry out a
surveillance and mediation function in the lower lakes.

Su--veillance is defined in this instance as essentiallv
an informat4on collection, data interpretation and dis-
semination role. It is an activity concerned with
problem definition. Surveillance includes a continuing
responsibility to be aware of problems and alert to future-
developments. Mediation, on the other hand, encompasses
the development of joint programs to attack common
problems. It involves also the promulgation of regulations,
schedules and-uniform standards, along with appropriate
means to secure implementation of those regulatory
mechanisms.

While some consideration might be given to assigning a
joint agency a third function - that of control, particu-
larly in the cases of water pollution or air pollution
control, that does not appear to be a feasible direction
in which to proceed, at least at the present time. The
governments will be better able to determine their posi-
tions with respect to vesting a joint body with an effective
control function once the Great Lakes Water Quality Agree-
ment signed by Prime Minister Trudeau and President Nixon
in April 1972 has had time to operateand be evaluated.

The second phase of the Cornell project began in late
1971. In order to further test the tentative findings
of the graduate student group and also to encourage a
.binztional focus on the problem, plans were laid for a
six-month seminar comprised of interested faculty from
universities in Canada and the United States.,

A Canada- United States University Seminar was formed by
.various faculty from some twenty universities and colleges.
inCanada and the United States. The Seminar met in three
.formal sessions during the period December 1971 - June 1972.
Using the information and data assembled by the Cornell
graduate student group as a starti"ng point, the Canada -
United States University Seminar took up the question of
improving the two countries' capabilities for managing the
water and related land resources'of the Great Lakes. A
principal objective of the faculty group was to produce a
report which would promote discussion in both countries
on the problems of the Great Lakes. Another purpose was
to set forth in general terms the available alternatives
for improving the management of the water and related land
resources of the Great Lakes Basin.

A final report of the Canada - United States University
Seminar has been written and the findings (1) indicate
that there is a need for a modified international arrange-
ment to cope more effectively with the existing and emerging
resource-use problems affecting the Great Lakes Basin, and
(2) present three alternative institutional approaches
as possible guides for further discussion and debate in

Canada and the United States.

The third phase of the Cornell research effort on the
Great Lakes Basin consisted of an attempt to develop
furt'ner the idea of a binational management o--'ice with
wide coordinative responsibilities for the Lake Erie and
Ontario Basins. Concurrently with the Canada - United States.
University Seminar (December 1971 - June 1972), a second
graduate student group at Cornell University investigated,
under the guidance of Professors Leonard B. Dworsky,
C. Donald Gates and David J. Allee, selected elements of
a hypothetical joint management office. As part of this
effort, ten graduate students completed seven theses for
advanced degrees, together with three research papers
on some facet Of ajoint regional management office.

The type of joint office conceptualized is one designed
to carry out a coordinative.role in the management of a wide
range of resource-use problems. The list of such problems
used in the investigation included: water quality; munici-
pal/industrial water supply; agricultural water supply;
lake level control; hydropower; flood control; navigation;
shoreline erosion; fish and wildlife protection; water-
based recreation; solid waste disposal; air quality;
economic development; agriculture and transportation.

In our attempt to simulate a Great Lakes operations
office jointly established and operated by Canada.and
the United States, we endeavored to examine a selected
number of those problems.which both the'designers of such
an office as well as those who are ultimately charged
with its direction would-be obliged to address.

An obvious initial consideration, for example, would be
the structure and functions of a modified joint agency.
This topic is dealt with in Natural Resources Management
in the Great Lakes Basin by James A. Burkholder. A
primary task of an operations office would be the collection,
interpretation and dissemination of data and information
pertaining to the Basin. This important area is treated
in An Information System for the Management of Lake Ontario
by Dale Reynolds. The role of public participation in the
activities of the proposed Basin operations office is
examined in detail in Public Participation in Water and Land
Management by Arvid L. Thomsen. Demographic trends and
problems are traced on a national scale and then examined
with respect to the Lake Ontario Basin as a case study in
Toward a National Population Rec-listribution Policy: Some
Policy Issues by Lawrence W. Saunders. The problems of

water quality management of a lake,basin are considered in
0
1 A Case Study
pportunities for Water.Quality Management:
of the Lake Erie Basin by Ralph P. Meckel. Special
problems of environmental quality management along an in-
ternational boundary are the subject of Environmental Manage-
ment of the Great Lakes International Boundary Areas: A
Case Study of the Niagara Urban Region by Donald R. Kisicki.
The opportunities and problems associated with Federal and
state grants for wastewater treatment facilities are discussed
in two case studies in Cost Sharing in Water Pollution Abate-
ment Facilities - Some Economic and Political Consequences
by James M. Foster. Land use management as an integral part
of the overall planning process is the subject of a paper
Land Management in the Lake Ontario Basin by James M. Wolf.
In his paper entitled Management of the-Biological Resources
of the Lake Ontario Basin, Douglas M. Carlson provides a
comprehensive survey of the fishery, recreational and wildlife
resources of the Lake Ontario Basin. Finally, in his paper
Management of Water Supply, Navigation, and PowerPrograms,
Martin J. Murphy focuses on-those water uses in the Lake
Ontario Basin and the potential role of a joint operations
office with respect to municipal water supply, navigation and
hydropower in a new institutional framework.

These papers, of which this by James M. Wolf is one, are
offered with the hope that they will contribute usefully to the
improved management of the Great Lakes of Canada and the United
States.

LEONARD B. DWORSKY
Director,
Water Resources and Marine Sciences Center
Cornell University
March 1973

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EUe

I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1) Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2) Linkages and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

11 PORTRAIT OF THE REGION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1) Physical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
a@ Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
b Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
c) Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2) Demography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3) Economic Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4) LUNR Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

III LAND USE PLANNING - CONCEPTS AND INSTITUTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 11

1) Land in Historical Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2) Current concepts in Land Use Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3) Regional Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4) Regional Development in Ontario . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . 17
a) Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
b) Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 17
c) Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 18
d) Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 18
e) Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 20
f) Mediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
g) Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22'

IV ISSUES IN LAND USE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 24

1) Land Use Requirements - Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

a) Ontario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
b) New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
c) Observations . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Page

2) Conversion of Ru ral Land to Urban Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
a) Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
b) Causes of Change in Land Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
c) Measures of the Conversion of Rural Land to Urban
Uses . . . . . . . . 26
d) Future Trends in Urban @r;wih' 29
e) Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3) impact of Land Use Trends on the Environment . . . . . . . . . 30

a) Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
b) Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

V THE LAND AND THE FUTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

1) Urbanization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2) Open Space Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
a) More People - More Leisure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
b) Concern for the Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 33
c) Pollution Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3) Mechanisms to Counter Urbanization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4) Proposed Bi-national Approach to Land Use . . . . . . . . . . 35

VI DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

1) Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 36
2) Summary . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3) Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

I INTRODUCTION

1) Background

In January 1972 a group of ten graduate students explored the
possibilities of a joint Canada-United States office designed to carry
out a doordinative role in the management of the lower Great Lakes.
Each student investigated a selected element of a simulated operations
office. The purpose was to examine in as much detail as time and
resources permitted some of the principal tasks that such an office
would carry out and to anticipate some of the significant problems
and opportunities associated with those tasks.

Three objective functions of the Office were recognized:

Surveillance - information gathering and compilation; interpretation
of data for planning purposes and decision making.

Mediation - establishment of standards; programs; priorities;
financing.

Control - methods of implementation and enforcement.

Various aspects of the objective functions were covered in reports pre-
pared by each participant. These included the following:

1) Institutional arrangements for resource management in the
Great Lakes Basin

2) Public participation in resource management

3) Information systems

4) Cost sharing alternatives

5) Management of water supply, navigation and power

6) Management of the biological resources of the Lake Ontario
Basin

7) Population alternatives

8) Land management
9) Environmental management of an international boundary area

10) Water quality management in the Great Lakes

As we developed our own topics, the linkages to the other partic-
ipants and their areas became clearer. This perhaps set the keynote
for the overall resource management problem. For management of Lake
Ontario involves linkages in two directions--first, linkages between
various resource uses, i.e. multi-resource management, and secondly,
binational linkages to facilitate achieving resource management ob-
jectives.

Linkages and Objectives

This paper on land management in the Lake Ontario Basin has very
obvious ties to other papers in the series. The need for adequate
information exchange and for public and joint Canada-United States
participation in the planning processes are becoming more apparent.
The paper acknowledges the significant implications that population
growth and distribution have upon the resource base. As an integral
part of the planning process, land management is recognized as having
tremendous impact upon water quality in the lake.

The objectives of this paper are to demonstrate the importance
of land management in particular as it interacts with management of
the lake. Basic to this objective is a physical and demographic
delineation of the region. Concepts in land use planning wi'll be
covered. Particular attention will be paid to a case study of regional
development in Ontario. Issues in land management will be discussed.
Lastly, future human needs and their impact on land use trends will
be explored.

II PORTRAIT OF THE REGION*

1) Physical

a) Dimensions Lake Ontario is the smallest of the Great Lakes.
The lake has a surface area of 7600 square miles of which 3600 square
miles are in the United States and 4000 square miles in Canada. There
are 726 miles of lake shoreline. The Lake Ontario drainage basin con-
sists of 15,200 square miles in New York and Pennsylvania, and 12,000
square miles in Ontario. Combined, the land and water portions of the
basin occupy 34,800 square miles. Figure I shows the general geographic
setting of the Lake. Figure 2 gives the boundaries of the drainage
basin. It should be noted that although Ontario is small by Great
Lakes standards, it still ranks among the largest fifteen lakes of the
world.

b) Hydrology Lake Ontario is the most easterly of the Great
Lakes. As such it is the last major lake of the chain and drainage
from the entire Great Lakes Basin, (approximately 300,000 square miles),
passes through the lake. Drainage from Lake Erie passes over Niagara
Falls and into Ontario. The St. Lawrence River drains Lake Ontario to
the ocean., Average inflow to the lake has been determined to be 202,000
cubic feet per second (CFS), while discharge from the St. Lawrence is
about 232,000 CFS. Annual flow from this river and the Great Lakes
system is the most constant of any hydrologic system in either country.

c) Landscape The land south of Lake Ontario is a region of
low relief and rolling hills. This area contains some of the best farm
land in New York State. The Appalachian uplands begin approximately
thirty miles south of the lake, roughly along a line now occupied by
the New York State Thruway. These uplands rise to form the southern
,boundary of the basin. East of the lake is the Tug Hill plateau,
while northeast of the lake is the St. Lawrence-Champlain Corridor.
The land north of the lake is low and rolling. The predominant phys-
iographic feature in that area.is the Niagara Escarpment.

2) Demography

In 1968 the population of the Lake Ontario Basin was 6.1 million,
of which 2.3 million resided in the United States and 3.8 million in
Canada.

In the United States, the population of-the Buffalo urban area in
1970 was 1,335,000 while the Rochester area had 875,000. (The Lake

*Much of the material for parts 1 - 3 of this chapter were taken from
the reference by Dworsky, et al.

NO RTH EASTERN jONTARIO

ALGOMA
SUDBURY

3,-
Q u a b e
45
NIPISSING
"6 @A
PARRY SOUND

GEOR G I A N RENFREW
ONTARIO CARLETON
DEVELOPMENT REGI MUSKOKA
It A Y Y, LANARK
HALIBURTON 0
LEGEND -ft tA
BOUNDARIES r--l@RENVILI
International D \X-K-5- 0 N 1\ \A R 0 FRONTENA(@, \(
Provincial I
Re ional C \PETERBOROU@H LEEDS
9 -Fo
@,,IASTINGS
County or District GREY
SIMCOE SIA,co
VICTORIA 01,
EO R G Ijk-N--1 B A Y
RTH-1
BRUCE DURHAM I MBERLAND- INCE
FERIN' \ YORK\\ ED
scale M I DW �S-TER N PEEL
0
HURON WELLING ON I. A X E 0 N T A R 1 0
N' A R lp@,,-\
HAL' 4
PERTH NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO
KENORA
NIAGARA (Pat".,. ;Trtionl
MIDDLESEX \OXF D BRANT L I OLO I
A.R1A
LA K E 'I E IMAN6'@ WELIIANV THUNDER NORTHEASTERN
ON ORFOLK
A -R-I
11--, COC
ELGIN KENORA BAY
L
RAI ALGO;TAI
T CLAIR RIVM
KENT'
It
ESSEx U.&A. SUDS

NORTHERN OWARIO,

Branch. DePartment of Treasury
Ri,qio@l Development and Economics

Figure I

f E D S
z

% St.LAWRENCE

0
0 Ij 'A A I
JE FIF E*R So

0 >
to 0

L IE W I S
HA I TON
0

0 S w E G 0

NIAGARA ORLEANS
0
%,4r U6 C7 W A Y N E
MONROE
5 C N E S E E
Olt,0
ONTARIO v N N

MILE
E R I E y m I N 0 z v
Y A T-E S 0 10 23

OMPKIN

ALLEGAN

5 T E U 5 f N

CHEMUN T 10 0 A
VEEKINSYLVANiA

Counties of the.Lak-c Ontario drainage basin.

Figure 2-

Ontario Basin contains other relatively large cities in New York State
for example, Syracuse. Due to their distance from the lake, they have
not been included in this discussion.)

In Canada, the bulk of the population is concentrated in an urban
arc called the Mississauga Conurbation which runs from Oshawa southwest
to Toronto and Hamilton, thence east to Niagara Falls. Figure 3 is a
map of this area. Population estimates, (1969) for urban Hamilton were
480,000; for urban Toronto - 2,316,000. Forecasts for 1976 project-a
population of 4.6 million.

The population is moving from the rural areas to urban areas, and
in particular from the north and east to the southwest and into the
Ontario Lake Basin. There are 12 counties in Ontario which have land in
the Basin. In the period 1951-1961, all but three of these showed
population growth rates above the provincial average. The pattern was
similar in the period 1961-1966. -More significantly, the counties of
Halton, Peel and Ontario have shown population growth rates greater
than 90% above the provincial average, while York and Lincoln have
shown population gains in the range 30-50% above the average. These
counties, Lincoln excepted, make up the heart of the Toronto Centred
Region. Thus urban areas in the Canadian part of the Lake Ontario
Basin are very rapidly expanding, and doing so at the expense of the
adjacent rural areas.

Most reports predict future population growth rates for the area
at or above current trends. It appears likely that the rate of
population growth on the Canadian side of the Basin will continue to
exceed that on the U.S. side.

In Ontario, 7% of the population is engaged in agriculture. In
the portion of the Basin in New York State only 2% of the population
is engaged in farming. Yet about 1/3 of the population in the Basin,
on both sides of the border, live in rural areas. Although there is
a tendency for population migration.from rural to urban areas, this
may in part be due to an expansion of the urban centers to absorb
rural lands by subdivision or other ways.

The high population concentration around the western portion
of the lake, (from Oshawa to Rochester), places environmental.stresses
on the lake and upon the land in the area. These pressures will re-
quire action in land and water management in the years ahead. Chapter
IV of this report deals with management issues and strategies with a
focus on this portion of the Lake Ontario Basin.

3) Economic Environment

Employment trends are useful in describing the economy of a
region. Buffalo and Rochester have been areas of slow growth as

CfO"C'A1,f

5\1:01

1. SCUGOG

IL -

Wh;IbY

% LAKE ONTARIO
Kitd,-er Pori Cred;I
Waterloo 1.
Ilk Ock,,*If*

St. cotho,mes

N;ogora Falls, KY.

t N;agn,a Fol 1,, 0.1.

Co-14
8.11fato

iNke.
I.C

8 0 8 )6 24 32

MILES

LAK! EVE
THE MISSISSAUGA- CONURBATION

AREAS BEING URBANIZED
M. AREAS LIKELY TO BE URBANIZED

URBAN SHADOW

Figure 3

measured by national trends. Nevertheless, they command important
positions in manufacture of primary metals, transportation equipment
and photographic equipment, among others. The Buffalo-Niagara Falls
industrial complex, strategically located between centers of primary
production in the mid-west, and centers producing manufactured goods
in the northeast, serves as a major transportation hub.

The Toronto region is the financial, manufacturing and educa-
tional center of Canada. Manufacturing is characterized by its diversity.
The city is an important shipping center and transportation link.
Hamilton is also a port and the Canadian center for the primary metals
industry. Overall employment growth in the area exceeds the Canadian
national average.

The Province of Ontario contains 36% of the population of Canada;
it accounts for over 40% of the Canadian GNP. Industrial employment
has increased by one-third in the last decade. Unemployment in 1970
averaged 4.3%, or 2% below the Canadian average. The Province is a
leader in the Canadian economy.

4) LUNR Study

Background The New York State Land Use and Nat ural Resource
Inventory (LUNR) has been established at Cornell University for the
purpose of developing a land use inventory for the entire state. Infor-
mation is stored in 51 categories of land use data obtained from air
photo interpretation. Other types of data such as point data (e.g.,
numbers of installations) are also available and computerized for easy
access and retrieval. Information from LUNR was used to determine
land use patterns in the Lake Ontario Basin. For purposes of this.
study, the 51 categories of land use were combined into five uses:

Active agricultural;
Inactive agricultural;
Wood Land - Forest, public lands, outdoor recreation;
Water Resources - Ponds, rivers, wetlands;
Urban Residential, industrial, commercial, utilities and
transport.

Study Areas Two separate data compilations were made. The
first was based on political boundaries. Data from nine complete
counties were used to determine land use patterns. The second com-
pilation was based upon physiographic boundaries irrespective of
county lines. This area was bounded on the south by a line approximately
30 miles.south of the lake, roughly along a line now occupied by
the New York State Thruway. As pointed out earlier, this is an
area of low relief and fine agricultural land. The two study areas

are shown in Figure 4. It should be noted that these areas exclude a
large portion of the actual drainage basin where environmental stresses
are apt to be less severe.

Results Land use patterns (percentage of the total area) in
each study ar a are as follows:

Political Physiographic
Boundary Boundary

Active Agriculture 39% 42%

Inactive Agriculture 14 15

Wood Land 30 24

Water Resources 11 9

Urban 6 10
100% 100%

Conclusions The physiographic boundary area has a higher pro-
portion of agricultural (active and inactive) and urban lands. It is
likely that there is somewhat more conversion of agricultural land to
urban uses within this area. The other area, containing more uplands,
is marked by a higher percentage of woodlands and water resources.

For both areas it is illuminating to note the relatively high
proportion of water resource lands. The rich endowment of water
resources underlines the need for complementary and integrated land
and water management planning for this region.

IKVN CL,

NEW YORK@ RIVER BASINS IL

cSst

it 46

Reif

E
2

2 B
43 -
281

2 C

jA
m
ov JQ
No "ew FAE BRWNC &A

Pol itical Boundaries

SCALE Sarorr MILES
0 0 40 ft

.2/71

so 71, 73 72

NEW YORN

SO 75 IS 77 70 7#1 IS IS

4S 43

NEW YORK- RIVER BASINS IL

44-

63 28 b3

A
UO al4w A I iMy FrVarN
Imm agow"wr

Physiographic Boundaries, fs

SCALE - MIUFC MILES

OL.
2/71

At 73 74, IS

&0. 400.36

III LAND USE PLANNING CONCEPTS AND INSTITUTIONS

1) Land in Historical Perspective

It has been said that "the land-tenure.system of the United States
has undergone.fewer changes since the establishment of our government
than our Federal Constitution has." (Harris, P. 278) In the United
States and Canada, this system has evolved slowly but continually, not
through statutory enactment, but rather through common law and judicial
decisions. In brief, our land-tenure system defines the relationship
between man's use and control of, and his rights in the land.

The rights in the land reflect a distribution between the individ-
ual's rights and public rights (as exercised by the government). On
the surface it may appear that governmental rights in land held in fee
are minimal, but let us recount these rights which are historically
vested in the people. These rights form the basis for increased govern-
ment action affecting man's use of the land. Future action will in
fact be vital to the very preservation of the land as we know it today.

Probablythe most far-reaching public power is the police power.
This is the power to "regulate individual activity in the interest of
the safety, health, morals and general well-be-ing of the whole pop-
ulation." (Clawson, p. 66) Inasmuch as this power is contained in
somewhat loosely worded language, and because it is subject to periodic
reinterpretaton, it is the public power with the widest scope.

A second broad public power is that of eminent domain. This power
enables the government, (subject to "due process" and "just compensation"),
to take over privately held property for purposes of public use such
as highways, urban renewal and public housing. It is only in the past
several decades that the power of eminent domain has been taken to
include the latter two uses specified above. (Clawson, p. 66)

We are all familiar with the power to tax. This is also a vested
public right in the land. Although originally conceived as a revenue
raising device, this power has evolved into a regulatory tool as well.
(Harris, p. 280)

Many now consider the power of the purse, or the spending power
as a fundamental public right in the land. It is clear how government
spending for services such as schools, transportation and utility
services, parks ... affects land utilization.

Perhaps the most basic public right in the land is that of escheat.
In the absence of private ownership, rights ultimately rest with the
public. This is merely a-reflection of the full circle, - which began
with government control of the land, which then permitted private
ownership, and which in the absence of said ownership provides for land
reversion to the public.

These five rights form the legal basis for public rights in the
land. The extension from the.basic land rights has been visually traced
in Figure 5 showing a time line of increased government authority in
dealing with the land. Parallel to the increase in government authority
are changes in human values. During the first two-thirds of the 20th
Century these rights were called upon to provide the legal framework
for public activity in the area of resource conservation. This activity
and these bases will presumably be widened in the future in scope to
encompass environmental protection. As population increases while the
earth's resources remain fixed or diminished, public action for the
protection of the environment becomes increasingly essential. But
government activity alone is not sufficient. What is needed is public
awareness of the problem, a public desire, then a sustained commitment
to keep the land habitable for generations to come.

2) Cur-rent Concepts in Land Use Planning

The objective of land use planning is to facilitate the most
efficient use of the land for society, and the economy as a whole.
Efficiency criteria can be gauged in terms of the four evaluation
criteria established by the Water Resources Council, namely, regional
development, national economics, social well-being, and environmental
protection. Often the desires of the individual run counter to the
aims of society. It is the job of the land.planner to reconcile the
individual's goals with the long range goals of society.

We have suggested that individual commitment, not government
regulation is the long range solution to protecting the environment.
Nevertheless, it is government action (spurred on by a small nucleus
of concerned individuals) which sets the pace for current activity
in land use planning. The tools which are available to the land use
planner take two forms - incentive and restraint. Proper use of these
devices allows the land planner to become engaged in a broader activity
known as regional planning. Both New York and Ontario are involved
in regional planning. However, the effectiveness of their planning
is somewhat restricted by a lack of specific land planning devices
available to, or used by, these governments. Let us briefly explore
some of the current concepts available to the land use planner as a
means of setting the New York and Ontario situations into perspective.

Effective zoning dates from 1926 in the historic Village of Euclid
VS. Ambler Really7o. (272 U.S. 365, 1926) decision in' which the
Supreme Court "strongly affirmed the power of a municipality to regulate
use of private land, under defined conditions and with proper pro-
cedural safeguards." (Clawson p. 93) The decision was an outgrowth
of the public police power through the common law of nuisances. Thus
zoning was initially established as a restriction rather than as an
incentive. A recent decision by the New York State Court of Appeals
has widened the scope of zoning beyond that initially implied in the
Euclid decision. The court held that "Zoning is not just an expansion

environmental
protection

resource
conservation

era of human
rights bentham

land and man both
property rights

Changing
human values
environmental
protection
intensive management

multi-purpose
internal resource
improve- development;
ments-, custodial
disposal management;
rrevolutionary of public zoning
rent system war grants* lands
established acquisition
by statutes of public
-:'eudal; land domain
used as favor
@@y King
Changing
government
authority

1.000 1600 1700 1800. 1900 2000

Figure 5

of the common law of nuisance. It seeks to achieve much more...zoning
can be a vital tool for maintaining a civilized form of existence only
if we employ ... all the other professions concerned with urban (or land)
problems.1 (Parenthesis supplied) Zoning, which at first took the
form of restrictive convenants can now be used as incentives to foster
planning. For example, positive zoning techniques became requisite
to providing directed growth in problems of urban renewal, traffic
congestion, commercial development, rural-urban demands on the land.
The effect of this approach is one of "creating community benefits
rather than preventing individual harms..." (Mandelker in Marcus &
'Groves., p. 16) The effect of broader zoning techniques can be viewed
in terms of recent legislation in several states.
Three states hav 6 enacted legislation which estabish statewide
land use regulations. In 1961 Hawaii passed legislation which led to
a classification of all land int@5 -four districts, agricultural, rural,
urban and conservation. This was done to provide ordered growth in
a situation where land speculation was (and still is) rampant. Under
the law, land in a certain category can only be used for certain pre-
scribed uses within that category. Vermont (1970) established an
environmental board which passes on all major proposals for develop-
ment in the state as well as for any development above an elevation
of 2,500 feet. Maine (1970) has developed similar controls with a
strong bent toward preservation of the environment.

Some states have established land use controls over selected
areas in their states. At least ten states have set controls over
development in coastal areas, wetlands or shorelines. California has
passed legislation affecting development in San Francisco Bay and has
joined with Nevada to regulate development in the Lake Tahoe Basin.
New York has created Special State Commissions under the Office of
Planning Services (OPS) which are charged with reviewing all develop-
ment plans for the Hudson River Valley, and the St. Lawrence-Eastern
Ontario region. These commissions serve as watchdogs for development
inconsistent with public uses of the land. In.addition, New York
has begun the process of planning for development in the Adirondack
Park area by creating land use plans for this unique area. In Canada,
Ontario has enacted legislation designed to protect the Niagara
Escarpment against development by speculators, mining, etc. The
types of development encouraged include agriculture, parks and recreation.
Certain parcels along the escarpment have been earmarked for provincial
purchase.

1Udell V. Haas, 288 NYS 2d 888, 893, 21 NY 2d 463 (1968).
2See Bosselman and Callies, The Quite Revolution in Land Use Control,
a comprehensive study of the subject prepared for the CounET1 -on
Environmental Quality.

Recent l.egislation has been enacted in a number of states which
provide for agricultural land preservation in the face of rising taxes
and increased land speculation. In California, the Wilkenson Act
provides a different tax basis for land set aside from development.
Under the provisions of the New York State Agricultural Districts Law
(1971) farmers may receive shelter from land taxes based on potential
for development.

While this discussion has centered upon zoning as a tool in
land use planning, other public actions to control land use should
at least be mentioned. Beuscher considers slum clearance as the "most
dramatic modern illustration of land use control through public
acclUisition" (p. 515) Acquisitions of land for public purposes will
become increasingly important under the concept of eminent domain as
demand for public uses of the land, e.g., highways, parks, power
projects,..., becomes magnified.

Under the spending power, various grants-in-aid affect land
development. For example, eligibility for VA or FHA housing loans
may only be available for homes meeting lot size and neighborhood
standards (p. 563 Beuscher). In order to obtain matching grants for
urban renewal or open space acquisitions, certain federal criteria
must be met. The Model Cities Program relies heavily on this concept
of regulation through the spending power. Public policy toward pro-
vision of services such as water systems, sewage treatment, highways,
will also greatly affect land use planning.

Some individuals consider taxation to be "the most effective
exercise of the police power" (Seligman in Beuscher p. 565) In
recent years it has shifted from a revenue raising device to a
regulatory power. We have already touched upon lowered land tax
assessments in return for agricultural zoning. Oil and mineral tax
depletion allowances have obvious implications on land use. In
Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana and Vermont, statutes permit tax
exemptions as a means of attracting industrial development. Other
states favor parklands and timber uses through tax exemptions. (See
Beuscher for a more complete account)

It is clear that the land planner has today a number of regu-
latory devices available to him. The basis for these devices has
evolved from simply "harm preventing" to promoting the "greatest
social good." Through the planning process, government can show
that the regulations are necessary to accomplish desired social
objectives. Regional planning which will rely on the regulatory
devices of the land planner will also contribute to an expansion of
the rules under which the planner operates.

3) Regional Planning

Regional planning has been defined as "the process of preparing,
in advance and in a reasonably systematic fashion, recommendations

as to policies and courses of action to achieve accepted objectives in
the common life of urban or regional communities." (Woodbury in
Ackerman, p. 66).

The key phrase in this definition is "in advance." Planning means
foresight, not simply taking action to correct mistakes. Planning
should be initiated preferably when the slate is clean-'-when problems
don't presently exist - so as to obviate potential problem areas before
they develop.

Another key word in the definition is "systemetic". Planning is
an integrating process which draws on inputs from a variety of dis-
ciplines. Since planning can have far-reaching effects on people and
resources, planning input should include insofar as possible, a con-
sideration of the indirect consequences of choosing particular courses
of action. For example, what would be the full range of effects of
transporting northern California water to the Los Angeles area? In
addition to encouraging industrial and residential development, would
the result be to worsen the smog problem and make commuting even more
of an intractable problem? In other parts of the country, for example,
in the Great Lakes Basin, we must turn the question around, how will
land use planning affect the water resource?

Effective regional planning requires broad planning objectives,
including livability, efficiency, amenity, flexibility, resource
optimization and public participation (Woodbury in Ackerman, p. 68-79).
A plan to include the governmental functions of surveillance, mediation
and control is required to meet these objectives.

Planning for a region is in phases. In the first phase of the
planning process, goals are often defensive, i.e., they are designed
to prevent further deterioration of the inner city or permanent damage
to the environment. The plight of the cities is a well-known and
studied phenomenon. It includes traffic congestion, air and water
pollution, unplanned development, deterioration of housing, decline
in the quality of services, erosion of a sense of civic responsibility.
Goals here arise pragmatically from the real problems besetting the
area. (Gertler, p. 396) Planning tools at this stage include, but
are not limited to, development schedules, urban renewal, subdivision
control, designation of land uses, establishment of greenbelts.

A second phase invol'ves regulation of land use. Also considered
here is actual planning and design for lands in order to limit sub-
division growth and to avoid urban decay. I't is noteworthy that, in
the United States, three states, Maine, Vermont and Hawaii have passed
legislation designed to regulate land use.

A third phase provides for long-range planning for the optimal
use and development of the resources of an entire region. The objectives
here are optimize human benefits over a specific region as well as to
provide for environmental protection.

The key to the final phase is broader,levels,of.optimAlc@lannin?-
Although local land use planning is a step in the right dire ion, i
is inadequate to meet problems confronting the province, state or nation.
An interregional development framework is needed to meet national goals.
The challenge here is a willingness on the part of the individual
regions to forego certain prerogatives for the benefit of an interregional
effort to meet planning objectives.

Systemetic planning in time and space thus goes beyond geographic
and political boundaries for solutions. Just as southern California
has looked beyond the Tehachapis for solutions to its water problems,
full management of the Great Lakes Basin requires commitment and action
from Canadian and U.S. interests. Let us now examine the structure of
land planning in the Lake Ontario Basin with specific reference to
planning in Ontario and the Toronto Centred Region.

4) Regional Development in Ontario

a) Background In Ontario during the sixties and early seventies,
three trends have called for organized planning efforts: First, there
has been an increasing tendency for migration to urban centers. Ac-
companying this familiar migratory pattern is the equally familiar un-
planned urban sprawl. The Toronto Centred Region now extends westward
towards Hamilton and Waterloo, and eastward toward Oshawa. The trend
is dismally familiar, choice farm land is transformed into suburbs,
forests are destroyed, open pit mines and quarries scar the countryside
and the air and water resources of the region are left polluted.

b) Structure A regional approach to these and related problems
in Ontario was deemed appropriate. The basis for a broad planning
approach was established through the Federal Planning Act of 1946 which
outlined procedures and regulations to be followed. In 1966, in a
program known as "Design for Development, Phase I," John Robarts, Prime
Minister of Ontario, stressed the belief that "regional plans and
priorities should always contribute to the total environmental develop-
ment and economic performance of the (whole) province" and that "regional
development policies are ... aspects of a broader provincial growth policy."
(See A Strategy for Southwestern Ontario Development, p. 1)

Under the program Design for Development, the Province of Ontario
took on responsibility for developing official plans into which local
governments would have maximum input. This intent was strengthened
in "Design for Development, Phase II" initiated in 1968. In this phase,
guidelines were established on the provincial level. Local governments
were required to develop plans in accordance with the Provincial Design
for Development.

Under Design for Development, provincial regional plan determination
is in three phases: (1) data gathering; (2) development of regional
plans; and (3) implementation of the above through local and provincial
coordination of on-site development. Phase (3) may be termed the "action"
or "med4ation" phase.

The Regional Development Branch of the provincial government was
given responsibility for planning development and guideline determination
for the province. The Branch is within the Department of the Treasury
which is expectedly indicative of how close provincial planning is tied
to the purse strings. The Branch acts as an administrative focal point
providing coordination between the various governments and governmental
agencies concerned with regional and local development.

Unlike intergovernmental endeavors in the United States, federal
hegemony is absent. While establishment of priorities and major
funding decisions may lie at the cabinet level (federal), operational,
guideline determination and approval will be found at the provincial
level.

Figure 6 is an organizational chart for the regional development
program. It should be noted that a reorganization of the Provincial
Government is presently underway.

c) Objectives "A Strategy for the Southwestern Ontario Develop-
ment" (p. 14-15) spelled out the following objectives for development
of the region:

1) Economic growth should be based on private industrial
development which combines regional diversification
with subregional specialization;

2) urban growth should be decentralized in growth nodes
so as to maintain economies of scale and at the same
time limit sprawl;

3) a transportation system should be established which
links the urban centers. The transportation system
should in part shape future development not simply
respond to past requirements;

4) environmental protection is necessary for the region's
shorelines, escarpment and prime agricultural lands;

5) flexibility; and

6) encouragement of local participation at each stage of
the planning process.

d) Surveillance Initially, ten economic regions were delineated
in Ontario for purposes of data collection or surveillance. These
regions conformed to existing administrative boundaries. Here the intent
was to take advantage of data gathered previously. Later, ten regional
plans were deemed too many for purposes of planning coordination, (i.e.,
some fluidity was to be gained if regional size within Ontario was
increased), and the number of regions was reduced to five.

Figure 6
ORGANIZATION
REGIONAL DEVELOPME14T PROG.RAM

CABINET

CABINET COMM1111F ON ECONOMIC CABIWET COMMITTEE ON POLICY
b REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT 7 - - - - - - - - b PRIORITIES

Ittas.,v 6 (to.o..C% (Cha.'sl Prime Minister (Cha.rsf
Environment td,ital.o6
Mines b Nottlitin Affairs ResIIh
Municipal Allai.1 Justice 6 Aito,i,ev Genera I hi.n.stets
I,aCt b liess.-V 6 Economics
b Communications_ transportation b Co.....Cat.o.b

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Treasury b Economics fChaiis)
Agricull.,ii h food
Environment
Departrieftial Lends b ;ortsls Delfuly
lopull Municipal Affairs Ministers
Tourism 6 Information
Trade b Ot.clopment
Tianspo,talion b Communication%

Prime Minister's Office Reo'clentat,

LIAISON COMMITUF LIAISON COP.1%,10TIE
CENTRAL 6 RECID14AL DEVELOPMENT NORTHERN b EASIFAN
SOUTH VOWIAN ON IARIO ONTARIO
BRANCH
Regional Oe,lopnie.t 8'a.ch 1112ional Dtvtlopmtnt Bfjnch
Icha,131

task loft

Reg,onaI R t V. a. a D.,@co Link to
Advise,, Ot.91opmeni Gov't Door%
Beside Co..cifs co.ce'.14d

In 1967, the Regional Development Branch commenced systematic
data accumulation so that trends could be established. Sixty-three
indicators of social and economic change were analyzed for the
period 1951 - 1966.

It may also be noted here that a land inventory (similar to New
York State's LUNR) has been established by the Agricultural Depart-
ment in Ottawa under federal-provincial agreement. The intent is to
use this information for gross land use planning in each province.
Initially the Canada Land Inventory is looking at four criteria:
(1) agriculture; (2) recreation; (3) wildlife; and (4) forestry.
Eventually the inventory will be computerized for easy access and
retrieval.

e) Control Enforcement of guidelines rests with the province.
Enforcement is based upon the concept that development within approved
areas will be guaranteed government supported services, (e.g., main
access roads, utilities, schools, transportation facilities ... ), while
development outside of approved areas will have no such guarantees.
Primary control is thus established through the public spending power,
though direct enforcement (police power) is also a possibility through
existing law. Under such a situation, a developer might be denied the
right to dispose of sewage, to bring in water, or to build high-rise.
Injunctions, though rarely used, are also a possibility. Local appeal
of provincial determinations is possible through a federally-appointed
panel of arbitrators..

In reality the control function appears to be less firmly
established in Canada than in the United States. The application of
positive zoning has not been widely carried out, nor are there land
use enactments other than the one cited regarding the Niagara Escarp-
ment. Taxation has not been used as a regulatory device nor are there
provisions for agricultural assessments.

In spite of these limitations, the action phase of the planning
process has been initiated for the Toronto Centred Region, an area
encompassing a 90-mile arc around Toronto. This region contains over
half of Ontario's population and occupies a pivotal position geo-
graphically within the province. Let us examine the status of planning
for this area.

f) Mediation

Principles

1) There should be linearity, or alignment, between growth
nodes to facilitate major transportation links and
allied services.

2) There should be a functional utility between urban and
rural areas. Each has a contribution to make to the
other. For example, one serves as a cultural source,
the other as a source of outdoor recreation. Economically,
complementary products are produced.

3) There should be linked sub-centers within the Region.
This will foster decentralization.

4) There is need for open space land areas of recreation.

5) Resource conservation, of land, air and water is a
necessity. (MacNaughton - pp. 4-6)

Goals

First To encourage all parts of the region in the
achievement of their overall potential,
insofar as such encouragement is consistent
with overall provincial development.

Second To preserve the unique attributes of regional
landscape.

Third To minimize the urban use of productive
agricultural land.

Fourth To minimize pollution of water and the
atmosphere.

Fifth To encourage and maintain a pattern of
identifiable communities.

Sixth To provide the best possible accessibility
for the movement of people and goods.

Seventh To provide essential transportation, water
and sewer facilities at minimum cost con-
sistent with overall benefit.

Eighth To maximize opportuni'iies for using
specialized services and facilities.

Ninth To develop the region in a manner consistent
with the needs arising from long term
population trends.

Tenth To develop the region in a manner consistent
with the needs arising from social, economic,
and technological changes.

Eleventh To develop the region in a manner that provides
flexibility for meeting future needs.
(MacNaughton, pp. 607)

Design

Three concentric zones have been delineated: (see Figure 7),

Zone 1. A lakeshore urbanized area. This is centered about
the present metropolitan area.

Zone 2. A commutershed. The policy here is to retain a pre-
@mium on open space, recreation and agricultural lands.

Zone 3. A peripheral area.

Provisions (as yet undefined for various reasons), have been made
for a Parkway Belt system and for recreation areas. The unique feature
of the Parkway Belt system is the concept of maintenance of wide cor-
ridors of open land, to provide transport and/or utility services and
also to prevent communities from growing together into urban sprawl.
The corridors will also serve as environmental buffers, to diminish
noise and diminish adverse visual impact.

Status

Affirmation of principles of the Toronto Centred Region have been
made as recently as April 1971. "The government has decided to endorse
the principles of this basic plan as the guideline for provincial
decision-making in the Toronto-Centred Region" (McKeough, p. 2).

9' Summary In summary, regional development in Ontario as
evidenced B-y-p7-anning for the Toronto Centred region has begun. Much
surveillance has been completed; mediation has been initiated. The
fact that there is a plan - with general governmental and public support-
speaks well for the process.

Three areas of potential weakness are noted:

1) While planning is integrated from a regional standpoint,
it is not integrated from a resource standpoint. This
is essentially a land plan. Regional planning should
encompass land, water, and air planning.

2) As yet there has been little need for control. Ontario
hopes that regulation can be effected through the public
spending form of regulation, i.e., incentives. It is
doubtful if this will be adequate.

3) The tempo of deleterious change in populations, urban
sprawl, loss of agricultural lands, environmental damage
calls for plan implementation at an early date. There
is an urgent need to got on with the task.

N
'plo,pa,

01,
50N
RECRCAT@
-.1,1 0
,1CA

R E C P E AT 10 N
x
p
pl@

AGRICULTU bL VATIO

AGR: LT R OSHAWA* "T opt - COOOVAG
OLTON

00
7
CULTUR _1
of

LEGEND
RICU UR
TORONTO 0 LAKESHORE URBANIZED A
T @MISSISSAUGA 0 NIAGARA ESCARPMENT
'A. RECREATIONAL AREAS
KrTCHE?.'ER- y
W&ERLOO EXISTING POPULATION: SELECTE
OAXVILLE
OUNDER 25,000
025,000-100,

BOUNDARI
U
URLINGTON
,
-NZONES I a 2 --*ZONES 2 8
@,HAIAILTON

WANTFO TORONTO-CENTRE

REGIONAL DEVELOPME.

SCALE 8 0 a 0 Is
ItMtONAI. OEVMOPMDff BRANCH. DEPARTMENTOF TREASURYAND ECONOMICS MAY 5, 1970
Figure 7

IV ISSUES IN LAND USE REQUIREMENTS

1) Land Use Requirements - Urban Areas

a) Ontario In 1964 there were approximately 200,000 acres of
built-up land-in the Basin and adjacent to the lake, excluding areas
such as Guelph and Barrie. The population density was 8,200 persons
per square mile. (By way of comparison, the west side of Manhattan
Island has a density of 160,000, while the density in an area zoned
for acre lots would be about 1000). The gross residential area was
estimated at about 120,000 acres. By the year 2000, land taken up
for residential areas alone will total 260,000 acres. This does not
include non-residential intensive uses such as transportation links,
parks, industrial sites, shopping centers, and institutions.

Projected urban land use requirements to the year 2000 have
also been made by MTARTS (Metropolitan Toronto and Region Transportation
Study) for a region encompassed within a 60-mile radius from downtown
Toronto. This area includes Guelph and Barrie but excludes St.
Catherines and Niagara Falls. The results of these studies are briefly
summarized in Table 1.

Table 1

Built-Up Area Density Residential Area
(Acres) (Persons/Sq. Mile) (Acres)

Low Density
Assumption-2000 592,000 7,000 403,000

High Density
Assumption-2000 412,000 10,000 223,000

1964 220,000 8,200 123,000

b) New York Allee's report projects urban land requirements for
the following counties: Niagara, Erie, Wyoming, Orleans, Genesee, Wayne,
Livingston, Monroe, Ontario, Yates, and Seneca. For projection purposes,
these counties are taken to be representative of the Lake Ontario Basin
area. For the 20-year period 1965-1985, requirements in acres are as
follows: housing - 63,000; commercial and manufacturing - 19,000;
other - 18,000. The derivation or original uses of this land is pre-
dicted to be as follows: openland - 59,000; cropland - 36,000; woodland -
5,000.

c) Observations It can be noted that overhalf the built-up area
will go for residential uses. Typically, streets and highways rights-of-way

take up about 1/5 of the developed land, and commerce and industry,
utilities, institutions, ... occupy another 1/10 to 1/5 of the land.

Zoning ordinances may in the future push minimum lot sizes to
larger acreages. This will lead to lower densities and higher land
use requirements. Even under extreme conditions, (low density as-
sumptions), availability of land will not present a barrier to urban
growth in the Basin in the foreseeable future. To the year 2020,
more than 3/4 of the land will still be vacant or in parks. Core
areas will of course have a very high percentage of developed land.

Despite the fact that there is ample physical space for urban-
ization, the costs associated with one type of development versus
another must be evaluated on economic, social and preservation bases.

2) Conversion of Rural Land to Urban Uses

a) Introduction On the fringe of present urban areas, rural
land, (agricultural, wooded and open), will be converted to resi-
dential and industrial uses. Some of this land will have a high pro-
duction potential as measured in economic terms. Loss of this land
will be in response to a higher marginal utility of the land for urban
purposes. Loss of prime agricultural land, though perhaps unfortunate
in many ways, will not result in a loss in total farm production. The
slack will be taken up elsewhere. Loss of forested land will be offset
by replanting in or exploitation of other areas. However, the value
of rural land in the vicinity of cities is not to be measured in
economic terms, but rather in their location in time and space when
used in conjunction with planned development.

b) Causes of Change in Land Usage

Land Speculation

With increasing urban sprawl, land values on the periphery will
continually increase, driven upward in value by the activities of
speculators and land developers. The number of acres converted to
urban uses is less than the conversion out of active agriculture. This
implies land available for recreation, preservation and open space,
but it also reveals the speculative pressures on the land. Urban
growth in New York State has required some 10,000 acres of cropland
annually. At the same time, land speculation has idled several times
this figure, of productive agricultural land in premature anticipation
of urban development. (In New York State, some 200,000 acres are
removed from active agriculture each year, the majority going to
recreational activities.)

When projections are made for future land requirements for urban
purposes, high and low figures are often given. Assuming a single

projected population figure, the difference in the land requirements
can be considered to be the land idled by speculation.

Assessed Evaluation and Taxation

One of the undesirable effects of urban growth on the rural country-
side has been the increase in the assessed value of the rural land
as a result of reassessment of the land potential for suburban develop-
ment. In a study involving some growth centers in the Lake Ontario
Basin, Hind-Smith noted that agricultural land in urban shadow areas
had assessed evaluations 40-60% greater than the farmland outside
the shadows. Rural lands adjacent to new subdivisions will generally
be taxed more heavily than in the past. For example, farmland may
be taxed by a public service district for improvements such as sewer,
water, lights and non-farm drainage. Under the provisions of the New
York Agricultural Districts Law, farmers may band together to seek
tax shelter from these types of taxes. They are also entitled to
apply for agricultural value assessments on their land and thus
exclusion from assessments based upon potential for development.
(Farmers not in Agricultural Districts may also obtain agricultural
value assessments by entering into contract yearly to keep their land
in farming for a period of 8 years.) This legislation recognizes
speculative pressures and inequities in land assessments and offers
alternative actions to individuals affected. Similar legislation
may be needed in Canada.

Higher taxes and speculation combine to idle thousands of acres
annually in the Lake Ontario Basin. These financial pressures are
engendered by urban sprawl. In this respect, urban growth accelerates
the conversion of rural land to non-rural uses. Land is placed on
the market in response to financial pressures which are in turn caused
by urban growth. The process feeds on itself.

In a study of the Niagara Fruit Belt, Krueger has traced the
detrimental effect of these pressures on prime agricultural land.
In the future'it will become increasingly important to protect such
land, to ensure its ability to compete, and to retain its present
character so that the undeveloped land will serve as a source of
enjoyment and recreation for rural and urban dwellers alike.

c) Measures of the Conversion of Rural Land to Urban Uses Several
studies in the United States and in Canada have quantified the trade-
offs between growth of urban areas and loss of rural land. The
methodology for this type of study was pioneered by Donald J. Bogue,
who posed the question, "...how many acres of land are removed from
agricultural production per 1000 population increase?" The answer to
this question might be sought in one of two ways: (1) Determine
population growth and growth of urban areas; and (2) determine population
growth and loss of land in non-urban uses. Although it may seem
indirect, the latter approach is preferred in that it underlines the

impact of urbani'zation upon potential loss in food production and also
the social impact due to loss of open spaces. Simply, Bogue and others
have noted population growth from one census to the next and have
related it to loss in acreage of agricultural, open, and forested land
in the vicinity of metropolitan areas.

One may rightly ask if a direct cause and effect relationship
exists? Certainly not all the exodus from the farming scene is directly
related to urban growth even in areas adjacent to cities. Some farms
are no longer operated because they are simply uneconomical. But it
has been shown that the greatest loss of farmland is closest to the
central city and the loss decreases as the distance from the core in-
creases. Clawson, et al., have shown that for every two acres withdrawn
from rural use, onlTone goes into development. A primary cause of
this is the speculative pressures on the land applied in an economic
sector where returns are only marginal. Also, one might add to this
the effect of rapidly rising property taxes in rural areas adjacent
to the cities. Thus, although there are other factors contributing
to conversion of rural land to non-rural uses, the most likely cause,
in and around growth centers, is urbanization and industrial growth
and the pressures created by them.

Ontario

In Canada, Crerar has made a study of the loss of farmland as-
sociated with population increases of major metropolitan areas. Table
2 presents a portion of his findings obtained for the years 1951-1956.

Table 2

Metropolitan Region Loss of Farmland (Acres)
per 1000 population increase

Ottawa 1001

Quebec 1000.

London 458

Winnipeg 383

Toronto-Hamilton 382

Montreal 374

Windsor 192

For example, in the Toronto-Hamilton area, 382 acres of land were con-
verted from farmlands to non-rural uses, commensurate with a population
increase of 1000 people. The acreage loss including forested and open
land would be in excess of this.

The question then arises as to how much of the loss of farmland
is actually required and how much can be considered waste? Crerar
(p. 131) states that Vancouver has planned for growth at the conversion
rate of 108 acres per 1000 population increase under what are con-
sidered to be very generous planning standards." If these standards
are to be applied to the Toronto-Hamilton region, 2.74 acres are wasted
for each acre consumed. The effect upon agriculture in the area and
upon Canadian agriculture as a whole is apt to be sizable.

Ralph Krueger has made a well-known study of the effect of urban
encroachment upon the Niagara Fruit Belt. This is that sector of the
Province of Ontario on the western shore of Lake Ontario. He notes
a recent acceleration in the retirement of this land from agricultural
purposes. This could be especially damaging in that the area accounts
for 25% of the gross value of Canada's fruit production. (The area
accounts for 80% of Canada's grape acreage, 60% of the peach acreage,
and 50% of the plum, pear and cherry acreage.) Alternative production
areas are scarce or nil. Alternative measures are to import fruit
from the United States.

The phenomenon of urban development encroac 'hing on agricultural
land cannot be viewed in purely economic terms. To do so is to give
undue weight to the economic gain resulting from the advent of urban
and industrial development in a given area. Other important values
are those of preventing unplanned growth, of insuring open space, and
of making cities livable. Moreover, if urban growth could be planned,
there would be provision for complementary agricultural and metropolitan
sectors, leading to economic and social advantages for people in both.

The reasons given for conversion of land in the Niagara Fruit
Belt are similar to those given for other areas. Increasing property
taxes and soaring land prices combine to induce the farmer into
selling his land. Land price increases can in many cases be attributed
to speculation. With this in mind, even the progressive farmer will
be reluctant to make improvements (say new trees) on his land with
repayment perhaps five years hence. He may opt to sell his land, or
simply to sit tight. Consequently, a side effect of speculation
may be a decrease in overall productivity.

As yet there is no legislation designed to relieve farmers in
Ontario of the price-cost squeeze. Nor do farmers seek this. Growers
are in general opposed to provincial planning which might in some
way limit their right to sell their land for a high price. Some have
proposed land use legislation to relieve growers in the area of the
financial pressures presently exerted. If planned growth is to take
place, this may be a necessity.

New York

A study has been done in New York State by Allee, et al., which
follows the Bogue approach and parallels Crerar's work in Canada.

Allee surveys past trends in population growth and demand for developable
land and uses these to develop land use projections for 1985 based upon
the rate at which rural land was in the past converted to urban uses.

The basic premise in the methodology, that demand for developable
land will continue as it has in the past should be questioned. Future
trends may favor apartment dwelling near the place of work or recreation.
This will in part be influenced by commuting times and distances. These
trends, if they materialize, will increase population densities and may
reduce the requirement for land conversion.

Allee's study presents figures for the conversion of land for
selected areas in the state including Buffalo and Rochester. The coeffic-
ients derived represent the amount of rural land in acres which were
required to support conversion from a rural to an urban use, given
population changes for the period. Coefficients for 1951-1966 for 78
sample towns surrounding Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany were
as follows:

Acres per 1000
population increase

New Use Housing 114
(demand) Commercial and Manufacturing 37
Other 42
193

Original Open land (rural non-farm, idle) 100
Use Cropland (active agriculture) 81
(supply) Woodland 112
193

Since more cropland surrounds Rochester than the other three cities, the
rate of conversion of cropland would be expected to be greater for that
city. Similarly, if the area between Buffalo and Rochester were to go
urban, it might require a higher percentage of cropland than the figures
above would indicate.

Unfortunately, Allee's study does not indicate the amount of land
converted from active agriculture or woodland to openland, and thus not
used for development. This would be an indirect effect of urban growth,
and an indication of speculative pressures. The amount of land idled
in this manner can thus be thought of as a measure of speculation for a
rural area surrounding a growth center. Figures which Crerar cities for
Canada include this component, (idled land). Thus, the coefficients
are higher.

d) Future Trends in Urban Growth Projections into the future
generally allow for high and low density residence assumptions. Neither
assumption denotes anything with regard to the quality of the living

environment. People's preferences in the future may favor, to a. greater
extent, apartment or high density living areas surrounded by open spaces,
in contrast to the present pattern of homes on individual parcels of
some fraction of an acre each.

Allee's work, supported by others, indicates that smaller cities
consume more land on the urban periphery than do larger cities. Stated
in another way, this means that as population increases, smaller and
smaller increments of land will be required to support the population
growth. This hypothesis, coupled with the high density living preference
just mentioned, indicates that one should not project land use trends
forward without first considering the decreasing successive require-
ments for land as the urban population grows. Here it might also be
added that if, in time, a circular growth center doubled its radius, the
area contained would be quadrupled. Thus, a 100% increase in the
radius of a city will allow for a 400% increase in the carrying capacity
of the land for urbanization, other factors being equal.

Although the urban growth process actually requires less and less
land per capita increase in population, urban growth pressures accelerate
the conversion of land from rural to non-rural uses. The effect of this
phenomenon can be to remove many thousands of acres from economically
productive purposes. Some of this land will in the future be bought
by local governments for purposes of creating permanent open space land.
In Massachusetts, the city of Lincoln has found it cheaper to buy up
vacant land for green belts rather than pay for the services that new
houses on the land would require.

e) Conclusions - Urban Land Use Requirements and Land Conversion
Issues Figures have been presented which highlight past trends and
project future requirements for land in the Lake Ontario Basin. Urban
demands for land will increase requiring removal of land from agricultural
purposes. Much land will be idled in response to speculative pressures
coupled with high taxation and poor economic returns. There will be
ample rural land to permit unrestricted development. This is wasteful.
If provision is made to purchase idled land to be set aside as open
space land, urban sprawl will be contained and the quality of life for
society will be enhanced.

3) Impact of Land Use Trends on the Environment

a) Water Both urbanization and intensive agricultural production
contribute to potential water pollution hazards. Intensive agricultural
activities, for example feedlots, can lead to excessive concentrations
of pollutants in ground waters or to odor and manure disposal problems.
Excessive use of fertilizers or pesticides can be a problem since the
ultimate sink for water-entrained pollutants from the Basin is the lake
itself.

It is impossible to legislate lake pollution standards without
first establishing land use controls. The necessity for such control
is becoming more widely understood in the United States and in Canada.
Unfortunately, other public priorities, particularly in the United
States, have retarded needed action in this area. Nevertheless, the
1972 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement may promote
eventual joint, coordinated efforts in land use management. This is
an essential goal because land use cannot be separated from the manage-
ment of the water resource (Lake Ontario).

Viewed from the perspective of the total lake environment, as
a resource for recreation, fisheries, navigation, municipal use, and
so forth, we must be alert to the stresses imposed by dense population
centers adjacent to the lake. Prudent management of the land is the
only effective solution to protection of the water resource.

b) Land Where intensive agricultural operations exist adjacent
to urban areas the environmental stresses may become particularly
acute. This may be partially offset by the desirability of having open
spaces adjacent to urban areas. There is much that technology and
education can do to minimize potential problems.

This is not to say we should become complacent on this issue.
Some of the best scenic areas are developed and spoiled with little
regard for public access and use by future generations.

Due to migration into the area, population will increase. There
will be increased need for land and water-based recreation facilities
and for other amenities which must be provided within the context of
regional planning for the area. This dictates a higher degree of land
management than that existing today.

V THE LAND AND THE FUTURE

1) Urbani zati on

For the purposes of this report, urbanization includes the following
land uses:

1) Housing

2) Industry, manufacturing, warehouses

3) Commercial districts, shopping centers, and retail
businesses

4) Recreation facilities, parks

5) Street and highways, parking facilities

6) Transportation facilities - airport, railroads

7) Utilities - power lines, water and sewage facilities and
transmission lines

8) Institutions - universities, hospitals

Additional examples of land indirectly affected by urbanization are
the following:

1) Undeveloped subdivisions land subdivided but as yet not
developed;

2) non-farm ownership of rural land, i.e., ownership for
speculative purposes;

3) farmland for sale for urban purposes; and

4) assessment of farmland on the basis of potential for
development.

Areas in these four categories are sometimes called "urban shadow
land."

In the future, the trend toward complete urbanization will be
countered in part by a concern for the environment. As in an ecological
chain, the balance is a precarious one. Certain types of development
will irrevocably set into motion the urbanization of an area. For
example, a proposed trunk sewer line running the length of the Niagara

Fruit Belt area would seal the fate of that region. The same cannot
be said of a major transportation route, e.g.,, the Queen Elizabeth Way.
Main roads which link large commercial centers do affect the economy
of the region they traverse. But they may affect it in ways that do
not necessarily result in urbanization.

2) Open Space Concepts

Why should areas in the Basin and elsewhere be spared from complete
urbanization? Phrased another way, one might ask, what is the value
of open space land?

a) More People - More Leisure The United States will have more
than 300 million people by the year 2000. Rochester and Buffalo
will grow by more than 200,000 and 300,000 people, respectively in
the next 15 years. The Mississauga complex is expected by some to
increase by 1.5 million people in the next 15 years. These larger
populations coupled with more leisure time will surely spell more use
of recreational facilities. Simply maintaining the present ratio of
recreational acreage to population will not suffice to accommodate
recreational demand because people will (presumably) have available
more leisure time. The pressures will be great for placing large
areas into recreational use. The National Recreational Association
which formerly recommended at least 10 acres of metropolitan park
space per 1000 population, now suggests a minimum of 15 acres.

b) Concern for the Environment This concern has been growing
among citT-zens of both countries. There is a strong movement to
reserve lands within urban areas for conservation purposes. Cited
are areas such as creeks and flood plains (both for scenic values and
to reduce the need for expensive flood control projects). Urbanization
threatens not only scenic areas but it also endangers the existence
of wetlands. The wetlands are major sources of food and are breeding
grounds and the favored habitat of an enormous variety of birds,
fish and other wildlife. These land areas are generally low-lying
and historically cheap in land market value. They offer the builder
certain cost and location benefits for development which are frequently
in direct conflict with ecological concerns. If used intelligently,
they can serve as recreational areas or as physical barriers to un-
restricted development.

c) Pollution Control Open space land may ameliorate pollution
of two types. Visual pollution, a resultant of unplanned urban and
suburban development, can be prevented or reduced by leaving certain
acreage undeveloped to serve as barriers to unrestricted growth and
also perhaps as transportation and utility corridors. Physical
pollution of the land and the lake may perhaps be lessened by reduced
density of urban populations. There is a growing awareness on the
part of concerned citizens that in the future there will be a difficult

trade-off between absorbing the externalities of pollution and paying
the high costs of keeping open space land out of private hands. In
addition to ensuring a future adequate supply of recreational
opportunities, the public may demand appropriate control over urban
sprawl and other forms of pollution.

3) Mechanisms to Counter Urbanization

Actions have been initiated on both sides of the border to thwart
complete urbanization. In New York, Agricultural Districts legislation
provides an opportunity for agricultural land to remain competitive
in the face of speculation and soaring assessments. It is precisely
this question of "rent" - that is, economic return from the land
versus speculation and taxation which exercises the major control over
changes in land use patterns. Agricultural Districts are a mechanism
to supress speculation and taxation based upon potential for develop-
ment.. No doubt the New York approach will undergo many adjustments
over time in order for it to become and remain an effective counter-
balance to speculation and taxation. What is important, however, is
that it is a start.

Ontario has developed a somewhat different approach. Design for
Development is a regional planning program reflecting current thinking
concerning economic and social growth in the province. As pointed out
above, DFD has established provincial guidelines to be enforced at
local levels in order to achieve balanced growth commensurate with
planned urbanization incorporating open space and corridor concepts.

DFD is a dynamic process involving continuous re-examination of
objectives and means to help secure and maintain a desirable standard
of living for all Canadians. As in the case of New York's Agricultural
District legislation, it represents only a beginning. And like the
New York mechanism, it reflects a consensus on the part of politicians
that planning for growth is an absolute necessity for the years to
come. One.can be sure that political interest in the planned growth
process will expand, not diminish, in the future. (One can also cite
recent land use control legislation in Hawaii, Wisconsin and Vermont.)

Unfortunately, broad scale regional planning in New York State
has not proceeded as rapidly as in Ontario. In 1973, Ontario has
the goals but lacks effective means of achieving planned growth. New
York has codified one means, but her planning processes lack the
scope of those evidenced in Canada. It would seem that both New
York and Ontario would stand to gain from a joint review of each
other's experiences to date in the matter of land use control.

What can be done to make land planning more effective?

1) Improve the skill of planners through research and
education.

2) Institutionalize the planning process at all government
levels - organize for broad scale regional planning.

3) Sharpen surveillance systems to give better information
re: economic analysis, ecological impact,.human desires.

4) Provide enforcement mechanisms such as voluntary con-
.servation agreements, land use zoning, control over
public improvements, pricing of public services, changes
in tax laws, purchase of open space land.

5) Make the financial commitment to achieve these ends.

4) Proposed Binational Approach to Land Use

One might raise the possibility that planning goals and mechanisms
might be made uniform or at least compatible over the land area in
Canada and the United States within the Lake Ontario Basin. No doubt
there would be considerable international hurdles to overcome. But the
areas of commonality between the two countries and provi 'nces (states)
stand out. If such an arrangement could be made to work anywhere in
the world, it would seem that it could be made to work here. The
effort required to bring it about would be prodigious, but the rewards
would be great. Open land in New York could be held in trust for urban
centers in Hamilton, and Toronto. The Niagara Fruit Belt area in
Canada could continue to be a preferred cite for tourism from both
sides of the border. Wilderness areas north of Toronto would continue
to be protected for citizens of both nations. Growth centers such as
Buffalo and Toronto might somehow be made more available to citizens
of the other country as centers for commerce, culture, education and
housing.

A comprehensive, binational development plan is needed to
optimize land planning around Lake Ontario. Political realities make
international land regulations unlikely. However, the Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement has placed an interesting new dimension on
international cooperation for water pollution control. Since water
pollution is intimately tied to land use, there is reason to believe
that cooperation, coordination and standards can be discussed, fostered
and eventually adopted with respect to use of the land.

VI DISCUSSION

1) Conclusions.

The pressures for development around the lake will increase in
the future. Private housing has and will continue to exercise the
greatest demand on lake shore property. With increasing affluence,
our nations' populations will demand more recreation areas for their
leisure time. In addition to housing and recreation requirements,
industrial and municipal requirements will sustain the present pattern
of exploitation of the land and water resources about the lake. In-
dustry will be attracted and held by water transportation facilities.
Electric power producers will be attracted by the availability of
vast amounts of water for cooling purposes. But cities and industries
can no longer continue to regard the lake as a sink in which to dispose
of their wastes.

What is called for is multi-resource management. Multi-resource
management of the water places heavy emphasis on the land. There
is need to view all water resources from the perspective of the land
and to manage the land resources from the perspective of the lake.
The value of the land for social and economic activity is strongly
influenced by the benefits afforded by the lake-navigation, recreation
and natural beauty, among others. Thus, the land must be managed to
control or eliminate the pollutants and to promote in general, the
quality of life.

Since land from two nations fronts on the lake, joint management
becomes essential not only for the lake itself but also for the land
resources in both countries which affect the lake. The precedent
for binational cooperation in lake management has been established
by the 1972 Water Quality Agreement. This type of cooperation, both
in concept and administratively, may be extremely important as a
model for international cooperation for resource management.

Beyond national control and-international agreements, there is
a basic need for increasing public participation at all levels of
the decision-making process. The most important benefits of participation
are apt to be reflected in changes in human values as these affect
the environment.

The prediction can be safely made that society, both rural and
urban, will be concerned enough to insure a heritage of rural, urban-
open space development. In the future, as leisure time presumably
increases, there will be more time available for participation in
local and community government. Some of the individual participation
will be directed toward developing a desirable quality of life for
the generations to come. This will inevitably involve improving the
planning processes relating to the use of our land, water, and air
resources.

2) Summary

1) The Lake Ontario region, especially in Canada, is one of
dynamic economic and population growth.-

2) Growth will create new dimensions in environmental stresses
on the land and water resources. These stresses can
adversely affect the quality of life in the.Basin.

3) Water management is inexorably linked to land management in
the Basin.

4) Land planning is essential to achieving an acceptable
package of resource controls.

5) There exists a gap between availability of land use controls
and their exercise to promote integrated resource manage-
ment.

6) To date, there has been a notable lack of effective, joint
planning goals, surveillance and action between the United
States and Canada.

7) There is need for joint Canada-U.S. consultation on land
use controls in order to facilitate the achievement of
agreed-upon water quality standards for the lake.

3) Recommendations

1) Binational cooperation should be strengthened.to foster
management goals for the region.

2) There is need for establishment of a joint information
gathering system, first to gain insight into problems,
and secondly to reinforce existing bilateral cooperation.

Future recommendations for water resource management in
the Basin should be closely tied to management practices
on the land.

4) There is a need for a comprehensive and binational land
use system to prevent indiscriminate land use, to save
fragile lands and to support unique productive lands.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackerman, J., M. Clawson, and M. Harris, eds., Land Economics Research,
Symposium at Lincoln, Nebraska, sponsored by Resources for the
Future, 1961.

Allee, D.J., et al., Toward the Year 1985, Special Cornell Series
Number 8, The Conversion of Land to Urban Use in New York State, 1970.

Beuscher, J.H., Land Use Controls - Cases and Materials, University
of Wisconsin, 1964.

Bogue, D.J., Metropolitan Growth and the Conversion of Land to Non-
Agricultural Uses, No. 11, Scripps Foundation Studies in Population
Distribution, Oxford, Ohio 1956.

Bosselman, Fred and David Callies, The Quiet Revolution in Land Use
Control, prepared for the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality,
GPO: Washington, D. C., 1971.

Canada-United States University Seminar on Institutional Arrangements
for the Integrated Management of the Water and Land Resources of the
Eastern Great Lakes, Working Papers, Cornell University Water Resources
and Marine Sciences Center, 1971.

Chapin, F. Stuart, Urban Land Use Planning, University of Illinois
Press, 1965.

Clawson, M., Suburban Land Conversion in the United States; Resources
for the Future, 1971.

Crerar, A.D., The Loss of Farmland in Metropolitan Regions of Canada,
in Regional and Resource Planning in Canada, R.R. Krueger, ed., 1970.

Dworsky, L.B., D.J. Allee, and C.D. Gates, The Management of Lake
Ontario, Cornell University Water Resources and Marine Sciences Center,
Publication No. 36, July 1971.

The Erie Shoreline Study; University of Western Ontario, 1971.

Forker, O.D., Casler, G.L., Toward the Year 1985, Special Cornell
Series Number 14, Summary Report, 1970.

Great Lakes Basin Framework Study,.Appendix No. 13, Land Use and
Management, Draft No. 2, Great Lakes Basin Commission, September 1971.

Great Lakes Region Inventory Report - National Shoreline Study, U.S.
Corps of Engineers, August 1971.

Gertler, L.O., Resources for Tomorrow, Report of Conference in
Montreal, Agriculture, Water and Regional Development, October
23-25, 1961.

Harris, Marshall, in LAND, 1958, Yearbook of Agriculture, p. 278-286.

Hind-Smith, J., The Impact of Urban Growth on Agricultural Land: A
Pilot Study in Resources for Tomorrow Supplementary Volume, Montreal,
1961.

Jones, Barclay G., ed., Regional Development Planning, Center for
Urban Development Research, Cornell University, October 1971.

Krueger, R.R., The Disappearing Niagara Fruit Belt in Regional and
Resource Planning in Canada, R.R. Krueger, ed., 1970.

MacNaughton, C.S., Design for Development: The Toronto-Centred
Region, May 1970.

Marcus, N., and M.W. Groves, eds., The New Zoning: Legal, Administrative,
and Economic Concepts and Techniqu es, Praeger Publishers, 1970.

McKeough, W.D., Design for Development: A Status Report on the Toronto
Centred Region, August 1971.

One Third of the Nation's Land, Public Land Law Review Commission,
June 1970.

Roberts, J., Design for Development, April 1966.

Roberts, J., Design for Development Phase Two, November 1968.

State Involvement in Land Use Control; Mimeo-Cornell University Water
Resources and Marine Sciences Center, February 1972.

A Strategy for Southwestern Ontario Development, Joint statement by
the Department of Treasury and Economics and the Dept. of Municipal
Affairs, March 1970.

Thoman, Richard S., Design for Development in Ontario, 1971.

r", ksm 1ORT
60

DATE DUE

I
I

I I
GAYLORDINO. 2333 1 PRINTED IN U.S.A.

I I I 111111 lill 11111101111111111 ll :,
3 6668 00001 9838