[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
........... aw@, ,',Z TPi t-'A IS, q"S 6 D dy -,-Coastal Development esources n,,rsey Department of Environmental Protection - Divisi of ',,Coa,st, HT 393 I .NS C639 1979 Coastal Development Potential Study New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection - Division of Coastal Resources u S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON, SC .29405-2413 Rogers &,Golden 1427 Vine Street Z-- Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 Property of CSC Library C" September 1979 ';Z' Preparation of this document was partially funded by the Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration under the provisions of Section 305 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (P.L. 92-583 as amended) Foreword New Jersey's Department of Environ- mental Protection, Division of Coastal Resources (DEP-DCR), in responding to the requirements of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (6ZMA) (P.L, 92-583), is engaged in assessing the development potential of the coastal zone for a number of uses. This study is in support of that responsibility. The Division of Coastal Resources has developed a Coastal Location Accepta- bility Method (CLAM). The Development ... Potential Study is part of CLAM and specifically examines development poten- tial from the vantage point of a devel- oper if he operated in an unregulated environment. This study provides descriptions of potential land and water uses by detail- ing factors in the built and natural environment that influence development. %I It also presents a method for evaluating the costs occurring for a use in any one location. At this time, the Division of Coastal Resources plans to use the infor- mation presented in this report for various planning endeavors. As shown on the accompanying map, the study area comprises the Coastal el "'Mt, Plain, the Hackensack Meadowlands, and all other land within 2,000 feet of tidal water. A case study, using the costs and the method for identifying sites with high development potential, was performed in lower Cape May County. Many assumptions and special- consid- erations were required in developing the Study Area sets of cost estimates for the land and water uses. For full understanding and proper use of this report, one should carefully read all introductory materials, Case Study Area notes and assumptions. Acknowledgments This study was greatly aided by informa- Joseph Birgeies tion and insights generously made available NY/NJ Port Authority to us by developers and other profe5sionals who shared their knowledge of New Jersey Tom Thomas with us. Townplan Associates Stewart McKenzie, designer of the Coast- John J. Tedesco al Location Acceptability Method (CL,:&I), of The Coastal Group, Inc which this study is a part, manaqed the con- tract for DEP-DCR and provided many helpful Hirair Hovnanian Susan Bonsall suggestions. Hovson's Inc. Department of Environmental Resources David Kinsey, Acting Director of DCR, Dave Bosted Cook College, Rutgers was project leader for this, as well as Department of Community Affairs other CLAM studies. Dana Rowan Michael Hochman, Data Manager of DCR, American Littoral Society aided our research and provided carto- graphic expertise. David Cox New Jersey Department of Transportation We especially acknowledge the following individuals who served on the steering Arthur E. Williamson, Sr committee for their help in formulating A.E. Williamson & Co. criteria, compiling cost and factor data, reviewing drafts, and participating in work Cable Spence sessions. New Jersey Farm Bureau Thomas Hall COASTAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL STUDY Governor's Office of Policy & Planning STEERING COMMITTEE Ralph Treadway Michael Redpath Division of Planning and Research Soundings Department of Labor and Industry Mercedes Johnson David Steiner Marine Trades Association Supler Construction Robert L. Myers Joseph L. Lomax Cape May County Planning Board Osprey, Inc. Joe Andrea Ken Bosted Wapora, Inc. Green Acres, Department of Environmental Protection Carl Eby Soil Conservation Service Michael Gross Giordano, Halleron and Crahoy John Serk;es office of Business Advocacy John Bachalis Department of Labor & Industry New Jersey Business and Industry Association Barry Weshnak Gary Sawhill Barrymor Enterprises Coastal Plains, Inc. V Staf f GRAPHICS Mei-Ing Liu EDITING Fritts Golden John Rooers John Rogers, Study Director Joanne 5ackson USES PRINTING George Macpherson Speedy Impressions Fritts Golden Philadelphia, PA Joanne Jackson John Rogers MAP PRODUCTION COSTS The Campion Co. Philadelphia, PA George Macpherson Joanne Jackson D&W John Rogers Trenton, NJ SURVEY OF DEVELOPERS SUBCONTRACTORS Joanne Jackson Dames & Moore Jim Cool FACTOR RESEARCH Phil Hopkins Joanne Jackson John Rogers George Macpherson Anne Marble CASE STUDIES John Rogers Joanne Jackson Anne Marble Mei-Ing Liu DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ANALYSIS METHOD John Rogers Fritts Golden Peter Harms COMPUTER PROGRAM Peter Harms V1 Table of Contents PAGE Ports (Major) 68 Ports (Minor) 70 Airports 72 FOREWORD i i i UTILITIES 75 ACKNOINLEDGMENTS v Liquid Waste Disposal 76 Solid Waste Disposal 78 STAFF vi Communication Structures 8o Water Supply 82 TABLE OF CONTENTS vii HARVEST 85 CHAPTER I Field Crops 85 INTRODUCTION I Fresh Market Vegetables 88 Nurseries 90 Use Assumptions 5 Greenhouses 92 Factor Assumptions 5 Orchards 94 Sites and Site-Types 5 Cranberry Farming 96 Cost Assumptions 5 Blueberry Farming 98 Factor Information 6 Forestry 100 Development Potential Analysis 6 Commercial Fishing Docks and Fish Pcocessing Plants 102 Case Studies 6 RECREATION I DI Playing Fields 10 Golf Courses 110', CHAPTER 2 Seashore Amusement Parks Illj USE DESCRIPTIONSAND COST DATA 9 Campgrounds 114 Summer Campgrounds 116 HOUSING 19 Parks 118 Rural Housing 20 Beach Bathing 120 Single Family Detached 22 Sport Fishing 122 Single Family Attached 24 Marinas 124 Garden Apartments and Midrise Housing 26 Natural Areas and Rivers 126 Highrise Housing 28 Footnotes Mobile Home Parks 30 128 Retirement Communities 32 COMMERCE AND SERVICE 35 Regional Shopping Centers 36 Neighborhood Shopping Centers 38 CHAPTER 3 Hotels and Motels 4o FACTOR INFORMATION 129 Warehousing 42 I Undeveloped Land and Publicly Owned Land 132 INDUSTRIAL 45 2 Access to Roads 132 Stand ard Industrial Classifications 48 3 Access to Railroads 133 Extraction industry 58 4. Access to Electric Power Transmission Line 133 5. Access to Electric Power Distribution Line 134 INFRASTRUCTURE 61 IS. Access to Channel 135 Collector and Local Roads 62 7. Marine Access 135 Arterial and Limited Access Roads 64 8. Proximity to Metropolitan Service Centers 136 Railroads 66 VII 9, Proximity to Regional Service Centers 137 10. Proximi ty to Community Service Centers 138 59. Labor Force Availability 177 ]I. Proximity to Fishing Communities 139 60. Minor Tides 178 12. Proximity to Resort Communities 140 61. Soil Drainage 179 13. Proximity to Public Transportation 141 62. Forest Cover 179 14. Proximity to Marinas and Boat Launching Ramps 141 63. Historic Sites 180 15. Proximity to Parking 142 64. Archaeologic Sites 181 16. Proximity to Commercial Fishing Docks 143 65. Gas Pipelines 182 17. Proximity to Public Open Space 144 18. Proximity to Disposal Sites 145 CHAPTER 4 19. Proximi ty to Ports 145 CASE STUDIES 183 20.- Proximity to Airports 146 Marina Case Study 192 21. Prime Open Agricultural Land 146 Detached Housing Case Study 196 22. Woodland Suitability Group 147 Fish Processing Plant Case Study 200 23. Soil Associations 148 24. Flooding 148 25. Slope 149 APPENDIX 20@ 26. Shallow Foundation Suitability 149 27. Soil Load Bearing Capacity 150 28. Deep Foundation Suitability 151 GLOSSARY 219 29. Availability of Mineral Resources 152 30. Thickness of Overburden 153 31. Soils Suitabl,e for On-Site Disposal Systems 154 REFERENCES 221 32. Surface Water Availability 155 33. Groundwater Availability 156 34. Access to Public Sewerage 157 CREDITS 227 35. Access to Public Water Supply 157 36. Potable Water Supply 158 37. Depth to Water Table 159 38. Major Ecosystems 159 39. Free-Flowing Characteristics 160 40. Habitats of Rare and Vanishing Species 161 41. River Accessibility 162 42. Shorelines of Rivers 163 43. Biotic Types 164 44. Geologic Types 165 45. Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage 166 46. Proximity to River and Bay Shore Frontage 166 47. Minimum Need for Bridges and Tunnels 167 48. Embayments 168 49. Visibility From Road 168 50. Dredging Maintenance 169 51. Acceptable Water Quality 170 52. On-Site Amenities 171 53. Character of Surrounding Area 172 54. Visual Amenities 173 55. Short Distance Between Trip Origins and Destinations 174 56. Jetties, Groins, and Piers 175 57. Bridges Over Streams 176 58. Population Density 176 List of Tables List of Figures TABLE I . Use and Development Potential Factors Matrix 4 Fl GURE 1. Simplified Flow Chart of the CLAM Analysis Procedure 3 TABLE 2. Land Use Index 11 FIGURE 2. Development Potential Analysis 7 TABLE 3. Distribution of Questionnaires and Telephone FIGURE 3. Maps of Necessary Factors Used in Case Studies 185 Interviews Completed for this Study by Use Categories and Counties 12 FIGURE 4. Access to Local Road 187 TABLE 4. Element Cost Sheets 13 FIGURE 5. Proximity to Community Service Center 188 TABLE 5. Factor Information Sheet Index 131 FIGURE 6. Soil Load Bearing.Capacity 189 TABLE 6. Factors Used in Case Studies 184 FIGURE 7. Access to Public Sewerage 190 TABLE 7. Marina Case Study Data 195 FIGURE 8. Access to 6-Foot Channel and Embayments 191 TABLE 8. Detached Housing Case Study Data 199 FIGURE 9. Development Potential Map and Histogram: Marina 193 TABLE 9. Fish Processing Plant Case Study Data 203 FIGURE 10. Development Potential Map and Histogram: Detached Housing 197 FIGURE I]. Development Potential Map and Histogram: Fish Processing Plant 201 C ha pter 1 Introduction I 2 /Coastal Development Potential Study The Development Potential Study describes method and the data are currently workable 182 land and water uses, lists those factors for regional planning purposes. The infor- of the physical environment (both natural and mation presented in this report may be man-made) which influence those uses, and supplemented or refined through updating and presents a method - Development Potential through the use of specific information Analysis - whereby various locations in a gained from subsequent use of the method. given area are studied for a specific use and ranked for development potential according It should be emphasized that the Devel- Section 303(a) of the Federal Coastal to total development costs. opment Potential Analysis procedure presented Zone Management Act (CZMA) (P.L. 92-583) here is a logical process, siting costs sets forth a goal of Coastal Zone Management The land and wat@r uses studied were being the major determinant. Some facility Programs, which is "to preserve, protect, identified by DEP-DCR in cooperation with or development planners, usually the larger develop and, where possible, to restore or Rogers & Golden. They are grouped into seven and more experienced ones, use a rational enhance, the resources to the Nation's major categories: housing, commerce, indus- approach to a project, balancing a carefully coastal zone for this and succeeding gener- try, utilities, infrastructure, harvest, and weighted set of factors. Among the tools of at ions." recreation. A list of 65 development poten- such developers are market analysis and tial factors was compiled from the uses research into land costs, taxes, and govern- Two of these objectives - preservation studied. ment regulation, This study assumes that and development - often are in conflict. In such research would be done by the developer order to strike a balance, detailed informa- Development potential factors are those before Development Potential Analysis. tion is needed as to which coastal locations elements or characteristics of the built or have high priority or potential for devel- natural environment which are required for Other development planners use a more in- opment and which coastal locations are successful development of a use, or which tuitive approach. Still others may use very sensitive to impacts. are desirable and enhance the attractiveness few locational factors, perhaps simply of a location for development. The loca- finding acreage in the area where the chair- The purpose of this study is to provide tional requirements of the uses dictate the man of the board wants to live. Obviously, the New Jersey Department of Environmental number and type of the development potential the location of new development cannot Protection, Division of Coastal Resources factors. These factors were taken from a always be predicted. The aim of this study (DEP-DCR) with detailed.information for use literature survey of each use and further is to present a rational method for deter- in determining the development potential of confirmed, except for the standard industrial mining development potentials for specified coastal locations for particular land and classifications, by questionnaire and tele- uses. water uses. "Development potential" is phone interviews. Table I is a matrix which defined here as the capability of an area to shows the relationship between uses and It is necessary to appreciate the logic be developed for a specific use and refers development potential factors. and limits of the Development Potential to cost considerations, as opposed to envi- Study in order to understand the method ronmental and socio-economic factors. Some factors are use-specific, such as presdnted here. The following sections mineral resources for the extraction indus- detail the assumptions and considerations The Development Potential Study is one try, while other factors, such as access to that have gone into the study. part of New Jersey's Coastal Location Accep- roads, apply to almost all uses. More tability Method (CLAM). The other two important, some factors are essential for the portions, an Environmental Sensitivity Analy- location of a facility, such as volume of sis and a Socio-Economic Analysis, will be processing water to an industry, while others used with this study to identify areas in represent costs or levels of desirability, which there are conflicts between enViron- such as vegetation or views of water. in mental and socio-economic factors and many cases, the particular combination of development potential and to determine Use- factors will be the real determinant for Location Acceptability Ranks. Once conflicts development potential for a particular use. have been identified and rankings made, the feasibility of new development will be more The critical elements of this method are clearly understood. The flow chart for the the data base - the factor maps and factor CLAM analysis procedure is shown in Figure 1. cost sheets - and the techniques for analyzing the factors relevant to a specific use. Chapter 4, Case Studies, indicates that the Introduction /3 PIGURE 1. SIMPLIFIED FLOW CHART OF THE CLAM ANALYSIS PROCEDURE F rDev-slcpme_-nt Potential Analysis Input Data Development Development Development Potential Factor Potential Thresholds Potential Distribution And Costs Rank L _j Development Siting Criteria p- F - - - - - - - - - - - f-A-cce tability Environmental Sensitivity Resolution Environmental alysis (Natural & Cultural) Environmental Environmental Environmental Use-Location Fact'or Land And Water Impacts Sensitivity Acceptability Distribu tion Type Distribution Rank Rank Use Types Public Valuesp Soc o- conomic Analysis Socio-Economic SO, IM, Land And Water Socio-Economic Socio-Economic Type Distribution Impacts Rank topic covered L in this study 6 /Coastal Development Potential Study are reasonable as they pertain to the spe- These uses are examined at two scales. cific characteristics of the prototypes. The Factor Information They are first presented for the entire quality of construction, especially in hous- study area and for a part of a county - ing types, and the scale of a particular the lower portion of Cape May County. development, could result in substantially Chapter 3 is composed of Factor Informa- different costs. Even in areas as small as tion and Factor Discussion Sheets, There is The three uses were mapped at 1:250,000 the coastal plain of New Jersey there are aFactor Information Sheet for every factor for the entire study area and at 1:24,000 significant regional cost differences. For employed in the Development Potential Study. for lower Cape May County. Due to the these reasons the cost information should be These Factor Information Sheets present the difficulties of accurate mapping at 1:250,000 considered as a general guide. Methods for best source of mapped information. In cases (a half-mile becomes approximately adjusting the cost figures for inflation are where the factor is@ not mapped, cannot be one-quarter inch) and the reductions that presented in the Appendix. mapped, or a map was prepared by Rogers and were necessary to include these maps in Golden specifically for this study, a Factor this report, only necessary (black dot) The factor cost may be either plus (+) Discussion Sheet is also presented. The factors were mapped at the 1:250,000 scale. or minus H. Those marked with a (+) are Factor Information and Discussion Sheets make At both scales, the costs associated with called bonus values because they increase the possible quick and acc urate asses s ments 0 f each relevant factor were summed and high, value of the land use. Those marked with a the data base. medium and low development potentials were (-) are deficiency costs because they repre- assigned to each site-type. sent additional expenses that must be met by the developer. Because its assumptions, criteria and Development Potential Analysis procedures, are explicit the Development A baseline site type is defined as a Potential Analysis Method can be an impor- site type with no bonus values and no The Development Potential Analysis is tant planning tool for state planners and deficiency costs. Baseline cost, then, is a method whereby various locations in a facility developers. As criteria and data the cost of constructing the baseline de- given area are studied for a specified use are improved or modified in the future, the velopment size of a given prototype on a and ranked according to development costs. method should become increasingly useful baseline site type. The baseline cost The method has six sequential steps, as as a planning tool. plus any bonus values and/or deficiency shown in Figure 2. costs become total development costs. This method allows the user to look at The baseline unit cost given for each a potential land or water use across a land use represents the cost of building study area or to look at a number of land materials and construction - what build@rs. and water uses in an area. The method refer to as "bricks and mortar" - and certain can also be used to review the development development potential factor specifications. potential of a site. These factor specifications are known as baseline specifications and are shown in A computer model has been developed the cost tables in Chapter 2. One data cate- in both batch and interactive modes to gory of each factor was designated as the perform all the steps except mapping fac- baseline specification. tors. Each data category of each factor was assigned a cost (except, of course, the data category designated as the baseline specifi- Case Studies cation, which is zero-cost because its costs were included in the baseline cost). Three uses - Marinas, Fish Processing Plants and Detached Housing - were chosen Information for the cost figures was to illustrate how the Development Poten- obtained from builders, lawyers, real estate tial Analysis Method works. The case studies agents and a thorough literature search. comprise Chapter 4. Development Potential Analysis /7 4 ASSIGN COSTS TO FACTOR DISTRIBUTION FaAMTM A0= Z USLOV M WC& ROW DEFINE USE u OVERLAY MAPS AND SUM FACTOR COSTS rom V= UST z DEFINE FACTOR 3DISTRIBUTION 7 ESTABLISH RELEVANT FaPt4n0Q Wff DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FACTORS FOR EACH USE AC= TO 0 t" 402S IMO LWOMM RANKING muopmew r'" wn@- k-@ DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL c 6 VVAftCPMff FUWJAL LVLL r. 7 FIGURE 2. Development Potential Analysis MVu0PMFNT cosr i I 'C ha pter 2 Use Descriptions and Cost Data I 10/Coastal Development Potential Study road is a deficiency cost to those uses locat- and cost per cubic yard of material dredged ing at sites requiring an access road. Access may be found on the Factor Cost Sheets of factors have in common the fact that they the uses in question. represent a direct outlay by the developer. Insofar as they represent fairly hard engin- Access to Pub] ic Water Supply -- Costs given eering costs, they can be estimated with a for access to water supply vary with the relatively high level. of confidence. type of faci.lity. Element costs for three types of pipes are given on the Element In manual analysis, data categories in access Cost Sheet. This chapter presents 182 land and factors are assigned to ranges of distance water uses (hereafter referred to as ''land (i.e., Data Category 1: 0-1/2 mile). Costs Access to Public Sewerage -- Costs given uses") compiled for this study by New Jersey's are calculated in each category by multiply- for access to water supply vary with the DEP-DCR and Rogers & Golden. A prototype was ing the element cost by the average distance type of facility. The cost of installing established for each use to facilitate con- of the data category (in this example, 1/4 pipe of various sizes is given on the Ele- centration on the most important features of I e) inent Cost Sheet. that use type. Site plans and photographs accompany each land use description. (Note Access to Roads -- The type, and therefore Access to Gas Pipeline -- This factor is that these are for illustration and do not the cost, for access roads varies with the important to many industries. Costs are form the basis for the cost figures given.) use. Rural housing, for example, requires based on the pipe sizes given on the Element no more than an unpaved road that is perhaps Cost Sheet. Once the list of land uses was estab- more accurately thought of as a driveway. lished (see Table 2), questionnaires were Other uses, which generate higher levels of PROXIMITY FACTORS -- Unlike access factors, sent to builders, developers, real estate traffic, require access roads built to higher which represent a direct dollar cost to the agents and facility operators to determine standards. Element costs for three differ- developer of the use in question, proximity the Baseline Unit Cost of construction for ent levels of access road may be found on factors represent the amount of money that each use and its Development Potential Factors the Element Cost Sheet. a representative developer of a given use (elements or characteristics of the environ- would be willing to pay for proximity to a ment necessary or highly desirable for the Access to Railroad -- This cost is for a particular factor. In this sense, the,fig- given land use). The questionnaires were single-track rail-spur. Estimates for this ures given represent an attempt to approxi- followed by telephone interviews. (Table 3.) factor vary widely. They may be found on mate the vagaries of the marketplace. The the Element Cost Sheet. figures are based on information gathered Certain definitions had to be established from a large number of interviews and ques- and assumptions made in order to develop the Access to Electric Power Transmission Grid tionnaire responses with various New Jersey list of the Development Potential Factors and and Distribution Line -- There are a num- builders and developers. Because of their the costs associated with each use. @er of variables associated with this fac- intrinsically soft nature, however, these tor, the principal ones being voltage of figures generally cannot be regarded with as The majority of Development Potential the line, amperage, single-phase or multi- high a level of confidence as can the Factors can be grouped into four major cate- phase, and whether the line is overhead or figures for access factors. There also gories: access factors, proximity factors, underground. Also, utilities have a rather tends to be a greater degree of variation site factors and amenity factors. These are complex pricing policy by which they may across the study area for them, as they are discussed more fully on the Factor Information reduce the charges for their cost of ex- more dependent on local market conditions. Sheets in Chapter 3. Data on each relevant tending a line based upon their anticipated factor is provided on the Factor Cost Sheets, revenue from the extension. Approximate As with access factors, data categories are which accompany the use descriptions in this linear costs for distribution lines, both assigned to ranges of distance and costs chapter. Additional cost information is given overhead and underground, and for overhead are estimated on the basis of the average in Table 4, Element Cost Sheets. transmission lines, may be found on the distance in each category. All proximity Element Cost Sheet. factors have been calculated with simple Factor Considerations radii. It would be desirable to calculate Access to Channel -- the assumptions for these factors using travel time; however, ACCESS FACTORS -- Access factors pertain to channel dredging costs, in general, are these data were not available. a site's location with respect to infra- that the channel's sides will be angled at structure required by any given use. Most 45*, and that an average of one-half the The cost figures pertaining to service and Uses, for example, require road access. depth of the channel will have to be market centers are the result of a two-step Therefore, the cost of building an access dredged. -Assumptions as to channel width process. The first step categorizes urban Use Descriptions and Cost Data /11 TABLE 2. LAND USE INDEX HOUS; NG 61. Sags, except textile bags (2643) :23. Construct ion machinery (3531) Rural housing 62 Die cut paper and board (2645) 24. No I ts, cranes and monorails (3536) 2 S:,91, det:ch:d 63 Presses and molded pulp goods (2646) 125. Machine tools, metal cutting type (3541) 3: S ng 1. @m Y,t ch d 64 Sanitary paper products (2647) 126. Machine tools, metal farming types (3542) 4. Garden 65 Converted paper products (2649) 127. Special dies, tools' jigs' fixtures (3544) ,,, ,:Partments and midrise housing 5. ghr housing 66 Folding paper board boxes (2651) 128. Metal working machinery, ec (3548) 6 Mobile homes 67. Set-up paper board boxes (2652) 129. Paper industries machinery (3554) 7: RetIrement communities 68 Building paper and board ills (2661) 130. Printing industry machinery (3555) COMMERCE AND SERVICE PRINTING AND PUBLISHING (27) 13). Special industry machines, nec (3559) 8. Regional shopping centers 69. Book printing (2732) 132. Pumps and compressors (3561) 9. Neighborhood shopping centers 70. Commercial printing lithograph (2752) 133. Power transmission equipment (3566) To: Hot:,ls.and.-t,l, 71. Manifold business forms (2761) 134. Miscellaneous machinery (3599) 11 War 0 sin 72. Typesetting (2791) ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES (36) CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (28) 135. Electric measurement equipment(36f]) INDUSTRIAL 73. Alkalies and chlorine (2812) 136. Motor and generators (3621) Standard Industrial Classifications 74. Industrial gases (2813) 137. Electric housewares 6 fans (3634) FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS (20) 75. Cyclic intermediates and crudes (2815) 138. Electric lamps (3641) 12. Meat and packing plants (2011) 76. Inorganic pigments (2816) 139. Lighting fixtures (3642) 13. Sausages and other prepared meats (2013) 77. Industrial organic chemicals (2818) 140. Radio and TV receiving sets (3651) 14. Poultry dressing plants (2015) 78 Industrial Inorganic chemicals (2819) 14). Electric components (3679) 15. Creamery butter (2021) 19 Plastic material and resins (2821) TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT (37) 16. Cheese, natural and processed (2022) 80. Synthetic rubber (2822) 142. Motor vehicles (3711) 17. Condensed and evaporated milk (2023) 81. Cellulosic man-made fibers (2823) 143. Motor vehicles parts & accessories (3714) 18. 1.- crew and frozen desserts (2024) 82. Pharmaceutical preparations (2834) 144. Aircraft equipment, nec (3729) 19 FluId milk (2026) 83Soap and other detergents (2841) 145. Boat building and repairing (3732) 20 Cann:d and cured seafood (2031) 84 roliet Dreparations (2844) 146. Motorcycles & bicycles & parts (3751) 21 Cann d specialties (2032) 85 Pa,-- and allied products (2851) INSTRUMENTS AND RELATED PRODUCTS (38) 22: Canned fruits and vegetables (2033) 86 Frrtilizers (2871) 47. Engineering & scientific Instr umle nts (3811) 23. Dehydrated food products (2034) 87 Agriculture, chemicals (2879) @48. Optical instruments 6 lenses (3831) 24 Pickles, sauces and salad dressings (2035) 18. Adhesive, and gelatins (2891) 149. Surgical & medical instruments (3841) 25. Fresh and frozen packaged fish (2036) .9. Explosives (2892) 150. Surgical appliances & supplies (3842) 26. Frozen fruits and vegetables (2037) 90. Printing ink (2893) 151. Ophthalmic goods (3851) 27. Flour and other grain mill products (2o4i) 91. Carbon black (2895) 152. Photograph IT equipment & u@plles (3861) 28. Prepared feed for animals and fowl (2042) 92. Chemical preparations (2899) 153. Extraction industry (No SIC 29. Distilled liquor, except brandy (2085) PETROLEUM AND COAL PRODUCTS (29) INFRASTRUCTURE 30. Bottled and canned soft drinks (2886) 93. Paving mixtures and blocks (2951) 154. Collector and local rl@ads 31. Food preparation necessities (2099) 94. Asphalt felt and coatings (2952) 155. Limited access roads TEXTILE AND MILL PRODUCTS (22) 95. Lubricating oils and greases (2992) 156. Railroad 32. Weaving mills, cotton (2211) 96. Petroleum and coal products (2999) 57. Ports (Major) 33. Weaving mills, synthetics (2221) RUBBER AND PLASTIC PRODUCTS (30) @58. Ports (Minor) 34. Weaving and finishing mills, wool (2231) 97. Miscellaneous plastics products (3011) 159. Airports 35. Knit fabric ills (2256) LEATHER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS (31) 36. Knitting ills, nec (2259) 98. Leather and leather tanning (3111) UTILITIES 37. Finishing plants, cotton (2261) STONE, CLAY AND GLASS PRODUCTS (32) 160. Liquid waste disposal 38. Finishing plant, synthetic (2262) 99. Flat glass (3211) 161. Solid waste disposal 39. Tufted carpets and rugs (2272) 100. Glass containers (3221) 162. C ommi unication structures 40. Felt goods, nec (2291) 101. Pressed and blown glass (3229) 163. Water supply 41. Processed textile waste (2294) 102. Concrete block and brick (3271) HARVEST 42. Coated fabrics, not rubberized (2295) 103. Concrete products (3272) 164. Field crops 43. Tire cord and fabric (2296) 104. Lime (3274) 165. Fresh market vegetables 44. Cordage and twine (2298) 105. Gypsum products (3275) 166. Nurseries APPAREL AND OTHER TEXTILE PRODUCTS(23) 106. Asbestos products (3292) 167. Greenhouses 45. Men's and boys' clothing, nec (2329) PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (33) 168. Orchards 46. Wmen-s and MISS% dresses (2335) 107. Gray iron foundries (3321) 169. Cranberry farming 47. Cor setsand a)II d ga rmets (2342) 108. Malleable iron foundries (3322) 170. Blueberry farming LUMBER AND WOOD PRODUCTS (24) 109. Steel foundries (3323) 171. Forest 48. Logging camps and contractors (2411) 110. Primary copper (3331) 172. Commercial fishing docks 49. Sawmills and planing mills, general (2421) Ill. Primary lead (3332) RECREATION SO. Millwork (2431) 112. Prim ry zinc (3333) 73. Playing fields 521. Veneer and plywood (2432) 113. Primary aluminum (3334) @74. Golf courses 5 - Wood preserving (2491) 114. Nonferrous wire drawing & insulating (3357) 175. Seashore amusement parks FU RNITURE AND FIXTURES (25) 115. Primary metal products, - (3399) 176. Campgrounds 53. Wood office furniture (2521) FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS (34) 177. Sumer campgrounds 54. Metal office furniture (2522) 116. Cutlery (3421) 178. Parks 55. Public building furniture (2531) 117. Miscellaneous metal work (3449) 79. Beach bathing 56. Metal partitions and fixtures (2542) 118. Screw machine products (3451) T. Sport fishing PAPERuAND ALLIED PRODUCTS (26) 119.-Metal stamping (3461) 181. Marinas 57. P IP -ills (2611) ;20. V:Ivesfa@d pipe,fitting s(3494) 58. Paper mills except building paper (2621) 21.MIa] il and eaf (3497 ) 182. Natural areas and rivers 59. Paperboard ills (2631) MACHINERY, EXCEPT ELECTRICAL (35) 60. Paper coating and glazing (2641.) 122. Far. machinery (3522) 1 2/Coastal Development Potential Study areas; the second measures the influence of the urban center in siting new development. The classification system distinguishes between three types of urban centers. The two Metropolitan Service Centers that influ- ence the data -- New York and Philadelphia -- TABLE 3. DISTRIBUTION OF QUESTIONNAIRES AND TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS are ou side of the study area, but the inc U51on of this factor accounts for the COMPLETED FOR THIS STUDY BY USE CATEGORIES AND COUNTIES desire to develop around these cities and within the New York-Philadelphia corridor. Those areas designated as Regional Service Centers usually have a population E3 :C:':' -75 of at least 7,000 (1970 census). There 8 U 0 0 are two exceptions to this. County seats 1-1 U 0 E3 Lu are designated as Regional Service Centers, U U j - - " i@ even if their population is less than z Q@ 8 n (3 U 8 S 7,000, because of the variety of services Lu Lu @5 co 8 UJ !U3 u, L=U they offer. Urban areas where the summer E 8 9 2 9 population exceeds 7,000 are also included USE CATEGORIES 0 Lu (D -0 -U) 18 in the Regional Service Center category. Those areas with lesser population but HOUSING 8 1 2 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 7 3 39 havinga post office, a bank, and a supermarket are designated .as Community COMMERCE AND 10 2 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 8 2 1 1 40 Service Centers. SERVICE The second step is assigning accessibil- INDUSTRIAL 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 4 3 1 1 37 ity to service and market centers. Since Regional Service Centers offer more ser- INFRASTRUCTURE 1 3 2 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 26 vices, they draw from a larger area. Fifteen miles, a distance roughly equal UTILITIES 3 7 4 4 3 1 4 2 3 1 4 2 3 3 1 1 3 49 to thirty minutes driving time, is con- sidered to be the maximum range of HARVEST 3 3 3 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 2 44 influence Regional Service Centers have in the siting of developments. In RECREATION 2 0 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21 other words, Regional Service Centers do - - not create bonus values for developments located more than 15 miles away from them. TOTAL 29 18 16 15 17 9 13 19 11 12 15 11 11 29 13 8 10 F25 6 Community Service Centers offer fewer services and therefore have a smaller drawing area. They influence develop- ment potential only within a radius of five miles. Proximity to Major H hw Y 17seths:ction Amajorhighway inter!:ct?.,n inter- section of an arterial road and one or more collector roads, or of two or more arter- ial roads, or an interchange of a limited access road. Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center Two Metropolitan Service Centers influ- ence the study area. They are Phila- Use Uescri pt ions and Cost Data 13 TABLE 4. ELEMENT COST SHEETS Element Cost Sheet ELEMENT OR ACTIVITY COST INCREMENT ELEMENT OR ACTIVITY COST INCREMENT Storm Sewer Elevated rail structure, 2 1,500 1 inear foot tracks, 15' high single 15" 12 linear foot concrete Pbioeres)& track costs 15 in: foot same a S a v 2 :in r foot 2 2 33" 26 linear foot Overhead railroad bridges 100 squar:.foot 42" 40 linear foot of sp manholes 1,000 each grass swales 2 linear foot Public water supply I.V' copper tubing, 4' deep 9 IF t Electric power distribution 6" steel pipe, 4' deep 18 f t Iine access 8-1 steel pipe, 4- deep 22 foot overhead 4-13 foot fire hydrant 15 each underground (5" PVC conduit, 25 foot (2-31 deep) Public sewerage Electric power transmission 6" vitrified clay pipe, A' deep 12-50 foot grid access 8" vitrified clay pipe, 4' deep 16 foot 500 KV 400,000 mile 15" vitrified clay pipe, 4- deep 35 foot (steel tower construction) manholes 7.50 each 230 KV 230,000 mile central treatment system 1,000-3,000 unit (H wood frame construction) 169 KV 130,000 mile Septic tank 1,500-3,500 unit Single track rail spur 300,000-750,000 mile (power cost additional) Gas line 2: stt::@ pip:, 4: d:ep 6 foot Track with third rail at grVe 75 linear foot 6: s pip , 4 d ep 18 foo t 18-- stone ballast - 7" x wood ties spaced 24" (power 8" steel pipe, 41 deep 22 foot cost additional) 14 /Coastal Development Potential Study Element Cost Sheet ELEMENT OR ACTIVITY COST INCREMENT ELEMENT OR ACTIVITY COST INCREMENT On-site disposai system 1,000-3,000 dwelling unit Soil stabilization site vegetation 300-14,000 acre Drainage tiles (4-15" perforated, [email protected] foot blankets, nets, mulches 7,000-12,000 acre cement or PVC) chemi ca Is 1,300 acre sandbags, other barriers 3 bag Clearing and grubbing hydro mulch 400-2,300 acre densely wooded l'5OO-'.OOO acre Channel dredging thinly wooded 800-;'000 acre (soft material) brush and scrub 500-700 acre hydraulic disposal 1.00-2.50 cubic yard barge disposal, long haul UP to 5.00 cubic yard Bulk @cavating 3.50-10-00 cubic yard Access road, level I (unpaved, 4o,ooo-So,ooo mile 9" crushed stone, 20' width) 3.4o-4.25 square yard Cut and fill .50-2.25 cubic yard Access road, level 2 (4V' Fill (compacted, Imported) 6-20 cubic yard bituminous paving, 9" crushed 130,000-170,000 mile 0 mile) stone, 24' width) 9.25-12.10 square yard Hauling (each additional mile) .4o-.75 mile Access road, level 3 (W' bituminous paving, 8" base 150,000-300,000 mile rock, 10" sub base, 26' width) 9.85-19.70 square yard Grading, rough 1,500 acre Curbing (pre-cast concrete, 6 foot 6" x 8" x 18") Grading, fine (by machine) 2,000-3,000 acre S i de- I ks 6 linear foot Street trees 10 linear foot Use Descriptions and Cost Data /15 delphia and New York. views with builders and developers in New Soil Drainage, Soil Load Bearin2 Capacity, Jersey and were averaged, deep Foundation Suitability, Sha Ilow Proximity to Regional S2rvice Center Foundation Suitabil_ity -- These four A Regional Service Center is an urban Proximity to Oc! -- Ocean factors are all difficult to deal with _h fron'a _ ge :n Beach Frontage area having a population of more than bea that property adjacent to at any but the site scale. Problems of 7,000 (this may he only the summer-time the beach, Builders and developers consis- soil drainage can be remedied by install- population), or a County Seat. tently gave a bonus value of $50,000 per ing drainage tiles, but the costs of tile- IOO1xlOO' lot. For more intensive uses, a fields vary with factors such as soil Proximity to Community Service Center developer will pay a bonus of $30,000 per type, slope, and impermeable surfaces. A Community Service Cenler is an urban unit. Bonus value decreases sharply for Thus, general figures cannot be given area having a minimum of a post office, properties not directly adjacent to the for this factor. Nevertheless, costs a bank, and a supermarket. beach, but remains a factor for land within of drainage tiles on a per foot basis 15 miles of the ocean. are given on the element cost sheet. Rela- Proximity to Publj@ Tr?nsportation tive costs for.these factors can be approx- Public t r.nsprta '." s considered to Proxio Resort Community -- Resort imated by assu ing that these soil problems be bus stops and train stationi. Prox- Commun@ttyie:oa re communities that actively can be remedied.by adding fill to deficient imity to public transportation is gen- seek tourists and vacationers. These are s i tes. We recognize that this may not be erally a more important factor in siting generally coastal communities. the cheapest or most effective or efficient low cost housing than it is in siting method for any given situation, but it more expensive housing. Proximity to Fishing Community -- A coastal allows consistency from one use to another. community which has boat maintenance, freezer Intermediate soil conditions assume that Proximity to Parking -- Inclusion of this storage, and ice-making faci Ii ties for com- an appropriate portion of a site is filled factor acknowledges that some land uses mercial and/or sport fishermen is cons idered to a depth of 3 feet. Deficiency costs for are heavy traffic generators, and that a Fishing Community- poor soil conditions are roughly double parking is an important consideration. those for intermediate. Bonus values approximate the amount that SITE FACTORS -- Site factors refer to the the use-developer would be willing to pay intrinsic characteristics of a site, pri- Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal Systems for proximity. marily soil and subsoil conditions. In For many uses, if public sewerage is not terms of remedying the site factor defici- available, the use will not occur. For Proximity to Public Open Space -- Publicly encies of any particular site, hard engin- other uses, development will occur only if owned land is land that the public may eering costs can be estimated. However, soils suitable for on-site disposal systems visit for either active or passive recrea- the regional scale of the present study are present. There are some uses, however, tion. This factor includes state and fed- does not allow us to treat these factors which might be undertaken in the absence of erally owned parks, natural areas, recre- which are by definition site-specific, with both public sewerage and soils suitable for ation areas and County parks of more than a high degree of confidence. Costs for on-site disposal system. Here the defici- 100 acres. various site preparation activities are ency costs were estimated as the additional given on the Element Cost Sheets. Data expense requried to provide for on-site Proximity to Ports -- A. port is defined categories were established for each factor disposal. This was done in terms of yards here as a cargo-handling facility on a to allow manual analysis. In order to of fill required. A range of costs for channel of at least 12-foot depth. arrive at dollar figures for deficiency on-site disposal systems may be found on costs, some assumptions had to be made. the element cost sheet. Proximity to Airports -- This factor refers These are discussed below under the indi- to general utility airports, basic trans- vidual factors. Depth to Water Table -- This factor is sig- port airports, and air carrier airports. nificant for solid waste disposal facilities Slope -- Deficiency costs for slope were and the assumptions concerning it may be Proximi y ve an Bay Shore Frontage obtained on a per acre basis by calculating found on the appropriate factor cost sheet. td ;o RSih r ' River an ay 0 re Frontage is the prop- for various slopes the cubic yards of earth erty adjacent to rivers, lakes, or bay that would have to be cut and filled in AMENITY FACTORS -- Amenity factors are sim- shores. In general, the amount of bonus is order to grade the slope to the baseline ilar to-proximity factors in that they do proportional to the size of the water body; specification for each use. This cubic not represent direct outlays by the devel- the larger the body of water, the larger yardage of earth was then multiplied by the oper, but rather reflect the dollar value the bonus value, cost of cut and fill given on the element which the developer would be willing to pay cost sheet in order to arrive at a dollar for the presence of the amenity in question. The dollar amounts were obtained from inter- figure. For this reason, they are rather specific to 16/Coastal Development Potential Study each particular marketing situation. Values amenity are vegetation, woodland or forest, Therefore, the baseline site type, by defini- assigned for these factors should not be topographic relief, agricultural land- tion, has no factor costs. treated with a high level of confidence. scapes, and townscapes. These vary from The values given on the factor cost sheets one use to another, and are specified Factor costs are caused by variations are, however, based on information gathered accordingly on the appropriate factor cost of site conditions which alter the baseline through questionnaire responses from and in- sheets. cost by introducing either deficiency costs, terviews with a large number of New Jersey marked as (-) costs, or bonus values, marked builders and developers, and are a represen- OTHER FACTORS -- There are a number of as (+) costs. These may be a cost per tative reflection of present market condi- other factors that are an important consid- development, factors marked (C), or cost per tions. eration for a variety of different uses, development unit, factors marked (V). C costs which do not fit readily into any of the will not vary with the size of development. On-Site Amenities -- On-site amenities are four broad categories of factors described V costs are proportional to the number of those features of a site which enhance its above. They are discussed separately below. units in a development. value for a particular use. There are two such amenities, vegetation and topography. Potable Water Supply -- This factor becomes Using these sheets for cost calculation Vegetation is defined as tree and shrubs a consideration, for certain low density (see Case Studies, Chapter 4), the factor which already exist on a site, and whose uses , when public water supply is not avail- costs are summed for each site type, defici- presence will make the use in question more able. It is a binary consideration: if it ency and bonus first separately, then in valuable. Specimen trees, for example, is present, development will proceed; if it combination. These summary factor costs are will enhance the value of housing. Simi- is not present, development will not occur. then expressed as percentages of the base- larly, some uses are made more attractive, line development cost (or baseline unit costs and hence more valuable, by a certain amount Forest Cover Type -- Costs given for this if the calculation is on a unit basis). of topographic relief. factor are the estimates of foresters of Deficiency factor costs are expressed as the value of woodland per acre independent variable percentages adding to the baseline Chara cter of Surrounding Area -- Character of real estate. cost, and bonus factor costs as variable OT surrounding area is copos ed or two dara percentages reducing the baseline cost. categories -- compatible land use and incom- Cost Calculation In order to sort either the deficiency, patible land use, Iwith the former the base- bonus or combination costs into high, medium, line specification, and the latter assigned This section explains assumptions made or low development potential ranks, cutoffs a deficiency cost. Compatible land uses in developing cost figures and shows how to are introduced into the range of percentage vary from one use to another, but may be interpret the Factor Cost Sheets that accom- factor cost variation. For examplej if the considered in general as land uses that are pany each use description in this chapter. range of factor cost variation were from a 'Similar to or supportive of the use in bonus of +50% of the baseline cost to a question. In the case study presented in Cost calculation starts with a baseline deficiency of -100%, then rankings might be Chapter 4, incompatible land use for cost for each use, a constant that repre- assigned as follows: Detached Housing was defined as proximity sents the cost of constructing a baseline to sewage treatment plants, industrial land development on a baseline site type. From High. +50% (bonus): 0 (baseline) uses and airports. this is calculated a baseline unit cost, the Medium. 0 (baseline): -50% (deficiency) baseline cost of constructing epch unit in Low. -50% (deficiency): -100% (deficiency) Visual Amenities -- Visual amenities are a baseline development. Where baseline de- features of a landscape that are visible velopments contain one unit, the baseline Neither the baseline unit costs nor the from the site in question. They differ cost and baseline unit cost are the same. factor costs attempt to account for anything from on-site amenities in that they are Baseline unit costs are shown at the top of other than construction costs. The baseline not on the site in question, but rather each Factor Cost Sheet. unit costs do not include the cost of land, can be seen from it. Whereas character architectural fees, surveys, insurance, of the surrounding area refers to the A baseline site type is an area with permits, or financing costs. These expenses effect of the surroundings on the marketing no deficiency or bonus costs. The baseline can increase the cost of developments by of a particular site, the values associated site type is made up from the overlay of the about 40 percent. in a full market analysis, with visual amenities reflect only the baseline data categories of each development variations of land cost, market demand and amount that users would be willing to pay potential factor. These form the baseline permitting costs would be combined with these for the visual enjoyment offered by views specifications. Baseline specifications are development potential costs. from a site. Those elements of landscape marked with an asterisk M on the Factor Baseline unit costs do include site that are considered as offering visual Cost Sheets and represent zero factor costs. preparation and landscaping expenses. Costs Use Descriptions and Cost Data /17 for clearing and grubbing of'brush and scrub, level of confidence indicates that there is part of the baseline unit cost, are given in great site-specific variability in costs Table 4. pertaining to that factor. All factor cost information refers In most cases, this study was con- only to siting costs. There are some oper- strained by only being able to consider ational costs that may be influenced by existing systems irrespective of capacities siting: for example, the distance to market or future projections. In each case we had from a fish processing plant may produce to assume the linear cost of expanding the significantly different operating costs. existing system, be it road, sewer, water, This type of constraint was considered to be channel navigation or landfill. This study beyond the scope of this study. Maintenance does not therefore consider the costs or costs were also excluded. economics of expanding or upgrading those systems or the need to do so. For land uses where there is a differ- ence between the size of the baseline devel- opment and that of the unit of development, the total factor cost per unit is given as well as the total cost. For example, in the discussion of Hotels and Motels, costs are given for the building and then broken down to give costs per room. in general, the baseline development size was kept to a minimum. Larger sizes may be calculated by analyzing developments containing more than one baseline development. Several aspects of cost fluctuations deserve mention here. The quality of construction, especially in housing, and the scale of development could result in different costs. Within New Jersey there are significant regional cost differences. in some cases, variations in cost can be attributed to the local labor costs; in others, they result from different physical factors. For example, it is more expensive to build a marina in the northern part of the state due to higher tides and stronger currents. Other factors, most notably soil load bearing capacity and soil drainage, are site-specific. Those factors have been assigned only very general costs. For these reasons it was necessary to assign a range of costs to several land use types. All land uses have a note explaining any use-particular assumptions. The "Levels of Confidence" column refers to the consultants' confidence in the given figures. The extensive scope of the study and the number of cost variations made it impossible to present figures having a uniform degree of accuracy. Generally a low Housing I 20/Coastal Development Potential Study Rural Housing Development Potential Factors aUndeveloped Land 9Access to Local Road oAccess to Electric Power Distribution Line F oFlooding oSlope oSoil Drainage ....... . Rural housing is defined for our pur- oSoils Suitable for On-Site Disposal poses as housing on lots of greater than Systems I acre. Rural housing is often owner- oAccess to Public Sewerage built or built a few units at a time by a oAccess to Public Water Supply local developer. The sites are usua I I y 0Potable Water Supply rural road frontage, subdivided from oProximity to Ocean Beach Frontage larger agricultural, wooded, or vacant parce I s. In some instances an entrepreneur oProximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage will subdivide a larger parcel into large 0On-Site Amenities lots, make basic required improvements such oCharacter of Surrounding Area as streets, and sell lots to individuals or small developers. oVisual Amenities The scale of rural housing ranges from multi-acre estates, to farm houses, to mini-estates, to large lot subdivisions. Rural housing does not experience any severe constraints; its basic requirements are for adequate potable water (well or public supply), ability to dispose of effluent (on-site septic system or public sewer), and acc-ess from a public road or right-of-way. Other site factors will affect design, e.g., basement or non-base- ment construction, level house or split- level. Distance to telephone and electric service is a cost factor in developing a site and can be limiting to an individual locating some distance from these services. PF Use Descriptions and Cost Data /21 BASELINE UNIT COST: $45,000 $65,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: I unit, I acre Rural Housing Total Factor Factor Level actor I Data Cost Cost/Uni t of Total Factor F Level Factor Categories + or - Data Cost 'ost/Unit of + or Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence M ($) M Undeveloped Land Potable Water Available 0 Supply Not Available 13,4] 0 X X High FL27V adjacent + 100,000 +100,000 Access to Local 0 1/2 0 0 Proximity to Ocean 0- 1/2 + 30,000 '30,000 Road 1/2 - 1 )/2 -50,000 50,000 High Beach Frontage 1/2 - 5 + 1 1/2 - 3 100,000 iQO'OO0 5 - 15 + 5,000 +5,000 High F c 3+ miles -150,000 150,000 + 2,000 +2,000 T 15+ miles 0 0 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Proximity to River adjacent + 4o,ooo +4o,ooo Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 -50,000 - 50,000 or Bay Shore 0 - 1/2 Line 1 1/2 @ 3 -100,000 100,000 Medium Frontage 1/2 - I + 8,ooo +8,ooo High FC- 3+ miles -150,000 150,000 + 2,000 +2,000 -Ev I+ mile .0 Flooding Not In Flood Prone 0 f6l o On-Site Amenities Vegetation + 2,500 +2,500 Area In Flood Prone Area Other 0 0 Medium _V Slope 0 3 -2,250 - 2,250 Character f Compatible land use 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 F_ 8 15 5,000 5,000 Medium Surrounding Area Not compatible land - 2,500 -2,500 Medium V 15+ % -9,000 9,000 use For!st,or dland + 21500 + 2,500 Soil Drainage High 0 [11 0 Visual Amenities Agricu turawololand- Medium -1,500 1,500 Low scape + 1,000 +1,000 Medium Low -3,000 - 3,000 Topography + 1,000 +1,000 Other 0 0 Soils Suitable for * Slight 151 0 0 Baseline Specification On-Site Disposal Moderate -1,500 - 1,500 Medium Systems Severe Limitations -2,500 2,500 FL72-V I NOTE: Access to * 0 @ 1/2 0 0 Due to the wide variety of housing types that can be found in this hous- I ing category owner-built cabins to high-amenity custom built dwellings - Public Sewerage /2 - 1 1/2 [21 -65,000 -65,000 Medium there can be a corresponding variation in price range. The figures used 1 1/2 - 3 -130,000 -130,000 here are based on a two-story house with a full basement and an area of 3+ miles -195,000 -195,000 1,800 square feet, costing approximately $35 per square foot. Deficiency FL 7c_ costs for Access to Local Roads assume a Level I access road (see Element Cost Sheet). It is assumed that a builder will prefer public water and Access to 0 - 1/2 121 0 0 sewage to private water supply and on-site waste disposal. Public water Public Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 50,000 -50,000 Medium costs are based on 1 1/2 inch copper tubing, while public sewer hookups are 1 1/2 - 3 100,000 -100,000 based on inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. LI IC 3+ miles 150,000 -150,000 C = costs are constant per development Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 22/Coastal Development Potential Study Single Family Detached and schools are all part of the market's de- Development Potential Factors mand of housing. Unlike many land uses * Undeveloped Land which are tightly controlled by economic e Access to Local Road factors such as transportation costs, access 0 Access to Electric Power Distr4bution to markets, or access to raw materials, Line housing is fairly footloose. People are o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Area willing to travel reasonably far to get the o Proximity to Regional Service Center sort of housing environment they desire and o Proximity to Community Service Center Single-family detached housing is the can afford. o Proximity to Public Transportation dwelling type universally referred to as a o Slope "house." It is free standing on its own Putting aside very real considerations o Soil Drainage lot, is occupied by one family, and, for of environment (type of nearby housing, o Access to Public Water Supply our purposes here, occurs at densities quality of the local school district) which o Potable Water Supply ranging from I to 6 units per acre. (Den- influence housing choice, we can isolate o Access to Public Sewerage sity is in gross acres, i.e., total number some factors which indicate areas of greater o Soils Suitable for On-$ite Disposal of units divided by total acreage of the potential for single-family housing. Chief Systems development.) among these are land availability and cost. Proximity to service centers is also impor- o Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage Detached housing, by definition, shares tant . In terms of physical site factors, o Proximity to River or Bay Shore no common wal I s wi th other dwel I ings. Typ- water supply and sewage disposal are obli- Frontage ically a front and rear yard and smaller gatory, as is availability of electric and o On-Site Amenities side yards surround a house. Building telephone service. o Character of Surrounding Area o Visual Amenities height ranges from I to 3 stories, with I o Flooding and 2 story houses predominant. This type of housing is almost totally owner-occupied. The rigid grid pattern of poSt-war hous- ing with houses lined up and down a regular grid pattern of streets has given way to more frequent use of curvilinear streets and cul-de-sacs and to the practice of grouping houses more closely together to create a more varied living environment. In grouping, single-family detached units are sited more closely together than has r '44"" @4,k traditionally been the case, in order to - ------ provide larger common spaces and to de- QR crease the road and utility footage re- quired to serve a development. I Compared to other housing types, as garden apartments or townhouses, ssinucghle- family detached housing is primarily ori- -4 ented to families with children. An ex- -A ception is found in special cases such as with retirement communities, where a spe- cific market is targeted. These are dis- cussed separately. Reasonable access to shopping, employ- @ @mA ment, cultural and religious facilities, Use Descriptions and Cost Date /23 BASELINE UNIT COST: $40,000 sloo,ooo DEVELOKIENT SIZE: 4 units, I acre Single Family Detached Total Factor Factor Level Co C TotaCloFactor Factor Level Data st ost/Unit of Data st Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or or Confidence Factor Categories + or + or - Confidence $) +($) ($) M Undeveloped Land Slope 0 06,750 01,690 Medium 15 % 000 k; :15:000 098 Access to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 1 T Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 50 000 -50 000 High I/gle-r3 100:000 100:000 Soils Suitable for Slight 0 3+ ml 150,000 150,000 On-Site Disposal Moderate 15,91 05,500 -1,375 Medium T Systems L =2V Severe Limitations 9,000 2,250 Access to Electric 0 1/2 0 0 Power Distribution I/i - 1 1/2 21:J50 Medium lm2l- 3 - I J8 , `10 0 - 1/2 [31 0 0 / 4 DO 0 Access to Line 3+ 1 5:0000 10 , 50 Public Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 -00 000 2 1/2 - 3 -'00 000 8:000 Medium rc 31+ miles 2 5 000 300,000 75,000 0 15 + 10 000 +2,500 Proximity to 5 0 + 7:500 +1375 Metropolitan 10 @5 + 008 +11:2gO Medium + 1:50 +7 0 Service Center @5 60 0 0 Potable Water Supply * Available 13,41 0 0 [-V 60+ miles Not Available X X High Proximity to 0 - 2 + 6 000 +1,500 FL2TV Regional Service + @.:000 + Medium Access to Public * 0 1/2 [21 0 + ,500 + 5 0 3 : T5 DO Center 15+ miles 0 0 Sewerage 1/2 - FT 2 3 188:888 Medium 3+ miles 300,000 75,000 Proximity to 0 - 1, + 8 000 +2 000 Fc- Community Service + Cow +11 00 + 2,000 +;Do Proximity to Ocean Adjacent +290 000 +50 000 Center 0 Beach Frontage 0 1/2 + 0:000 +20:000 5+ miles 0 1/2 - 5 +12 000 +3 000 High IFT + 4:000 +1:000 Proximity to 0 - I + 1,000 +M RE 75+_ mlfi.s 0 0 Public Transportation I - 2 + 00 +I Low 2 + Mo +2@ 3 Iles 0 0 Proximity to River Adjacent +4 000 +10,000 FT * or Bay Shore Frontage 0 - U2 +9:000 +2,000 Medium 1/2 - I +2,000 + 500 On-Site Amenities Vegetation + 8,000 +2,000 Medium Fi__ * + mile 0 0 * Other 0 0 Flooding * Not in Flood 0 [61 0 Prone Area Character of Compatible Land Uses 0 +2,500 Medium Ev_ In F] ood Prone Area Surrounding Area _V Not compatible - 10,000 0 Baseline Specification Visual Amenities Woodland + 8,ooo +2,000 NOTE: There is considerable range in the quality and size of Single Family Topography + 2,000 +500 Medium Detached Housing. The figures given here are based on a two-story house other 0 0 with a full basement and an area of 2,000 square feet. Construction costs rv- are assumed to be $35 per square foot. Deficiency costs for Access to Local Road assume a Level I access road (see Element Cost Sheet). Public soil Drainage High [1] 0 0 water cost s are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth Medium - 6,000 1,500 Low of 4 feet and Public Sewerage Access is based on the use of an 8 inch vitri- Low - 12,000 3,000 fied clay pipe installed 4 feet deep. I C = costs are constant per development I Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 24/Coastal Development Potential Study Single Family Attached Originally, townhouses (rowhouses) or cost considerations. provided lower cost housing, chiefly in urban areas. In the 1960s, higher priced Development Potential Factors townhouses began to be marketed on more expensive parcels of land by-passed in 9 Undeveloped Land earlier development phases. More recently, * Access to Local Road attached single-family housing has become a o Access to Electric Power Distribution common form in suburban areas. Line In single-family attached housing, at o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center least one wall or floor/ceiling is common Most units are bought by those who pre- o Proximity to Regional Service Center fer to own rather than rent their homes but o Proximity to Community Service Center between units. Essentially, we are con- who do not want to maintain yards. Part of o Proximity to Public Transportation sidering here higher density versions of this market is made up of people who value o On-Site Amenities the single-family detached house, but the amenities offered within many attached- o Character of Surrounding Area spatial constraints or site design dic- house communities or which are available 0 Visual Amenities tates building a greater number of units nearby. Moreover, a townhouse or other ci Soil Drainage (6 to 15 per gross acre) on a site. attached form of housing is usually less o Slope Elimination of side yards and reduction of expensive than a similarly sized detached 0 Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal System yards associated with each unit achieve house due to use of less land per unit and 0 Access to Public Water Supply these higher densities. (Mid- and high- less road length per unit. 0 Access to Public Sewerage rise single-family housing, though - o Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage ''attached," is more constructively con Where site amenities are important, such o Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage sidered a multifamily unit). as woods-or water, a group of attached o Flooding houses requires less disturbance of the site A wide range of housing types falls than an equal number of detached houses. within the single-family attached category: This is often a marketing feature because duplexes (twins), triplexes, quadplexes, many are willing to forgo extensive private and townhouses (rowhouses) are the basic yards in exchange for a larger common area. types. The plexes have many of the characteristics of a detached house, but L 7. r The population mix occupying single- share party walls or floors/ceilings. family attached housing can be expected to Often they are almost indistinguishable have fewer families with children than would from detached housing, only the structures be found in detached homes. Single people, are merged at the lot line. Townhouses are @-4 young marrieds, and older couples are a essentially rows of attached single-family prime market for attached housing. dwellings ty@ically 5 to 10 units in length, with only the end units having side. Change in preferences, cost of housing, yards. and even change in size of families have all worked to broaden the demand for attached All of these attached housing types and housing. Attached housing (including apart- their variations commonly share two char- ments) accounts for about 50% of all new acteristics: at least I wall is common to housing. Twenty-five years ago only 6% of two units and they are I to 3 stories high. new starts were multifamily housing, and While a higher number of rentals are found those were primarily apartments. in attached than in detached single-family A@, housing, a high proportion of units are owner-occupied. Ownership is usually fee Attached and detached housing have essen- tially the same set of factors controlling simple or through a condominium arrangement. their location. Access to employment, shop- In condominium ownership, the homeowner owns the unit outright, and, rather than ping, schools, recreation, and cultural owning a specific lot, the homeowner owns activities are all important from a market an undivided proportionate share of all standpoint. Availability of water, availa- land and common facilities in the condomin- bility of sewage disposal, and availability jum. of utilities are each important construction Use Descriptions and Cost Date 25 BASELINE UNIT COST: $20,000 - $4o,ooo DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 10 units, I acre ed --Single Family ttaCh- Total Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Un I t of Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + or - Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence ($) M ($) ($) Undeveloped Land Access to 0 - 1/2 0 0 1/2 - 1 1/2 121 - Pubd ic Sewerage 00 000 -- I -1010'0 Medium 1 1/2 3 200:000 Access to Local 112 0 0 rL IT -C 3+ miles 300,000 300:000000 Road 1 1 1/2 -50 000 15,000 1 1/2 -3 -100:000 40 000 High 3+ miles -.450,000 5:000 Soils Suitable Slight [51 0 0 FE for On-Site Dispoial Moderate m9,000 - goo Medium Systems Severe Limitations -16,000 -1,600 Access to Electric 01/2 0 0 FF Fy- Power Distribution 1/2/@ 11/2 -35 000 13,500 Medium I ImJle-s3 I:OOo 0 Adjacent +00,000 +3@0,000 3 - 000 4080 0 - 1/2 +?00 000 +10 000 ,Line + Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage 1/2 5 1;'000 +1 900 High C + T5 +000 f, 00 015 +16 000 15@ miles 0 D Proximity to 15 30 +12:000 rV Metropolitan Service 0 - 45 Medium - Center 3 +NOD 5 - 60 +000 Proximity to River Adjacent +120 000 f- 12 000 60+ miles 0 or Bay Shore 3 - 1/2 +30:000 3:000 Medium 1/2 - I +5,000 500 rv- Frontage I+ miles. 0 Proximity to 0-2 +1000 +11100 F Regional Service 2-7 + ODD +a Center 7-15 2,000 2008 Medium On-Site Amenities Vegetation +2,000 + 200 Medium 15+ miles * Other 0 0 rv- - 1- T Proximity to 0 +8 000 +800 Character of * Compatible Land Use 0 0 1-3 +i,000 +NO Community Service 3-5 500 50 Medium Surrounding Area Not Compatible -25,000 -2,500 Center F 5+ miles FV- 0 - I Visual Ameniti-es Woodland +1,000 +100 Proximity to - "2 +4 000 +4oo Topography +1,000 +100 Medium Public Transportation I +f:080 +foo Medium Other 2- 3 +,0 0 +00 0 0 7 13+ miles 0 0 V Flooding Not in-Flood Prone [61 Slope 03 7,900 -790 Area 0 0 * 38 0 Medium In Flood Prone Area 200 320 815 Y:OOO 3: 00 V -V 15+ % Baseline Specification Sol] Drainage * High [11] 0 0 7,000 1700 Low 16,000 1,6oo NOTE: The figures presented here are based on a two story townhouse with a full basement and an area of 1,200 square feet per dwelling unit. The Access to Pub] ic Sewerage f i gures are based on the use of an 8 inch vi t rif ied cl ay pi pe Access to Public @O - 1/2 [21 0 0 installed at a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Public Water Supply numbers Water Supply 1/2 - 11/2 100,000 -10,Q00 Med i um 1 1/2 -3 00,000 -20,000 are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. r-r 3+ miles 300,000 T30,000 Deficiency costs for Access to Local Road assume a Level 2 access road (see LI C, I Element Cost Sheet). Potable Water Supply vailable [3,41 0 lNot Available X C = costs are constant per developmenL FL2FV 1 10 X V = costs vary with number of units L Baseline Specification 26/Coastal Development Potential Study Garden Apartments and level and upper floors. Density ranges of o Access to Public Water Supply between 20 and 35 units per acre typify o Access to Public Sewerage micrise housing. o Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage Midrise Housing o Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage Parking for midrise housing is either o On-Site Amenities around the building or is in a garage under o Character of Surrounding Area or adjacent to the building. o Visual Amenities o Flooding Garden apartments and midrise housing Midrise housing can be used to improve are two residential types intermediate be- the overall population density of a mixed tween single-family housing and high-rise use development without resorting to high- housing. rise development. In practice, once a unit is over 4 stories, necessitating Garden apartments are rental units. elevators, the developer will often build Townhouses and other attached housing higher than 6 stories. forms are similar, but are owned by the resident. As the name implies, garden Midrise housing can be either rental or apartments strive to provide character- condominium. There are differences between istics of suburban living to the renter. the two which affect design. Security and Small yards frequently accompany ground- privacy are more important considerations @F level units. Units are 2 to 3 stories, in sales housing. Also, condominium units with the trend being to 2-story units. are generally built at a density between A slope can often be used to gain an 10 and 25 percent lower than rental units. One-quarter to one-half more parking is additional floor without having to use more than I flight of stairs. Open space required for sales units. surrounds each unit, often configured to provide at a rate of between 1.5 and 1 .75 Garden apartments and midrise housing ------ spaces per apartment. Parking is open, are similar in their need for employment covered, or in garages. Most designs now centers or prospective job generators, use outdoor balcony cor'ridors or open shopping, schools, recreation, and cultural stairwells for second floor access rather activities. For large developments the IL -------- than interior public corridors. availability, frequency, and directness of transportation to key centers is important. Garden apartments are either con- Character of the area surrounding the site structed as a separate development or are and the quality of site and near-site one of a mix of residential types in a amenities will also affect development planned development. Maximum site cover- choices. age is 25%, but usually coverage is 15% or less. Densities in garden apartments range Development Potential Factors from 10 to 20 units per acre. A 25% cover- age will house about 20 families per acre. 9 Undeveloped Land k e Access to Local Road -.4 Well designed garden apartments are 9 Access to Electric Power Distribution almost indistinguishable from attached Line single family dwellings. o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center o Proximity to Regional Service Center Midrise housing is o Proximity to Community Service Center intermediate between garden apartments and highrise housing. o Proximity to Public Transportation These multi-family units are between 4 and o Slope 6 stories high. Elevators are necessary o Soil Drainage because of the distance between the ground o Soil Load Bearing Capacity Use Descriptions and Cost Data /27 BASELINE UNIT COST: $15,000 - $40,ooo DMLOPMENT SIZE: 20 units.- one acre Gar-den Apartments and Midrise Housin Total Factor Factor Level Data COSt Cost/Un it of TotaIFactor Factor Level Factor Categories I or + or Confidence Data cost Cost/Unit of ($) M Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence ($) M Undeveloped Land Access to Public 0 - 1/2 [31 0 0 Sewerage 1/2 - I '1/2 -100,000 -5,000 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 -10,000 Medium Access to Local rc 3+ miles -300,000 -15,000 0 - 1/2 0 0 Proximity to Ocean Adjacent +550,000 +27,500 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 -120,000 -6 DOD Beach Frontage 0 - 1/2 -3 -24o,ooo +7,000 1 1/2 12,000 High +14o,ooo 3+ miles -36o,ooo -18,ooo 1/2 - 5 +15,000 +750 High - 5-15 +2,000 +100 Access to Electric 0 -.1/2 0 0 15+ miles 0 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 J/2 -6 750 Proximity to Line 1 1/2 - 3 -270,000 River Adjacent +16o,ooo +8,ooo - F 3+ miles -405,000 -6,500 1 Medium or Bay Shore Frontage 0 - 1/2 +30,000 +1,500 Proximity to -20,250 * 1/2 - 1 +2,000 +100 Medium Metropolita 0 - 15 +12,000 ry- I+ miles 0 0 Genter n Service 15 - 30 +g'OOO On-Site Amenities 30 - 45 +6,ooo Vegetation 45 - 6o Medium * Other +300 +150 +3,000 V 0 Proximity to F*1 6o+ miles 0 - - Character of Surround- Compatible Land Uses +5,000 +250 0-2 +6,ooo +300 ing Area * Other 0 0 Medium Regional Service 2-7 - I _V Center +3,000 +150 7-15 +1'000 +50 Medium Visual Amenities Veget @1 on +2,000 +100 F 15+ miles 0 0 Townscape +2,000 +100 Medium V Other 0 0 Proximity to 0-1 +10,000 +500 Community Service 1-3 Flooding Center +8,ooo +4oo Not in Flood Prone 0 0 3-5 +3,00o +150 Medium Area FT 5+ miles 0 0 In Flood Prone Area [61 Proximity to Public 0-1 _F I +8,ooo +400 Transportation 1-2 +4,ooo +200 Baseline Specification 2-3 +2,000 +100 Medium V 3+ 0 0 Slope 0-3 -8,300 +415 NOTE: 1* 3-8 0 0 The figures given here are for a three story, slab on grade, apartment 8-15 house, each unit having an area of 800 feet. The Access to Public Water V 15+ % -19,000 -975 Medium figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth .35,000 -1,750 of 4 feet. The Access to Public Sewerage numbers are based on the use of - an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. Deficiency Soil Drainage High [1] 0 io costs for Access to Local Roads assume a Level 2 access road (see Element Medium -g'OOO -450 Low Cost Sheet). V Low -lC'OOO -goo Soil Load Bearing High 0 Capacity Medium -12,000 -6oo Low V Lqw -27,1000 -1,350 Access to Public 0 - 1/2 131 0 0 Water Supply 1/2 - 11/2 -100,000 -5,000 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 -10,000 Medium _+ miles -300,000 -15,000 C = costs are constant per development C , V = costs vary with number of units Baseline Specification 28/Coastai Development Potential Study more receptive to the type of living offered by a highrise. Highrise Housing The mixture of unit types within the high- rise is also a problem for the developer. The two-year lag between the time a highrise apartment building is conceived and ready for Highrise residential buildings are, for occupancy may witness a change in the market this study, taller than six stories. These for larger or smaller units. The time lag are buildings of steel frame or reinforced requires that front-end money and construction concrete construction with fire-proof financing be substantial. Other housing types elevators. typically bring units to market in smaller increments with an earlier return. When the price of land exceeds $5.00 per square foot, highrise construction or other Development Potential Factors forms of high density use are dictated. Highrise buildings are also developed to 9 Undeveloped Land take advantage of and market unobstructed e Access to Electric Power Distribution views, particularly from upper floors. Line These floors command a higher rent or price o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center than lower floors. o Proximity to Regional Service Center o Proximity to Community Service Center Privately developed highrise housing is o Proximity to Public Transportation typically market as luxury apartments or o Slope condominiums. High land and construction o Soil Drainage costs require that rents or selling prices 9 Deep Foundation Suitability be high. People are willing to pay the en- o Access to Public Water Supply suing high prices and even additional pre- 0 Access to Public Sewerage miums for the amenities which often come with o Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage these buildings. o Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage 0 Character of Surrounding Area Highrise bui Idings can be developed o Visual Amenities singly, in groups, or as part of a mix of o Flooding T residential types. In a development with varied housing types, a highrise building helps obtain the overall density needed for a successful project and also secures added open space. 4 T A problem for highrise developments is A major element of the sub acceptance in any but the urban or near- - T urban market. urban milieu is direct access to open space. The highrise, with only visual access to open space, must compete with residential types offering more immediate access to the suburban outdoors. Also, locations are traditionally family oriented. The downtown and densely-built suburban housing market includes a high percentage of young and old people without families. These groups are Use Descriptions and Cost Date /29 BASELINE UNIT COST: $20,000 $75,000 1DEVELOPMEW SIZE: 50 units, I acre Highrise- Housing TotaIFactor Factor Level Factor Data Cost Cost/Unit of TotaC10F7ctor Loy I Data s Cost/Unit f Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence Factor Categories + 0 r or Confid:nce ($) ($) 1 ($) + ($) Undeveloped Land Access to Public 1/2 131 0 0 Water Supply I/f/2- 1 31/2 14'9:888 J;@88 Medium 3+ miles 3 5,000 6,9oo Access to Collector n-1/2 0 0 Fc Road 1/2 40:0088 @:888 High Access to Public 1/2 [31 0 3+ miles 50,000 9,000 Sewerage 11/2 -185,000 3 00 Medium 1C 1 1/2 -3 Access to Electric 0 rc 1+ miles ?;980 Power Distribution 1/2 0- 35,000 -2 tj ne 0,0 0 -EZ'00 Medium Proximity t AOjaunt + o Ocean 0 . 2 + "9000:888 ++ ??:000000 1+ M, 4195,080 08 Beach Frontage 1/2 rc 55 + @O 000 + 800 High - 75 + 5:000 + 100 Proximity to +50,000 15+ miles 0 0 Metropolitan Service 0 + F +18;800,0 Medium Center 45 18 5,000 Proximity to River @dj nt 60+ miles +?00 000 +10 000 FT or Bay Shore -T2 +75:000 Frontage /2 - I +3 500 Medium +5,000 + ]Do Proximity to 02 f35,000 + F* miles 0 0 Regional Service 1-2 + ?8 High Center 315 #1 9:988 + * 15+ miles D 0 Character of * Compatible Land Use 0 0 F Surrounding Area F Not compatible -10,000 -2,OOC Medium Proximity to 0 -I 1. 20,000 +4oo Community Service Vegetation +7,500 +150 + Townscape +7,500 +150 Medium Center 'g;888 +188 HIgh Visual Amenities * 5+ miles 0 Other rV 0 0 IV Proximity to Public 01 171 +4 000 + Flooding No in Flood Prone [6) Transportation 12 +3:000 +goo t 2+_3 +2,000 +40 Medium Area 0 0 i rv- 3 miles 0 0 V In Flood P one Area I Slope 0 0 0 1 Baseline Specifications - 54 Medium 15 6.2oo @8 5@ 9 00 0 NOTE: There is a wide variation in types of high-rise housing. The figures 17:700 given here are based on a ten-story building with dwelling units of 875 2 square feet. The Access to Public Water Supply figures are based on the Soil Drainage High [1] 0 0 use of an 8 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Medium -10,000 200 Low Public Sewerage figures are based on the use of an 15 inch vitrified clay rV Low 20,000 4oo pipe installed 4 feet deep. Deficiency costs for Access to Collector Road are based on a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet) . Deep Foundation High [1] 0 0 Suitability Medium 15,000 300 Low T-V Low 30,000 6oo C = Costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units _T TrBaseline Specification 30/Coastal Development Potential Study Mobile Home Parks which are wider then most highway vehicles, Soil drainage is highly desirable, as are visual amenities. Mobile home parks should be within reach of employment, schools, shopping, recreation, and religious and cultural activities. Development Potential Factors Mobile homes are movable or portable dwellings constructed for towing on their e Undeveloped Land own chassis and designed to connect to 9 Access to Collector Road utilities without the use of a permanent a Access to Electric Power Distribution foundation. ''Mobile home" is something of Line a misnomer, since most mobile homes are not o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center moved from their original site. The appeal o Proximity to Regional Service Center of mobile homes is in their low cost rather o Proximity to Community Service Center than their mobility. They constitute a o Proximity to Public Transportation near monopoly of the low end of the single- o Flooding family housing market. Most mobile homes 0 slope are 14 feet wide, the greatest width al low- able on the r The majority of units o Soil Drainage oad. o Access to Public Sewerage are between 45 and 60 feet long, although o Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal some are as long as 70 feet. Systems o Access to Public Water Supply Mobile home parks are developments for o Potable Water Supply mobile homes. They provide concrete pads o Proximity to Ocean BeAch,Frontage on which the homes rest, and hook-ups for o Proximity to River on Bay Shore Frontage electricity, water and sewage. They also generally provide, at a min imum, laundry facilities. The larger ones may also have community recreational facilities. Owner- ship arrangements take a number of forms. 'J In an open park, the tenant brings his own mobile home to the park, and plugs it into a site which he rents from the park owner. the home In a closed park, the tenant buys from the park owner, who then charges a monthly site rental. In some parks, the lot is sold to th e tenant, and co ndominium forms Amu, of ownership are also becoming more common. tw Nevertheless, the great majority of parks rent their sites. Mobile home parks usually range in size between 20 and 60 acres. Densities are in i7i the neighborhood of 6 to 7 sites per gross acre. The locational requirements of mobile 7,- home parks are similar to those of other _* _71 types of single-family housing. Public water supply, sewerage, and electricity are essential. Access to a collector road _'a- 7. facilitates delivery of the mobile homes, Use Descriptions and Cost Date /31 BASELINE UNIT COST: $12,000 - $30,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 120 units, 20 acres Mobile Hoftie- Parks Total Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Data Cost Cost/Un I t of Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence Undeveloped Land tied i um Soil Drainage High 0 0 Medium - 36,000 - 300 Medium Low - 6o,ooo - 500 57 1 Access to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 Access to Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 120,000 1 0(10@ Public Sewerage 0 @ 1/2 0 0 1 1/2 - 3 20,000 2,000 High 1/2 - 1 1/2 -100,000 - 833 Medium 3+ miles 36o,ooo 3,000 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 - 1667 Fc LI [C 3+ miles -300,000 - 2500 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Soils Suitable for Slight 0 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 135,000 1,125 Medium On-Site Disposal Mdderate -)20,000 -11000 Medium Line 1 1/2 - 3 270,000 2,250 Systems Severe Limitations -228,000 -1,900 3+ miles 405,000 3,375 Fc L2 FV 0 - 15 + 24,000 + 200 Access to Proximity to 15 - 30 + 18, 0-100 + 150 Public Water Supply 0 - 1/2 0 0 Metropolitan Service 30 - 45 + 12,000 + 100 Low 1/2 - 1 1/2 -100,000 - 833 Medium Center 45 @ 60 + 6,ooo + 50 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 - 1667 F 60+ miles 0 LI [ C 3+ miles -300,000 - 2500 Proximity to Regional 0 - 2 + 30,000 +250 Potable Water Availabl- (3,4) 0 0 Service Center 2 - 7 + ilil,ooo +150 Medium supply Not available X X High 7 - 15 + 6,000 +50 FV 15+ miles 0 0 L2 FTV Proximity to Community 0 - I + 42,000 +350 Proximity to Ocean Adjacent (8) Service Center I - 3 + 33,000 +275 Medium Beach Frontage 0 - 1/2 3 - 5 + 12,000 +100 1/2 - 5 5+ miles 0 0 5 - 15 FV_ I _V 1;+ miles Proximity to Public 0 - I + 45,000 +375 Proximity to River Adjacent +120,000 + 1,000 Transportation I - 2 + 2014oo +170 Medium or Bay Shore Frontage 0 - 1/2 + 40,0oo + 333 2 - 3 + 9,6oo +80 1/2 - I + 15,000 + 125 FV- * 3+ miles 0 0 V 1+ mile 0 0 E_ Baseline Specification' - Flooding * Not in Flood 0 0 Prone Area tied i um NOTE: In Flood Prone Area The variation costs in mobile home park is determined, in part, by whether sites are sold or rented. The Access to Public Sewerage figures are based on the use of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Public Water figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe in- Slope 0 3 0 0 stalled at a depth of 4 feet. Deficiency costs for Access to Collector Road 3 8 V6,ooo i,lloo tied i um and based on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). 8 15 450,000 3,750 F-V! 15+ % 700,000 5,833 C = costs are constant per development Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 32/Coastal Development Potential Study Retirement Communities Retirement communities are developments which provide housing specifically for el- derly and retired persons. While retire- 7. ment communities may provide a mix of hous- ing types, such as apartments and townhouses, the predominant trend is to small, single- family detached houses. As their name im- plies, one of the major attractions of re- tirement communities is the sense of commu- nity they provide to residents. To this end, these communities generally feature units in these communities, they generate common meeting spaces and recreational significant volumes of automobile traffic; facilities for community residents. Hous- therefore, they should have access to a ing densities tend to be fairly high for collector road. Lastly, slope is an impor- detached housing, on the order of 6 houses tant consideration, to protect residents per gross acre. Because so much of the from undue exertion. activity of residents is centered on the community, it is desirable that they con- Development Potential Factors tain a large number of units. This is also necessary to support their relatively 9 Undeveloped Land extensive communal facilities. Acreage for 9 Access to Collector Road retirement communities may range up to o Access to Electric Power P:stribution several thousand acres, with 400 acres Line being a reasonable minimum. c, P r o x i m i t yto Metropolitan Service Center The site requirements for retirement ri o Proximity to Regional Service Center communities are similar to those for other M o Proximity to Community Service Center types of single-family housing, with the o Proximity to Public Transportation obvious exception that proximity to employ- o Flooding ment and schools is not important, but 9 Slope proximity to health care facilities is a major concern. These communities are often o Soil Drainage e Access to Public Sewerage found at the outer fringe of urbanized * Access to Public Water Supply areas, just beyond the areas being devel- o Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage oped for conventional single-family housing. 0 ID0, o Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage Proximity to shopping and religious and o On-Site Amenities cultural activities is desirable, as is o Visual Amenities proximity to recreation to a lesser degree, since so many recreational opportunities are Provided within the community. Visual amenities and pleasant character of the sur- rounding area are important. Proximity to water supply, sewerage, and electric power is important. Because of the number of Use Descriptions and Cost Date /33 BASELINE UNIT COST: $2 000 - $50,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 600 units, 100 acres Retirement Communities Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of TotaCloFactor Factor Level Factor Categories + or - Data st Cost/Unit of + or - Confidence Factor Categories + 0 r - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Soil Drainage * High [1] 0 0 Medium -24o,ooo -4oo Low Low -48o,ooo - Boo ET Access to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to Public * 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -250 High Se,erage 1/2 - 1 1/2 -100,000 - 167 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -500 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 High 3+ miles - 333 FC] -450,000 -750 F 3+ miles -300,000 500 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 -130,000 -217 Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 Line 1 1/2 Medium -100,000 -167 High -3 -26o,ooo -433 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 -333 Fc- 3+ miles -390,000 -650 3+ miles -300,000 -500 Fc- Proximity to 0 15 +200,000 +333 4djacent Metropolitan Service 15 30 +150,000 +250 Proximity to 0 - 1/2 *5,000,000 8,333 -30 45 Ocean Beach +2,000,000 +3,333 Center +100,000 +167 Medium Frontage 1/2 - 5 + 500,000 +833 Low 45 60 *50,000 + 83 5 - 15 +. 75,000 +167 FV 60+ miles 0 0 Fy_ 15+ miles 0 0 Proximity to 0 - 2 300,000 +500 Proximity to Adjacent 1,000,000 1,667 Regional Service 2 - 7 24o,ooo +4oo River or Bay Shore 0 - 1/2 Center Medium 500,000 833 7 - 15 120,000 +200 Frontage 1/2 - 1 75,000 Low F- 15+ miles 0 - I+ mile 125 v - - I V Proximity to 0 - I +24o,ooo +4oo on-Site Amenities Vegetation + 100,000 + 167 Community Service I - 3 +210,000 +350 Other Medium Center 3 - 5 +18o,ooo +300 Medium 0 0 5+ miles 0 0 I - V Proximity to 0 - 1 171 +180,000 +300 Visual Amenities Vegetation + 50,000 + 83 Public Transportation I - 2 +120,000 +200 Low Topography + 30,000 2 - 3 +60,Ooo +100 + 50 Medium FT 3+ miles 0 0 Other 0 0 Flooding Not in Flood Prone #_se I ii ne _Spe6f I at ion Area 0 0 NO TE: In Flood Prone Area The baseline unit costs given for Retirement Communities are based on a smaller than average facility. Retirement Communities can cover 1,000 acres V o- more. The Access to Public Water Supply figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Public Sewerage Figures are based on the use f an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe install- Slope 0 - 3 0 0 ed 4 feet deep. Deficioncy costs for Access to Collector Road are based on 3 - 8 -1,600,00 -2,667 a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). 8 - 15 -24,ooo,ooo -41000 15+ % -3,750,000 -6,167 C = costs are constant per development r_V Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units Commerce and Service I i I I I I I t 36/Coastal Development Potential Study Shopping Centers Because the overwhelming majority of Regional customers travel to shopping centers by automobile, adequate parking space is extremely important. The number of parki ng spaces required by a center is proportional to the center's GLA. The parking index refers to the number of parking spaces required per 1000 square feet of GLA. IL - "We Experience has shown that a parking index A shopping center is ''a group of of 5.5 is most appropriate. Thus a architecturally unified commerical regional center of 400,000 square feet GLA _*i&-, establishments built on a site which is will require 2,200 parking spaces (40ox5.5l. planned, developed, owned, and managed as -4- The trade area of a shopping center may in its location, be defined as the area containing people an operating unit related size, and type of shops to the trade area who are likely to purchase a given class of that the unit serves. The unit provides goods or services from a particular firm or on-site parking in definite relationship group of firms. Regional centers might to the types and total size of the stores."* have a trade area with a radius of up to 10 miles. The extent of the trade area depen -0-N-OWWR@_ This definition distinguishes shopping ds centers from shopping areas or shopping on driving time, however. The maximum driv- districts, which do not have a unified ing time to a typical regional center is on design and operation. the order of 20 minutes. A regional center Shopping centers are classified located near a high-speed highway, then, according to their major tenants. A will have a larger trade area than a similar regional shopping center has as its major center which is not so located. From this tenant one or more full-line department it can be seen that location and accessi- stores. A neighborhood shopping center, bility are of great importance for shopping on the other hand, has a supermarket as centers. In terms of population, a regional its major tenant. Regional shopping center requires a population within its centers provide a full range of shopping trade area of at least 1,50,000 people. This goods, general merchandise, apparel, is a very rough estimate, the actual number furniture, and home furnishings. A will vary with such consideration as income regional center typically has 400,000 levels and competing retail outlets. Within square feet of gross leasable area (GLA). suburban metropolitan areas, a regional Gross leasable area is the total floor center would ordinarily be no closer than area designed for tenants' occupancy and 5-10 miles from the nearest competing center, exclusive use: all the area on which ten- ants pay rent. GLA is generally 70 to 90% Development Potential Factors 4L* 40 1@1 --_ of the total building area of a regional 11@ + _\ @ center. Regional centers may range in e Undeveloped Land size from a GLA of 300,000 square feet to 9 Access to Arterial Road more than 1,000,000. Regional centers of o Access to Electric Power Distribution Line more than 750,000 square feet of GLA, o Proximity to Major Highway Intersection S including three or more department stores, o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center It are classified as super-regional centers. o Slope These differ from regional centers only o Soil Drainage "'0", in scale and strength of customer drawing o Soil Load Bearing Capacity . -<;@@ a power. In a regional or super-regional e Access to Public Sewerage f4 center, each department store would Aic IL. 1, A usually have a GLA of at e Access to Public Water Supply least 100,000 6 Visibility from Road square feet. e Population Density l1ran Land ln@@titute. 1977. Shopping Center Development Handbook. Washington, D.C. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /37 BASELINE UUNIT COST: $ 8,000,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 350,000 square feet, 25 acres (includes parking) Regional - Shopping enters Total Factor Factor Level Co t C Total Factor Factor Level Data S ast/Unit of Data Cos t Cost/unit of Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence Factor Categories + or + or - Confidence UndeveiopeO Land Access 0 Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Water buPply 1/2 - 1 1/2 -115,000 -115,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 -230,000 -230,000 1C 3+ miles -345,oOO -345,000 Access to Arterial 0 - 1/2 0 0 Visibility from Visible 131 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 200,000 -200,000 High Road Not Visible X X High 1 1/2 - 3 - 4oo,ooo -4oo,ooo F-C 3+ miles - 600,000 -600,000 FV_ 0 - 200 131 X A cess to Electric 0 - 1/2 [101 0 0 Population Density 200 PC - 500 A ower Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 16o,ooo -160,000 Low 500 - 1,000 X X High Line 1 1/2 - 3 - 320,000 -320,000 1,000 - 2,500 X X 3+ miles - 48o,ooo -48o,ooo 2,500 - 5,000 0 0 - - __T_ - . - I _V 5,000+ t)er unit 1+ 7SO n00 0 1 131 + 750,000 +750,000 Baseline specification Proximity to 1 2 0 0 Major Highwa@ 2 3 X X Medium Intersections 3 5 X X V 5+ miles X X Proximity to 0 15 + 750,000 +750,000 15 - 30 + 500,000 +500,000 Metropolitan - 45 + 300,000 +300,000 Medium Service Center - 60 + 100,000 +100,000 110 45 60+ miles 0 0 Slope 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 - 150,000 -150,000 Medium 8 - 15 - 550,000 -550,000 F-y 15+ % - 925,000 -925,000 NOTE: Regional Shopping Center sites range from 15 to 50 acres. In some in- Soil Drainage High 0 0 stances they may be even larger. The gross leasable area (GLA) can range Medium - 375,000 -375,000 Low from 150,000 to 500,000 square feet or more. When planning for shopping Low - 750,000 -750,000 centers it should be recalled that every 1,000 square feet of building area requires approximately 5 parking spaces (the index is rough I foeqtu oiva Ilen! t1dtiong an area ratio of 2.2 square feet of parking area per square F-v area) and that the enclosed common area is typically 10 to 30 percent of the soil Load Bearing High 0 0 total enclosed area in most shopping centers. The figures given here assume - 400,000 -400,000 Low bu)lding costs of $17,050,000 and $950,000 for parking and adjacent areas. Capacity Medium The Access'to Public Water Supply figures are based on the use of an 8 inch Low - 875,000 -875,000 steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Public Sewerage figures are based on the use of a 15 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a F-y depth 0f 4 feet. Deficiency costs for Access to Collector Road assume a level Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 3 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). Sewerage 1/2 - 11/2 - 185,000 -185,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 - 370,000 -370,000 3+ miles - 555,000 -555,000 C = costs are constant per development *1 Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 38/Coastal Development Potential Study Neighborhood Shopping Centers I L :F A neighborhood shopping center is a group of stores distinguished by unified development and management, with integrated provision for customer parking. Neighbor- ho d centers are distinguished from region- alocenters by the nature of the major ten- ant in the center. Neighborhood shopping tenants. cent s er have supermarkets as their major Neighborhood centers, also sometimes the ca@led convenience centers, provide for sa e convenience goods (food, drugs, and It -------------- - sundroies) and personal services which meet the need 5 of an immediate neighborhood trade area- Other tenants might include a drug store, laundry, sandwich shop, and similar retail establishments. A neighbor- hood shopping center might range in size from 30,000 to 100,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA). A typical GLA would be 60,000 square feet. The trade area of a neighborhood center might extend about 1.5 miles, or a driving time of 6 minutes. The population required to support such a center might range from 2,500 up to 40,000 people. Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land * Access to Collector Road * Access to Electric Power Distribution Line _MML.. * Slope Drainage is * Soil * Soil Load Bearing Capacity Access to Public Sewerage IZ_ Access to Public Water Supply 0 Population Density -em J Use Descriptions and Cost Date /39 BASEUNE UNIT COST: $1,750,000 DEVELOMENT SIZF: 55,000 square feet, 5 acres (includes parking) Neighborhood Shopping Centers Total Factor Factor Level Co t C Data s ost/Un it of Factor Categories t or + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -150,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -300,000 3+ miles -450,000 -450,000 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 P?wer Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 -48,ooo -48,ooo Low Line 1 )/2 - 3 -96,000 -96,ooo F- 3+ miles -144,ooo -j4li,ooo C - -- i i Slope 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 -30,000 -30 000 Medium 8 - 15 -110,000 -110.000 15+ % -185.000 -185,000 F Soil Drainage High 0 0 Medium -75,000 -75,000 Low Low -150,000 -150,000 F Soil Load Bearing High D] 0 0 Capacity Medium -36,000 -36,ooo Low Low -72,000 -72,000 Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Sewerage 1/2 - 11/2 -100,000 -100,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 -200,000 3+ miles -300,000 -300.00G C NOTE: f Neighborhood Shopping Centers range in size from 3 to 15 acres. As with Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 P Regional '%hopping Centers, every 1,000 square feet of building area requires Water Supply 1/2 - 1 112 -100,000 100,000 Medium approximately 5 parking spaces. The amount of common area tends to be less 1 1/2 - 3 200,000 200,000 in neighborhood shopping centeis than in regional shopping centers. The fig- 3+ miles 300,000 300,000 ure5 given here assume building costs of $1,650,000 and $100,000 for parking C and adjacent areas. The Access to Public Sewerage figures are based on the Population Density 131 use of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed 4 feet deep. The Access to Less than 1,000 square Public Water figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at miles X X High a depth of 4 feet. Deficiency costs for Access to Collector Road assume a 1,000 square miles or Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). FVJ1 greater 0 0 C = costs are constant per development Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 40/Coastal Development Potential Study Hotels and Motels Proper site location is critical to o Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage hotel or motel success. Access is important o Character of Surrounding Area for all types of hotels and motels; it is o Visual Amenities critically important for motels and commer- cial hotel@- Where the later intend to cap- ture business traveler trade they must be immediately accessible to on/off ramps of a major artery, and the road must be one used Hotels and motels provide lodging for by the commercial traveler. Alternatively, I ep people away from home. Services beyond or as an adjunct to highway location, a hotel simple lodging are usually offered and, or motel is best located in an area which indeed, are often vital to the success of gener@tes a high number of transients. Large the enterprise. commercial centers and areas with a number of corporate headquarters, for example, are two For discussion, hotels and motels can such areas which generate a demand for hotel 7 __Q be divided into three broad categories: and motel facilities. It is noteworthy that % 4 motels, commercial hotels, and resort business travelers and conventioneers account q hotels. These distinctions are not exclu- for 50% and 20%, respectively, of all room .1, 0 occupancy. Location is critical for these sive; an establishment can exhibit charac- 0 0 teristics of any or all of the categories. commercially oriented establishments. Motels (deriving their name from motor Another important consideration is the and hotel) offer lodging and parking, with availability of utilities, especially water rooms usually accessible from an outdoor and sewerage. parking area. Their primary market is the road traveler needing temporary lodging. Fluctuations in occupancy are of concern Limited amenities, such as a swimming pool to hotels and motels. Establishments with a and a restaurant, are typically part of the high percentage of business trade often establishment or are close by. experience slack weekends. Resorts which are seasonal -- as would likely occur in coastal Commercial hotels offer lodging and, areas in temperate regions -- are booked usually, meals, entertainment, and various solid in season and are nearly unoccupied in off- personal services. Room access is through season periods. A successful hotel or motel a central lobby and internal hallways. must maintain about a 60% annual occupancy Meeting rooms, ballrooms, restaurant, rate to break even. swimming pools, health clubs, and game decks and courts are also provided in many Development Potential Factors commercial hotels. Commercial and other travellers are the principal guests of 9 Undeveloped Land these hotels, but meetings, conventions, * Access to Collector Road and private functions are an important part * Access to Electric Power Distribution of their business. Line o Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center Resort hotels are similar to commercial o Proximity to Regional Service Center hotels with the added factor of a special o Proximity to Resort Community amenity or activity which attracts customers. 0 Slope Resort hotels cater to different clientele. o Soil Drainage -OMNI! For example, some are family oriented, while o Soil Load Bearing Capacity others may draw young marrieds. Some will o Deep Foundation Suitability specialized in ''pampering" guests, others o Access to Public Sewerage stress activities, events or special attrac- o Access to Public Water Supply tions provided by the hotel or available o Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage nearby. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /41 BASELINE UNIT COST: $600,000 $2,100,000 DMLORMENT SIZE: 50 units, I acre Hotels and Motels Total Factor Factor Level D;ta Cost Cost/Unlt of Total Factor Factor Level Factor Cate ories + Data Cost Cost/Unit of or + or Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence ($) ($) Undeveloped Land Deep Foundation High 0 0 Suitabi lity Medium - 12,ODO - 24o Low Low - 30,000 - 6oo IT Access to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to * 0 - )/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 150,000 -3,000 High Public Sewerage 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 185,000 -3,700 1 1/2 - 3 - 300,000 -6,ooo 1 1/2 - 3 - 370,000 -7,4oo Medium Fc 3+ miles - 450,000 -9,000 FC 3+ miles - 555,000 -11,100 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to 0 - 1/2 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - I Public Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 115,000 02 1/2 - 135,000 -2 700 Medium - 300 Line 1 1/2 - 3 - 270,000 -5:4oo 1 1/2 - 3 - 230,000 -4,6oo Medium C 3+ miles - 450,000 -8,ioo F-c 3+ miles - 345,000 -6,9oo Proximity to 0 - 15 + 8o,ooo +80,000 Proximity to Ocean Adjacent + 1,500,000 +30,000 Metropolitan Service 15 - 30 + 60,000 +6o,ooo Beach Frontage 0 - 1/2 + 650,000 +13,000 Center 30 - 45 + 30,000 +30,000 Medium 1/2 - 5 + 40,000 + 8oo High 45 - 60 + 10,000 +10,000 5 - 15 + 5,000 + ]Do IT 60+ miles 0 0 Fv 15+ miles 0 0 Proximity to 0 - 2 + 50,000 +50,000 Proximity to River Adjacent + 500 000 + 10,000 Regional Service 2 - 7 + 30,000 +30,000 Medium or Bay Shore 0 - 1/2 + 175:000 + 3,500 Medium Center 7 - 15 + 10,000 +10,000 Frontage 1/2 - I iles + 5,000 + ]Do Fy- 15+ m 0 0 F-v * 1+ mile 0 0 Pro-ximity to 0 - I + 75,000 +75,000 Character of Compatible Land Use + 7,500 + 150 Medium Resort Community I - 3 + 50,000 +50 000 Medium Surrounding Area * Other 0 0 3 - 5 + 25,000 +25:000 5+ miles 0 0 V V Slope * 0 - 3 0 0 Visual Amenities Vegetation + 7,500 + 150 3 - 8 - 9,500 - '90 Townscapes 8 - 15 - 16,000 - 320 Medium + 7,500 + 150 Medium Fy- 15+ % - 54,ooo -I,oft Fv-' Other 0 0 Sol] Drainage * High [11 0 a I* IBaseline Specification Medium - 9,000 18o Low NOTE: Low - 20,000 00 Due to the wide variety of hotel and motel size and style, there is a corresponding variation in the price range. Generally motels are less expensive than hotels. The figures given here are for a hotel with an area of 30,000 square feet. The Access to r -V Public Sewerage figures are based on the use of a 15 inch vitrified clay pipe installed Soil Load Bearing High [1] 0 0 at a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Public Water Supply figures are based on the use of 8 inch steel pipe installed 4 feet deep. Deficiency costs for Access to Arterial Capacity Medium - 15,000 -300 Low Road are based on the use of a Level 2 road (see Element Cost Sheet). When planning for Low - 35,000 -700 Commercial Hotels the Proximity to Resort Community factor should be dropped and when planning for Resort Hotels the Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center factor should be dropped. C = costs are constant per development Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 42/Coastal Development Potential Study Development Potential Factors Warehousing * Undeveloped Land 9 Access to Arterial Road 9 Proximity to Major Highway Intersection o Access to Railroad e Access to Electric Power Distribution Line 0 Proximity to Ports Warehouses are storage facilities for o Proximity to Airports various kinds of goods, either finished o Slope products on their way to market, or com- o Soil Drainage ponents awaiting further stages of o Access to Public Sewerage manufacture. Modern warehouses are typi- o Access to Public Water Supply cally one-story buildings, although high- lifts allow ceiling heights up reach fork to 30 feet or higher. Warehousing and distribution centers are characterized by MAO.- W low ratios of employment to building coverage. They also do not typically generate nuisances such as noise, odors, and smoke. The principal impact of warehousing will normally be the generation of a relatively high volume of truck traffic. 0-p F-y I w-warehousing Large-volume producers of industrial P-Processing or consumer goods may operate their own CE-Centr3l Energy Plant warehouses for the storage of inventory. o-office BuIlding Other warehouses are operated on a con- tract basis. This latter type is more commonly found at the breakpoints between -.A "wom -ke, different modes of transportation; that is, goods off-loaded from a ship will Z likely have to be stored for some period Yt of time before being shipped by another JL@ mode, such as rail or truck. Z Whether a warehouse is operated by a FF manufacturer or on a contract basis, it is of paramount importance that it be sited conveniently to transportation. A location near two or more m6des of trans- portation is preferable to a location near only one mode. Sites should be level or nearly so. 7, nor . ...... Use Descriptions and Cost Data /43 BASELINE UNIT COST: $1,500,000 - $2,500,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: .40,000 square feet, 3 acres Warehousin Total Factor Factor Level Factor Data Cost of Tota Factor Level Cost/Unit Data C, t Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + Qr - Confidence Factor Categories 4- OS + or - or - Confidence ($) ($) ($) W Undeveloped Land Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Sewerage 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100,000 -100,000 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 -200,000 Medium F 3+ miles - 300,000 -300,000 Access to Arterial 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -150,000 High Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100,000 -100,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -300,boo 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 -200,000 F- 3+ miles -450,000 -450,000 3+ miles - 300,000 -300,000 C FC Proximity Major 0 - I +7,000 +7,000 Baseline Specification to Highway Intersection I - 2 +5,000 +5,000 2 - 3 +3,000 +3,000 Medium 3 5 0 0 E_y 5+ miles X X Access to Railroad 0 1 0 0 1 3 -6oo,ooo -6oo,ooo 3 5 -1,200,000 -1,200,000 Medium F-c 5+ miles -1,500,000 -1,500,000 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 -135,000 -135,000 Medium Line 1 1/2 - 3 270,000 -270,000 F-c 3+ miles 405,000 -405,000 Proximity to Ports 0 - I +4o,ooo +4o,ooo I - 5 +30,000 +30,000 5 - 10 +6,ooo +6,ooo Low 10 15 +2,000 +2,000 F_v* 15+ miles 0 0 Proximity to Airports 0 - I +20,000 +20,000 I - 5 +15,000 +15,000 5 - 10 +3,000 +3,000 Low 15 +1,000 +1,000 Fy_ * 105+ miles 0 0 NOTE: These figures are based on a one story slabon grade warehouse with a capacity of 1,200,000 cubic feet. The higher figure presented in the Slope * 0 - 3 0 0 baseline unit cost refers to cold storage warehouses. The access to trans- 3 - 8 -29,000 -29,000 Medium portation fig uresg iven here assume dependence on mixed transportation modes. 8 - 15 -48,ooo -48,ooo If a warehouse operation is heavily dependent on one or two modes, higher FV- 15+ % -162tOOO -162,000 prices would be paid for those factors. Deficiency costs for Access to I I Arterial Road are based on the use of a Level 3 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). The Access to Public Water Supply figures are based on the use Soil Drainage High (11 0 0 f a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet and Public Sewerage Medium -30,000 -30,000 Ac cess is based on the use of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed 4 feet Low -70,000 -70,000 deep. FV_. I C = costs are constant per development I " Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 44/Coastal Development Potential Study Will Jft MOP- A 41 Industrial 5) McKenzie,.S.K. Hess and R. Kull. )977. The existing data base only contains Land and Water Use Classification for data on electric power line distribution use in the New Jersey Coastal Zone Plan- showing level of service by transmission ning Method. Office of Coastal Zone lines. This data is explained in Factor Management, NJDEP, information Sheet A, in Chapter 3. The c st data for 230 kv and 500 kv trans- 6) New Jersey Coastal Area Facility Review moission lines are found in Table 3. Act. (CAFRA). Chapter 185, Laws of 1973. N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 et seq. 0 Employment Characteristics A variety of industries and a wide range of possible sizes for an industrial facility A list of 132 industrial uses was devel- a. Professional can occur. Therefore, it is necessary to oped from references 2, 3, 5 and 6 above, initially determine a reasonable range of and was further extended using the language If this characteristic is checked, industries which might be developed in New in CAFRA. These uses and their development the industry requires a heavy con- Jersey's coastal zone. The list of industries potential factors are shown in the following centrBition of scientists, engineers, examined is based on available data about table. Standard Industrial Classifications designers, technicians, etc, industries presently in the coastal zone, (SIC) are used. The list is not exhaustive; and on studies of industrial uses in other rather, it provides, a representative list b. Percent Female coastal zones. Industries regulated under of potential industrial user,s in the coastal the New Jersey Coastal Area Facility Review zone. This item is self-explanatory and Act (CAFRA) are also included. may be useful in industries when high Most industries require flat land. unemployment or underemployment exists The basis for locational decisions can Other industrial requirements vary substan- for one of the sexes. vary significantly from one industry to the tially by industry or from one facility to next and even within the same industry. the next. Factors shown tn the following c. Total Employment Also, some firms follow a systematic approach table for different industries are compiled to locating facilities while others are mainly from references I and 2. Reference 2 d. Unemployment strongly influenced by such factors as where was relied on heavily, No interpretation the president of the company lives or wants is made as to the relative importance of Factor Information Sheet S9 can be to live. We deal here only with objective factors for any given industry, used for this factor. development factors. The data used were compiled for the most 0 Transpo,@ta' Six references used to develop the list part between 1970 and 1974, Many were of industries and development potential fac- collected by mailed survey, and in some The percent distributions of each tors are: cases industrial uses were represented by a industry's total shipments by the single respondent. four major modes of transportation 1) U.S. Department of Commerce. 1973. in 1967 -- air, water, rail and Industrial Locational Determinants. Definitions of the development potential trucks are presented. Washington, D.C. factors are as follo .ws: In determining the better locations 2) Delaware State Planning Office. 1974. DEYELOPMENT PHEUTIAL FACTORS for each class of industry, consid- Local Impacts and Requirements of Manu- eration should be given to the type(s) facturing Industries. Dover, Delaware. 0 Energy Requirements of transpor@tation most commonly used, Where one mode is preferred or is 3) Industrial Location Service, EDA. 1978. Average annual consumption of the four required the development potential Vineland, Bridgeton and Millville, New primary sources of energy were calcu- factor for that mode should be listed, Jersey. lated on a per employee basis. In Factor information sheets 2, 3, 6, 19, addition to matching industry energy 20,in Chapter 3, can be used for this 4) New Jersey Bureau of Operation Statis- demands with local area capacities, this factor. Cost data on each mode is tics and Reports, Division of Planning information may also be useful in antici- contained in Table 3. & Research. 1979. Computer search for pating'future industrial impacts result- industries located in the coastal zone ing from shortfalls of particular forms having over 250 employees. of energy. 46/Goastal Development Potential Study � Population Density distance from the plant, When ADDITIONAL DATA transportation costs are high rela- This characteristic shows the pref- tive to other factors of production, 0 Income erence of the percentage of the an industry may tend to locate in firms surveyed for communities of close proximity to its product mar- a. Average Income Per Employee, 1967 different sizes. The industries ket. This would'be reflected by a surveyed are located across the high percentage of total shipments This category shows the average wage country, in the under 50 mile or under 200 or salary per employee for each in- mile columns. Presumably, areas dustry in 1967. Although in 1967 Factor Information Sheet 8, 9, 10 without the appropriate markets dollars, this figure can be used in and 58 can be applied when using could not expect industries with a conjunction with recent cost of liv- this factor. Costs associ 'ated with high proportion of local shipments ing adjustment to generate an esti- these factors are operational ex- to locate there. mate of new income an area might penses rather than s.iting expenses, accrue directly from a specific in- Markets is an operational cost rather dustry. � Foundations than siting costs. The buildings required for each 0 Support POLLUTION DATA industrial facility require differ- ent types of foundations depending Agglomeration and Support Industry As explained in Chapter 1, pollution on the building size and the equip- Requirements and environmental data are not a focus of ment and machinery required for this study, some information concerning operation. A black dot shows the a. Forward Linkage pollution has been included as reference types of foundations required for material. each facility, If this characteristic is checked, it means the industry tends to locate As shown below, each industry was Factor Information Sheets 26, 27 near the consumer of its product, assigned a value between 0 and 5 according and 28 can be applied for these to its pollution potential. factors. b, Backward Linkage 4 - very high pollution potential � Undeveloped Land This indicates the industry tends to 3 -.high pollution potential locate near its raw products or 2 - above average pollution potential This number represents the acreage materials suppliers. I - average pollution potential requirement of plants. (See 0 - below average pollution potential Factor Information Sheet IJ c, Concentration Dependence These w6ights were developed for the � Water Use This is an indication that the indus- Delaware State Planning Office by the try tends to locate near other indus- Battelle Laboratories (2). A description This data represents the total tries of the same type for purposes of each of the air and water pollution freshwater requirements from both of cost sharing of facilities or categories follows; public and/or private water systems. services. (See Factor Information Sheets 32, (1) Biochemical Oxygen Demand 34 and 35.) d. Urban Orientation Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is a surro- � Sewage Disposal This ind,icates a firm achieves cost gate indicator of the effect of a combina- savings by locating near markets or tion of substances and conditions on water Both the public sewer effluent and other industries of similar types. quality, Specifically, BOD is a measure of solid waste average are shown. the amount of dissolved oxygen that will be Support deals with operational cost depleted from water during the natural 0 Markets rather than siting costs. biological assimilation of organi,c pollu- tants . This category indicates the aver- age distribution of shipments by Use Descriptions and Cost Data /47 (2) Dissolved Solids temperature combustion; it then oxidizes to n;trogen dioxi.de, which leads to the smog The concentration of total dissolved solids formarion. is the aggregate of carbonates, btcarbonates, chlorides, sulfates, phosphates, and ni- (8) Hydrocarbons trates of calcium, magnesium, sodium, potas- sium and other substances. The nature and Hydrocarbons in air result from the incom- magnitude of changes in water quality de- plete combuston of petroleum products and pends, to a large extent, upon the total contribute to smog formation. concentration of the above salts, commonly referred to as total dissolved solids. (9) Particulates (3) Suspended Solids Suspended particulate matter, often referred to as particulates, is the most prevalent Suspended solids from various.types of waste atmospheric pollutant and detrasts from the discharge cause turbidity. Turbidity is usual quality of air. measured by the extent to which light pass- ing through water is scattered by suspended (10) Sulfur Oxides materials. Turbidity is undesirable for a number of reasons. For example, it Sulfur dioxide is generally the only sulfur decreases photosynthesis by interfering oxide considered. At very high concentra- with the penetration of light. tions, it is detectable by taste or smell. It is readily oxidized into sulfur trioxide (4) Oil and Grease which, when in contact with water, becomes sulfuric acid, a very corrosive chemical. The discharge of oil and grease into surface waters can create serious environmental problems by forming barriers to 6xygen enter- ing the water, thereby cutting oxygen sup- plies of fish.and wildlife. (5) Inorganic Nitrogen Nitrogen is one of the basic elemental nu- trients needed to sustain aquatic life. Trace quantities are essential to support aquatic ecosystems. However, excessive quantities of nitrogen promote overenrich- ment and are undesirable. (6) Phosphorus Phosphorus is similar to nitrogen in that small quantities in water are necessary but large quantities are detrimental to aquatic life. (7) Nitrogen Oxides Oxides of nitrogen, together with hydrocar- bons, participate in photochemical reactions leading to the formation of photochemical smog. Nitric oxide forms during high- 48/Coastal Development Potential Study Development Potential Factors STANI)ARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICIATION ENERGY REQUIREtIENTS EIMPLOYMENT TRANSPORTATION POPULATION DENSITY C @11 ModaZ SpZit PopuZation by Jurisdiction > a% 0 M E '0 E 0@ 01 Ili (7@ C@ 0 C) a, M '06 0@ C, M 0 0 0 E '@j E co >1 10 0 0 0 c 0 0 C, 7E C) 0 M E a") U Q 0 C@ .2 0 LL 0 uj Q@ 20 FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS 30.4 69.6 2011 Meat and packing plants 218 144 7.9 13 14 2013 Sausages and other prepared meats O'il 89 6.6 58 58 2.3 52.3 44.6 20 5 Poultry dressing plants 1* 0.03 58 6.1 78 5 0. 0.1 8.6 91.1 2021 Creamery butter 37 539 26.3 865 117 [email protected] and processed 263 2022 Cheese, natural 077 18.1 396 17 68 32 2023 Condensed and evaporated milk 8.23 512 38:3 1025 117 2024 ice cream and frozen desserts 0.02 40 8.2 80 124 1 .2 99.8 2026 Fluid milk o.48 98 7.5 )25 ;14 i 2031 Canned and cured seafood 0,27 105 24.0 175 158 i.o 88.2 lo.4 2032 Canned specialties 0.14 204 31.1 266 35 0.1 61.3 37.8 2033 Canned fruits and vegetables 0.56 1151 14.4 306 35 3.5 76.4 19.8 2034 Dehydrated food products o.44 225 9.1 604 42 2.3 65.2 32.5 2035 Pickles, sauces and salad dressing 1.17 99 5.4 142 42 3.1 32.6 63.9 2036 Fresh and frozen packaged fish 0.87 36 9.9 14 58 0.2 0.2 1.6197-91 2037 Frozen fruits and vegetables 102 13.1 214 49 0.5 58.4 4o.7 114 0.3 95.4 4.2 204 Flour and other grain mill prodijct@ I Prepared feed for animals and fowl, 1.07 12.7 503 115 1 48.5 202 249 561 Distilled liquor,e brandy 97 2.8 20 14 0.6 2.2 8 .2 10.7 2085 xcept 1 3.2 19.4 77.0 Bottled and canned soft drinks .52 60 4.1 78 10 2886 2099 Food preperation necessities 96 118 9.8 200 134 0.7 61.4 37.7 22 TEXTILE AND MILL PRODUCTS 221@ W aving mil Is, cotton 262 65 3.8 87 42 0.1 0.1 17.6 81. 222 Weaving mills, synthetics 1.92 66 6.8 89 39 0.2 0.1 4.8 93.9 88.9 2231 Wea.v.ing and finishing mil is, wool 101.27 24 29.7 92 37 0.5 2256 Knit fabric mills .25 @12 21.6 117 65 2259 Knitting mills, nec 165 2261 Finishing plants, cotton 13-17 350 52.3 404 28 @ -7 2_8 4 9 2262 Finishing Plant, synthetic 6.76 .9 426 i28 35o 47 1 2272 Tufted carpets and rugs 1.47 188 29.7 296 136 13.3 14. 73-E 2291 Felt goods, nec 0.03 179 44.7 154 29 2294 Processed texti le waste @1 I 1 29 156 12 13 2295 Coated fabrics, not rubberized 3. 28 29 2. 2296 Tire cord and fabric 0.61 72 0 7 1 6 29 2298 Cordage and twine o.4o 44 8.3 44 2 q Use Descriptions and Cost Date /49 Additional Data FOUNDATIONS UNDEVELOPED LAND WATER USE SEWAGE DISPOSALI MARKETS SUPPORT INCOME WATER POLLUTION AIR POLLUTION Industrial Acres for Plant 10 Percent Ns- External Linkages 111), tribution by C U shipment CL C 0 0 :31 U E a 0 13 Q 0 0 z x 0 6 0 0 Z CD 0 CD, C@ C 0 0 UQ 0 M a C, 0 0 Q ;3 Q) w lu Do, 0 0 a -0 C C C 0 M C & 199 6,730 4206 1,712 9 33 52 x x 7380 1 0 1 4 0 1 0 1 41 4,149 3333 7,612 11 47 69 x x 696o 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 203 6,501 3679 112,501 1 8 40 70 x x 3720 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 U 0 0 24 22,758 9310 4,320 6 55 93 5220 1 27 8,636 3863 2,873 14 67 88 518o 1 3 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 188 25,000 7222 6 422 13 58 8 6320 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 7,272 4772 29:394 24 94 wo x 6360 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ') 0 0 0 1077 5,592 4019 5,681 14 67 88 x 6420 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 183 5,853 487 14 23 33 4370 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 380 8,522 4729 -4 39 79 5780 00 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 518 7,779 3o45 21,667 61 25 48 4730 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 369 8,679 2264 6 30 44 5230 1 0 1 0 0 0 110 4,923 3230 )0 40 78 5o8o 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16o 4,418 697 7 21 45 3610 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,5 42 15,173 3146 4 2o 41 4580 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I 1 0 0 0 0 ig4o 8,378 1621 303 5 31 69, 6970 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 527 9,636 527 24 73 91 6110 0 0 () 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 3773 13 043 3043 4 29 49 696o I o 4 o o a ') 0 1 C. 39 169 3 024 1774 4,95o 47 86 95 5890 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4o 0 243 12,266 3660 10 49 73 5740 34 43,083 2,503 448 7 37 59 4630 930 242 2,090 242 735 7 33 60 4870 1 0 11 0 '0 9 01 0 01 0 399 82 6,583 1500 485 24 81 89 5170 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 23 4,380 544o 74 17 4230 49 3,789 10,601 3120 3,734 5410 0 11 0 0 0 01 0 01 0 0 1 177 369 14,230 2538 4 6200 121 0 72 4,568 2690 125 6 5210 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 IH 3,846 1538 8 25 59 584o 136 31 8 25 59 x x 46oo 34- 19 42 97 5,125 1875 29 541 XI X 1930 4 499 799 389 25 59 X x 820 84 59 30,000 10000-- i088 25 59 4750 6@j 50/Coastal Development Potential Study Development Potential Factors STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION ENERGY REQUIREMENTS EMPLOYMENT TRANSPORTATION POPULATION DENSITY Z, ModaZ SpZit PopuZation by Jurisdiction > n 0@ a, 0 a@ M M E 0 E a) M 0@ O@ 13i 0 a, c@ 0 M 0.1.@ 0 0@ C@ @D M 0@ C) = c - , a - Lu 0 E 0 U Lu a) 0 0 C, 0 0 C, E Q I c@ (Z; c@ C, 13 Z 0 U, Ci LL I @Q :3 21 _Z! 0 c C@ Lu @Z El 21 23 APPAREL AND OTHER TEXTILE PRODUCTS 2329 Men's and boys' clothing, nec. 0.01 10 0.5 12 84 2335 Women,s and misses' dresses 0.02 1 0.5 3 87 2342 Corsets and allied garmets o.o4 6 o.4 3 84 24 LUMBER AND WOOD PRODUCTS 2411 Logging camps and contractors o.o4 108 12.0 134 4 2421 Sawmills and planing mills, general o.o8 ji5 14.8 113 6 - 17@[email protected] 11.8 2431 Millwork 0.32 30 2.1 4o 16 - 0.1 87.5 12:@ 2432 Veener and plywood o.43 118 6.51 262 12 1 - 0.2 96.0 3.7 40 20 21 0 0 10 11 0 2491 Wood preserving o.82 230 19.7 487 24 6.9 6.9 62.1 31.C 25 FURNITURE AND FIXTURES 1 2521 Wood office furniture 39 1.3 50 1.9 0.7 48. 49. 2522 Metal office furniture 33 6.8 237 1.6 40 20 0 120 0 20 0 2531 Public building furniture 47 2.3 83 3.9 0.5 0.1 66 _7 32. 2542 Metal partitions and fixtures - 26 PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS 2.9 115 5.7 0.1 0.3 12.6 86. 2611 Pulp mills 10-83 1641 @35.4 249? 10 262.1 Paper mills except building paper 43.02 1169 203.8 1479 10 47 26 7 13 7 0 0 2631 Paperboard mills 47.63 1951 399.9 2672 7 2641 Paper coating and glazing 1.36 154 14.8 182 34 0 30 0 14 14 14 14 2643 Bags, except textile bags 0.27 44 2.4 5 33 9 4 12 12 23 12 28 1 2645 Die cut paper and board - 69 6.7 92 34- 25 25 25 0 0 0 25 2646 Presses and molded pulp goods 3.09 364 44.4 742 34 2647 Sanitary paper products 0.55 Io8 32.9 142 34 17 17 32 17 0 0 0 2649 Converted paper products 0.19 41 16.71 67 34 2651 Folding paper board boxes 0.29 45 4.5 53 41 2652 Set-up paper board boxes 0.33 20 3.7 15 41 26661 Building paper and board mills ig.98 951 101.7 1869 10 - 9.1 71 1 18.( 31 21 9 6 6 9 15 27 PRINTING AND PUBLISHING 2732 Book printing - 5 - - - 13 23 13 123 7 7 7 2752 Commercial printing lithograph .02 34 2.3 74 208 - - - 14 11 14114 10 14 23 2761 Manifold business forms - 38 2791 Typesetting 10 0-1 10 38 .6 0 12 0 6 16 58 L Use Descriptions and Cost Datia /51 Additional Data FOUNDATIONS UNDEVELOPED LAND WATER USE SEWAGE DISPOSAL KARKETS SUPPORT INCLME WATER POLLUTION AIR POLLUTION Industrial w Acres for PLant Percent Dis- External Linkages tribution by 4) shipment C U 0 E C 0 X: C C C z C x C 0 Q) 0 01 , x z CM CD 0 CD 0 0 3: 0 z .2 3z 0 0 C M w C M U M 0 (D M M 0 0 0 0 -0 0 $2" C C 0 -C C >. -9, 0 -0 C 71 - r 4000 82 10 10 29 51 4240 42 237 @x 4250 150 9 0- - - 48oo 2 0 2 4 398 92271 10 35 55 49oo 2 0 2 00 00 00 00 00 11 18 217 27540 5 25 46 1978 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 20 1064 11543 402 19430 151 18 311 1 1 5770 11 01 2 0 0 0 01 0 11 11 141 147 5600 32900 27 72 87 5070 2 0 1 0 o 0 0 0 1 11 44 528 775 431 470702 9 26 63 x 2072 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 238 819 4og 4417 x x 2033 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 149 17332 5 29 45 2074 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 47 19681 6 18 53 2065 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 1160 257714 285 013 23 41 8320 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 336 2291 89222 2922 34626 6 27 62 8010 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 690 1241 122043 3699 33960 6 25 54 7960 1 o I o o o o 0 1 0 453 644 6434 1913 31097 8 31 62 x x x 7030 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 372 9523 158 19403 7 26 52 x x x 6010 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 128 19403 17 49 70 6310 1 0 2 0 0 01 0 .0 0 0 51 351 12162 351 6486 8 23 54 x x x 6690 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 8890 238 6 28 62 7010 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 242 535 432 1081 54o 5 30 65 x x x 564o 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 1 1 x x x 713 9259 1481 22842 30 74 90 x x 6540 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 104 'S 94 99221 28 69 88 x x 4760 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 1 50 456 39569 3871 15556 7 22 45' x 7050 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 272 I x I - I - - - 53 2227 - - - x x x - 6 32 1306 - - - x x x 6770 22 305 - - - x x x 546o 13 x 17 x x x 1 8170 52/Coastal Development Potential Study Development Potential Factors STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION ENERGY REQUIRFMENTS EIVIPLOYMENT TRANSPORtATION POPULATION DENSITY ModaZ SoZit PopuZation by Jurisdiction > M 0 E E M cl M M oI >.- 0 M C@ 0 O.Z) U 0 a, M o@ a, o 0 Cn 0 Z, .2 E "d LU E to 0 0 0 Q@ E Z =- - 1@ E 13 0 - G) '2 CD L@ 0 C LU ;2 M 5 El 28 CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS 2812 Alkalies and chlorine 222.58 2985 50.9 3299 X* 8 18.7 72.1 9 0 2813 Industrial gases 9.8o 1385 1116 3956 X* I 1 0:1 0.1 80.0 19:6 2815 Cyclic intermediates and crudes 16-57 1233 158.31 1313 X-': 11 O.2PO.5 32.0 57.2 34 8 @25 125 0 0 8 2816 Inorganic pigments 25-52 1107 153.3 1588 X* 11 - 1.7 69,2 28.6 i 2818 Industrial organic chemicals,nec 50.27 2658 43.5 5849 X-h @3 - 27.2 58.6 14.1 18 25 8 iz@. 0 0 0 281g Industrial inorganic chemicals 17.59 1752 51.6 1467 1 - 8.9 8o.6 10.4 55 18 o 1 9 o 9 o 2821 Plastic material and resi,ns 19-39 537 66.8 714 9 130,0 33 0 0 ;56 0 11 0 _T_ 2822 Synthetic rubber 19-53 1418 14.4 4016 1 Iq* - 2623 Cellulosic man-made fibers 120.81 1163 15.0 574 27n - 2831, Pharmaceutical preparations 1.66 81 14.0 121 4o - - - - 27 0 9 1 9 37 9 9 2841 Soap and other detergents 5.81 259 21.2 465 X" - 40:7 52.5 22 1 6.71 1 1 i I i 2844 Toilet preparations .26 39 4.6 26 X* 54.'. 0.6 2.3 32.4 60.7 13 20 7 .113 7 20 @20 2851 Paints and allied products 16 76 4.6 91 x*1 16- 0.1 4.3 19.7 75.4 2871 Fertilizers 2.40 1013 21.8 2968 x*1 8 - 16.2 65.3 18.3 1 - - - 0 40 ;10 10 0 10 2879 Agricultural chemicals 96 x"-1 If- 0.3 63-5135.8 30 5.85 294 11.1 5 2891 Adhesives and gelatins 0.31 210 89.6 - 18* 2@O 2:1, 17 75 1 2 36:2 2892 Explosives 48.4 4oo 75.7 6@9 18 1 61:2 2893 Printing ink - 134 18.5 1 0 8@% 0.1 12.2 2.1 84.1 2895 Carbon black - 1813 5844 18* 1 I 2899 Chemical preparations io.80 370 17.7 456 18* 0.1 M 61.0 35.0 10 30 10 _@5 15 0 10 29 PETROLEUM AND COAL PRODUCTS 2951 Paving mixtures and blocks - 863 128.0 831 1]* - 0.1 54.1 45.5 0 20 40 !:0 20 0 20 2952 Asphalt felt and coatings .46 458 49.8 840 ]1* - 3.5 45.6 50.8 2992 Lubricating oils and greases .44 234 26.7 250 - - - 2999 Petrolium and coal products 2.93 14oo 36.0 4200 1 RUBBER AND PLASTIC PRODUCTS 30 3011 Miscellaneous plastics products 0.27 61 4.9 96 42- 22 18 16 :18 9 2 14 31 LEATHER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS Leather and leather tanning 188 15* 3111 3.95 196 32.1 4.9 92.6 32 STONE, CLAY AND GLASS PRODUCTS 3211 Flat glass 7.20 812 3.0 2495 8* 0.1 57.6 41.9 r 34 00 6 I 196 Use Descriptions and Cost Data /53 Additional Data FOUNDATIONS UNDEVELOPED LAND WATER USE SEWAGF DISPOSAL MARKETS SUPPORT INCOME WATER POLLUTION AIR POLLUTION Industrial Acres for Plan, co Percen@; Dis- External Linkage tribution by C 0 shipmen-- C 0 0 m CL 0 0 C m 3 C 'j 0 -a 0 a X 0 0 3 10 m U z z 0 Q = m U U on 13 0 0 0 0 Z,CC C 0 C: a 7113 215865 26368 013 45 77 X 811o 1 4 2 0 746 384583 11250 27 6o 85 X 7620 2762 55640 1880 801072o 41 X 8370 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 1 1 0, 0 0 0 ,11 0 "q 875 102580 1075 699724 58 X 7110 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19L 2279 243215 4954 7236725 56 X 8880 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 281 498 81198 6719 26626 21 52 74 X 8160 1 3 2 0 0 0 3 3 4 2 19 1751 43591 2325 173990 12 29 57 x x X 8060 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13 835 54260 1826 762 12* 29* 57*x x X 876o 1 0 0 0 01 31 0 0 0 38 4414 57294 94 4272 12* 29* 57* X X 6210 1 0 o o o 1 0 0 0 255 76 5 456o 1334 10467 5* 21* 44* X 8050 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 4o8 13576 2251 14308 12 42 81 X 8020 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 265 6800 60 23 66724 51 x 6320 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 66 265 6800 0 x 744o 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 23966 11 42 78 0 1 0 45 1 1 x b210 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 18437 2 48 2o 68 87 989 @3 @j014 35 66 X 7020 0 4 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 2204 215 42142 100001 11647 59260 J58531 70 6920 1 2 1 4 0 2 0 0 1 1 886 0 203 440976 9 66 82 x X 7630 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 47 0 631 019 38 64 x X 814o 0 0 01 0 01 01 41 0 21 01 255 9 872 31684 4210 7210 20 37 68 6910 0 0 0 o o@ ol 0 0 1 0 2 0 445 0000 480 53 85 93 7380 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 22 1590 @4038 3461 11128 21 59 92 X 6690 1 0 n 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 125 I X I -1 28 4000 2000 3 463* 6-, 7950 29 8 5 21 5 796 10000 341@ 63 36 x 6270 29 182 6080 287 13 36 62 5710 56 5431 16319562 8o x 6070 1 2 @j 2 01 01 01 01 0 1380 01 0 55 1213 1884 120( 40-324 73 8230 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 6131 54/Coastal Development Potential Study Development Potential Factors STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION ENERGY REQUIRPIENTS DIPLOYMENT TRANSPORTATION POPULATION DENSITY Z Q) RlodaZ SpZit PopuZation by Jurisdiction ' > Q, 0" M 0 o W 0@ a, E E 0@ C, C@ 0 '71 C@ 'D a) 0 0 u.1 0 0 E 0 10 C 0 0 0 C@ C@ 0 E .2, Q) C M E U0 U LL Q@ 0 W M c@ C@ 0 C> C) 00 0 Lu W 3221 Glass containers - 529 20.5 16og 36 - 0.6 2170@ 78.4 37 18 18 9 9 0 9 3229 Pressed and blown glass o.og 422 7.5 1256 30 0.1 0.2 5915 39.5 5933 0 8 0 0 0 3271 Concrete block and brick 0.47 174 30.6 277 6* - 5.0 13.1 8O.C 3772 Concrete products 0.10 117 11.5 106 6* - - - - 3774 Lime 308.1 4475 116.7 64411 6* - 72 4 27 3275 Gypsum products 5.12 1097 84.8 2874 6* - 1.0 78' 2 20:1 3292 Asbestos products 1.58 164 26.4 275 16* - 0.4 37.2 62. 33 PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES I I 3321 Gray iron foundries 1.14 187 2.9 247 4 - 4.6 44.7 50.3 32 11 27 8 4 io 4 3322 Malleable iron foundries 5.82 226 4.8 363 4 - - - -14 24 28 !24 5 0 5 3323 Steel foundries 1.46 150 6,6 328 8 - - - -20 12 22 1@ 12 10 12 10 3331 11.04 2642 4'1 - 0.4 95.1 4.c Primary copper .1188 137.3 3332 Primary lead 20-37 1114 7.7 1257 4* 0.1 - 90 6 9@ 3333 Primary zinc 83.48 1746 1.3 2847 4* - 3.6 90:6 5. 3534 Primary aluminum 24-93 1731 6.9 4992 3 - - qi.i 8. 3357 Nonferrous wire drawing & insulating .42 81 12.3 150 1 26 0.2 3.2 46.8 49. 24 36 @20 8 1 8 1 0 1 4 3399 Primary metal products, nec 8* 0.1 - 76.0 23. 30 6 10 !20 30 10 0 .20 378 15.8 910 1 34 FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS 1 Cutlery 0.12 66 15.0 57 28 0.1 @O 94. 30 30 1@6 3421 '1 .0 8 8 C, 3449 Miscellaneous metal work 0.36 63 2.1 142 14 7.7 8.-2 83.1 27 37 9 0 9 products - - - 3451 Screw machine 0.11 31 3.8 66 25 -2 21 25 ;15 9 6 9 3461 Metal stamping 51 26 18 i2l 11 3 8 3494 Values and pipe fittings 1.59 56 2.5 89 218 0.6 0.3 48 03 .4o 75 4.1 158 1 0.5 0.2 59 39 22 27 16 ')6 8 8 4 Meta) foil and leaf 94 8.1 170 18-@ - - - - I 3497 16 17 0 117 17 0 17 MACHINERY, EXCEPT ELECTRICAL 35 3522 Farm machinery 1.78 85 2@6 15 10*1 0. 47 0 52.1 22 30 13 116 4 13 2 3531 Construction machinery 2.81 73 2.2 130 8-'. 0. 1 72.5 25.9 17 25 !25 9 5 5 3536 Hoists, cranes and monorails - 11 1. o. 49.7 48.131 15 23 115 0 0 8 41 1,7 99 3541 Machine tools, metal cutting type .48 44 3.9 74 x* 10 5. 8:7 53.2 ;5 122 !24 13 14 10 3542 Machine tools, metal farming types 45 3.7 78 X." 18 2.11 14 1 22 4 , 0114 22 7 14 0.03 4 3 79. fixtures 5 1 :0 3544 Special dies, tools, jigs, 0.25 39 1.9 63 X* 8 1.2 9 5 4 73.6 17 33 27 6 11 0 3548 Metal working m ach ine ry, nec 0.63 54 7.3 119 x* 1 18 0.3 0:5 15 AA 125 21 11 25 1 7 1 4 Use Descriptions and Cost Data /55 Additional Data FOUNDATIONS UNDEVELOPED LAND WAT---- LSE SEWAGE DISPOSAL MARKETS SUPPORT INQjME WATER POLLUT ION 1AIR POLLUMT Industrial Acres for P@anr. Percent Dis- ExternaZ Linkages C u tribution by shipment C $:L 0 'A r C M 0 2 0 ;E ;E a x V 0 0 -0 0 0 1 C 2 - - @0 01 0 t ;3 2 u 0 u 0 0 0 6 -0 -0 0 z, 0 0 0 < > 8459 1746 476 7982 11 54 92 x 6390 0 0 0 0 1 01 17010 372 2297 557 7982 14 41 77 x 6170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 6 700 1592 52 89 �8 x 6170 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 14 439 1592 27* 71* 93*1 x 618o 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 19 I I 1 0 01 0@ 1343 15806 645 4425 7 @ 73 53 x 6260 0 0 1 0 0 01 O@ 0 3 0 87 1958 7049 327 4425 14 53 88 7070 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 182 2211 5970 597 1290 6 27 6o x x 6760 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 551 6006 1914 20222 2 49 77 x x x x 6990 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 142 1837 4580. 1068 121 49 771 x x x x 455 2025 739 34578 12, 49 77 x x x x 7050 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 270 9572 6016 1770 0 13 53 59 x 6950 o o o o o o o 1 11 4 1055 1 7360 0 0@- 0 01 358 2555 4oooo 0 10 35 65 x 7000 0 0 0 0 1 4 27C 8090 64391 3013 0 7 30 46 x 714o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40@ 1 0 736 0 0 0 17116 86822 3474 0 8020 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 01 2975 1609 4301 1863 6 28 51- - x 7000 348 154 10000 -.495 12 47 66 x x 7260 208 9333 1166 3 11 16 x 6170 0 429 15 54 78 x x x x 11 1o6 13 40 74 x x x 264 1339 702 13174 16 48 8o x x 7460 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 88 4o5 1363 848 4 21 54 x x 7170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 166 805 3636 1818 10 32 67 x 7380 0 0 0 0 0 0 0@ 0 112 883 4948 869 5 27 65 x 6950 0 0 1 C 1 1 89 15765 2032 441 4 23 44 x 7430 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 30 5969 3623 3623 4 18 70 7990 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 117 11 x 1 0 O@ 001 0-@ 1 2 112 841 544 8 26 53 8710 0 0 0 101 191 357 357 5 32 54 x x 0 1 0@ 00 0 0 x 8550 0 1 0 0! 85 01 0 60 2121 1212 11 43 89 x x x 9090 01 0 0 0 0! 1 1 17 0 558 1051 558 7 30 66 x x x 724o o 0 0 0@ 1 1 114 0 0@ 0 11 01, 56/Coastal Development Potential Study Development Potential Factors STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION ENERGY REQUIREMENTS EMPLOYMENT TRANSPORTATION POPULATION DENSITY Modal Split Population by Jurisdiction > 0 E E 0 0 M E 0 U Ij M 0 U) = , t) M C) V 03 -0 a, a) m u.J z "Zi 0 .0 E U 0 Lu E 0 C) 0 0 c@ c@ C@ 0 E U - 0 W z LL. 11 C) M M 0 0 0 :t @2 iz@. M W .'V , M -,) 1:@ 't @- 4, =C) '21 3 W CO a: 3554 Paper industry machinery 53 4.9 82 12* 03 - 31.1 68z45 27 36 18 9 0 3555 Printing industry machinery o.44 34 4.8 38 x* 12 3.0 - 2:2 93.5 12 17 17 @34 4 o o 3559 Special industry machines, nec 0.11 39 4.7 62 X* 12* 019 - 19.4 79.42 29 11 @21 10 9 4 3561 Pumps and compressors o.4o 521 3.4 94 x 14 10.5 0.2 55.6 43.1 @4 19 .8130 8 13 8 3566 Power transmission equipment 0.33 57 3.4 116 x 14 2,5 0.6 24:5 71.5 18 @5 130 ;15 10 7 5 3599 Miscellaneous, machinery 0.14 43 1.6 51 X* 15 3.3 1.1 9.6 83.2 42 8 125 ;@7 8 o o 36 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES i 3611 Electric measurement equipment - 18 1.8 36 x -": 45 6.5 1.6 45.9 37.3 13 0 24 7 3 17 13 3621 Motor and generators 0.78 49 1.5 96 36 0.7 0.2 14.6 79.6 28 17 17 @17 7 0 7 3634 Electric housewares & fans 36 2.7 62 1 0:3 4.8 10.2 79.3 27 16 16 '10 5 0 21 - x* 56 0.3 - 0 0 20 0 3641 Electric lamps 0.03 52 3.1 134 78:4 21rl 20 60 0 3642 Lighting fixtures 0.94 50 1.9 75 3 0.9 2.1 28.4 64.1 14 16 28 !12 12 10 8 3651 Radio and TV receiving sets 0.14 41 2.1 33 56* 1.0 0.4 4o.7 55.16 0 59 6 6 0 6 8 3679 Electric components 0.16 2 5.0 33 58 3.9 3.4 5.3 73.4 20 24 16 @20 6 6 4 37 TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT 3711 Motor vehicles 3.11 77 4.6 132 8 - 1.71 77.4120.6 3@14 Motor vehicles parts & accessories 2.88 72 3.5 119 o.6 - 75*124.1 3729 Aircraft equipment, nec 0.6 37 3.3 62 X* 15 6.9 - 36 554.6 3732 Boat building and repairing 0.04 33 3.1 23 13 612 1.4 33:2 63.6 40 20 10 '10 10 0 0 3751 Motorcycles & bicycles & parts 14 51 4.3 88 16* 0.9 0.4 53.9 43.8 43 14 0 :29 0 0 14 38 INSTRUMENTS AND RELATED PRODUCTS 3811 Engineering & scientific instruments .05 34 5,8 36 X@% 27* 11.5 - 19.3 62.8 o 14 o l14 14 44 14 3831 Optical instruments & lenses .01 20 2.1 20 X* 45, 12t6 - o,7 56 2117 33 17 0 33 0 0 3841 Surgical & medical instruments .02 25 1.8 49 50* 4. o.4 43.2 141:5 31 23 23 0 8 0 15 3842 Surgical appliances & supplies - 19 o.8 38 50* 1.6 0.5 21t2 69,1 22 22 17 :17 4 Ophthalmic goods D.8 3851 25 4.6 25 52* 4t9 - 10.1 60.8 20 20 0 :30 0 3861 Photographic equipment & supplies 26* 2.0 0.5 48.1 47t8 22 6 6 ;18 30 14 4 20 10 0 18 Use Descriptions and Cost Data /57 Additional Data FOUNDATIONS UNDEVELOPED LAND WAT:-R USE SEWAGE DISPOSAL MARKETS SUPPORT INCUME WATER POLLUTION AIR POLLUTION Industrial Acres for Plant; 0 Percent Dis- External Linkages v tribution by 0 C 2 shipment 0 10 CL 0 U E C -0 3 0 C X 0 C 0 0 3: tj 0 o Z o c m cu c 3: c @) = m u 0 M 0 0 0 o c 0 = c >. :t , , > - = zI I . < 1 160 9 29 50 x x x 8100 0 0 0 0 0 O@ I 1 103 104 4 25 48 x x )< 8210 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6o 472 2041 628 20 59 x x X 8010 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 66 408 810 474 3 15 36 x 7560 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 J 1 113 I I x I " " I logo 1349 746 9 31 58 x 7470 0 01 1@ 0 0. 0 0 0 1 115 114 1612 725 7 50 75 x x x 7130 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 l 13 165 757 318 2 9 33 x 68go o o o o o o o o 1 0 123 I X 743 2076 1134 5 26 74 6780 0 0 01 0 01 0 0 0 1 01 35.3 167 2110 1557 3 2.2 46 x 54lo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 180 1304 910 648 11 22 57 5760 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 410 362 1923 1346 8 23 55 6010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 56 1371 372 290 6 18 46 5510 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 385 1344 217 709 8 27 52 5780 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 142 1 7181 104 967 23820 1 7 1 30 67 84jo 0 1 1 1 0 01 01 0 1 3002 2371 3926 994 13063 0 35 74 x 7920 1 1 1 0 01 0 0 1 256 1034 597 2 2 45 x x 847 266 581 8 32 51 x x 534o 79 241 3 18 42 x x 586o 38 1057 5 0 988 497 354 5 22 55 x 7100 72 487 365 15 30 72 784o 333 72 592 36 55 71 x x 6350 74 t -1 1 1 1 x 173 1980 1584 27 68 x X 6610 32 74 7699 442 7 x 56oo 186 2819 763 6'1 14 22 67 59 x 48 8640 188 @,x 58/Coastal Development Potential Study Extraction Industry New Jersey is one of the leading States in the production of special industrial sands, the excavation of which is nearly all by mechanical means. Mining methods in- clude both wet and dry mining. In the case of dry mining, deposits of mineral sand, or industrial sand and gravel can be worked with a variety of equipment such as bull- The extractive industry as discussed in dozers, front-end loaders, draglines, etc. this report refers primarily to the mining Overburden, the covering of useless material of mineral sands. The minerals mined are above the deposit to be worked, is removed. those known colloquially as light and heavy Excavation of the mineral sands can then minerals, or beach sands. These include begin, with the material conveyed to a load- the fol ]owing: quartz, clay minerals, glau- ing point for trucks, or directly to a con7 con i te and ilmenite. Mineral sands found centrator for separation, prior to treatment in New Jersey are used in the production of at a processing plant. special industry sands, such as glass sand, foundry sand, sand-blast sand and filter Dredging, or wet mining, is the cheapcst sand . These special sands are obtained and most convenient method ot excavation mostly from the Coastal Plain, which is the where the product is to be washed sand or part of New Jersey south and east of a line gravel, and the deposit extends to a depth from Perth Amboy to Trenton. Sand and of a few feet below the water table. There gravel for concrete aggregate and other con- are two basic dredge types: the bucket struction uses are obtained in large quan- dredge and the suction dredge. In the case tity from both the Coastal Plain deposits of the latter, a centrifugal pump, mounted and the glacial deposits of the northern on a barge sucks up the sand deposit through part of the State. a movable pipe submerged beneath the water. The sand is broken by a rotating cutter head Mineral sands are made up almost en- The sand-water mixture is then pumped to a tirely of mineral and rock fragments derived concentrator, or preparation plant. The from preexisting rocks and transported by concentrates from the dredge, upon pretrez water or wind to their present location. ment, are pumped ashore at about 60 percer:tt- In prospecting for such sands it becomes solids and dewatered in a cyclone. They important to note the nature and thickness are dropped into a stockpile from which they of the overburden as well as the thickness are transported to a processing plant. Most of the usable sand below it. Depth to the mineral sands in New Jersey are mined by water table is important in that it may de- suction dredge. Bucket dredges are used for termine the method of excavation to be used. the coarser gravel found in south New Jersey. Physical or chemical properties of the mineral deposits should also be noted, since Development Potential Factors sand and gravel for most uses must now meet specifications for purity. Therefore, some & Undeveloped Land degree of treatment or preparation is * Access to Collector Road necessary. The processes for preparation e Access to Electric Power Distribution generally include: (1) mixing of sands to Line obtain desired grain texture and clay con- o Access to Railroad tent, (2) removal of clay and silt by wash- 9 Availability of Mineral Resource ing, (3) modification of grain-size distri- o Slope bution by screening or water classification, (4) removal of certain minerals, generally those containing iron, (5) crushing or grinding to reduce the Darticle size, and 4p. N' (6) drying. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /59 BASELINE UNIT CaOST: $ 0,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 50 acres (includes 30 acres for buffer and overburden sto-rage) Extracti(xi Industr TotaI Factor Factor Level Data cost Cost/unit ?f 9 rir Factor Cat. 0 tor + or Confidence Undeveloped Land AcTs to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 0 Roa 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 50,000 - 50,000 High 1 1/2 @ 3 - 100,000 - 100,000 F-c 3+ miles - 150,000 - 150,000 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Power Distri bution 1/2 - 1 1/2 50,000 - 50,000 Line 1 1/2 - 3 100,000, - 100,000 Medium - 3+ mtles 150,000 - 150,000 FC Access to Railroad 0 - 1 0 0 I - 3 - 6oo,ooo - 600,000 3 - 5 - 1,200,000 - 1,200,000 Medium Fc 5+ miles - 1,500,000 - 1,500,000 Availibility of Prese nt 131 0 0 Mineral Resource Not Present X X High r T Slope 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 - Oo,ooo - Oo,ooo 8 - 15 - 6oo,ooo - 6oo,ooo Medium 15+ % - 925,000 - 925,000 F_y__, NOTE: The baseline unit cost for extractive industry represents the cost of 1* Illaselone Saecificatinn a small office, earthmoving equipment, a storage shed, an on-site rail iding, and a cyclone fence surrounding the site. The most important con- siderations in locating an extractive industry are the thickness of the mineral deposit, and the thickness of the overburden overlying it. A Sthird variable is the value of the mineral in question by volume. If, for example, it is economically worthwhile to remove 5 feet of overburden in order to recover 2 feet of a resource with a value of $2 per ton, then it will be worthwhile to remove more than 5 feet of overburden to recover 2 feet of a resource with a value of $5 per ton. This kind of analysis must be done on a case-by-case basis, which is beyond the scope of this study. Another.important variable is Depth to Water Table. If the resource in question is below the water table, wet mining techniques must be used. These can be more or less expensive than dry mining techniques. Since they represent operating costs, they are beyond the scope of this study. Costs for Access to Collector Road are for a Level I access road, the spe'cifications for which may be found on the Element Cost Sheet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of un its i I i . Infrastructure I I i i 62/Coastal Development Potential Study Collector and Local Roads tunnels, slopes which would require cutting and filling, and soils with poor load bearing capacity. The land requirements of a road with a 60-foot right-of-way are 7.3 acres per mile of road. Development Potential Factors Collector and local roads serve functions o Undeveloped Land rather different from that of arterial roads, 0 Slope of which limited access roads are a special o Soil Load Bearing Capacity type. Arterial roads do not go to many o Short Distance between Trip Origins and places, but they carry large numbers of peo- Destinations ple at generally high speeds to the places o Minimum Need for Bridges and Tunnels they do go. The emphasis with arterial roads is on mobility. With local roads, the empha- sis is on access. That is, the function of local roads is to provide access to indivi- dual homes, businesses, farms, etc., on adja- cent land. Most trips on local roads are for short distances and at low speeds. The func- tion of collector roads is intermediate be- tween those of arterial and local roads. Collector roads provide access between places which do not generate enough trips to justify service by an arterial road, and they also provide a link between arterial and local roads. Most trips on collector roads are of moderate length, at moderate speeds. 7.. In the rural areas, collector roads might comprise 25% of total road miles, and might carry 19% of total vehicle-miles of travel (VMT). Local roads might represent 67% of total road miles, and might carry 8% of total VMT. Thus collector and local ruads together, while comprising 92% of all road miles, would carry only 27% of total VMT.* Because collec- tor and local roads carry a low level of VMT in proportion to their total length, and be- cause their function is to provide access throughout the road network, it is not so imperative that they be built very close to the shortest straight-line distance between trip origins and destinations. Considerations which might move a route away from the short- est distance are the need for bridges or iE JM-1 -.Jr-11 `fU.S. Dept. of Transportation. Highway 0 Functional Classification: Concepts, Cri- '1' teria and Procedures. July 1979. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /63 EASELINE UNIT COST: $600,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: I mi e, 2 lanes, 30 feet wide Collector and Local Roads Tota Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories t or + Qr Confidence Undeveloped Land Slope * 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 -100,000 -100,000 8 - 15 :,144,ooo -144,ooo Medium y 15+ % -235,000 -235,000 Soil Load Bearing * High 0 0 Capacity Medium - 50,000 @ 50,000 Low Low -100,000 -100,000 FT Short Distance between Trip Origins and Destinations FT Minimum Need for Bridges and Tunnels Fi: Baseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost presented here is based on a roadway with a 9 inch base of crushed stone, 5 inches of bituminous paving with storm sewers and curbing. Two lane roads can vary in cost from a minimum of $330,000 to $400,000 per lane-mile. Four lane roads vary in cost from $200,000 to $250,000 per lane-mile. These construction costs exclude at-grade intersections. The figures given on the chart for slope and soil load bearing capacity assume a graded and filled width of 60 feet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 64/Coastal Development Potential Study Arterial and Limited Access Roads ation, because of the cost of cutting and filling. Similarly, soils with poor load bearing capacity may require expensive reme- dial measures. The only other requirement is land . A road with a 300-foot right-of-way requires roughly 36 acres of land per mile, exclusive of land required for entrance and Roads present special siting problems exit ramps and similar features. because they are linear features. Rather than finding a single, relatively small area Development Potential Factors which best fulfills a given set of require- ments, the need with a road is to find a 9 Undeveloped Land (36 acres/mile continuous strip of land which best connects for 3001 right-of-way) two points, the trip origin and trip destin- o Slope ation points. Limited access roads are o Soil Load Bearing Capacity principal arterial roads which carry a high o Short Distance between Trip Origins volume of relatively long-distance travel- and Destinations lers at high speeds. For any given area, o Minimum Need for Bridges and Tunnels limited access roads will form a very small percentage of total road miles, but will carry a substantial percentage of total vehicle-miles of travel (VMT). For example, CW* MKOYMY MEA in rural areas, principal and minor arterial AMA roads (a category that includes limited 'An'ym 1AMS access roads) might comprise only 8% of ;7= total road miles, but might carry as much as 73% of total VMT.* The disproportion between percentage of road miles and percen- tage of VMT carried would be even greater in LAMES the case of limited access roads. Because of the high levels of VMT they carry, and TypinA, -ME r14 SECTI because of their high costs of construction LL per mile, it is important that limited access roads be close to the shortest straight-line PAAUNO distance between the origin and destination points they serve. This not only keeps con- CA -I.G.K struction costs down, but also minimizes total of vehicle-miles of travel (VMT), an important consideration in a time of rising fuel costs. In finding the best and cheapest route for a limited access road, a number of con- siderations may have to be weighed against the shortest straight-line distance between origin and destination points. If the shortest distance entailed a number of water crossings, for example, a longer route might be cheaper, since the cost of bridge con- struction is very high. The need for 7V070*77 7-7 bridges and tunncls should therefore be minimized. Slope is another such consider- and Cost Data r65 Use Descriptions ELINE LINIT COST: $9,000,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE' I mile, 6 lanes, 99 foot width Arterial and Limited ACCew Rmds- Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence Undeveloped Land Slope * 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 @224VOOO -224,60 8 - 15 @336,000 -336,ooo Medium Fy 15+ % -518,000 -518,000 Soil Load Bearing * High (1) 0 0 Capacity Ned i um 400,000 -4oo,ooo Low Low -8oo,ooo -Iloo,ooo E: Short Distance (12) between Trip Origins and Destinations V Minimum Need (12) for Bridges and Tunnels V 18aseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost given here assumes a roadway with 6 inches of bituminous paving on 12 inches of crushed stone. The construction of inter- states or freeways, excluding interchanges may cost a minimum of 1.3 million do liars -per lane-mile to a maximum of 3.2 million dollars per lane-mile. The figures for slope and soil load bearing capacity assume a graded and filled width of 114 feet. Generally engineering costs range between 10 and 15 percent of the estimated construction cost. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 66/Coastal Development Potential Study Railroads acquisition of right-of-way is generally a major expense. .-Vz, At present, it seems likely that J, T mo st of the areas that could support A rail service already do. However, the rapid growth of the Atlantic City area may make passenger and freight service from Philadelphia and New York an attrac- The problem of siting railroad tive proposition. alignments is similar to that of siting roads; they are linear features. Thus Development Potential Factors the problem is not simply to find one relatively small area which best fulfills * Undeveloped Land a particular set of requirements, but o Slope rather to find a continuous strip of o Soil Load Bearing Capacity land which best connects two points, the o Short Distance between Trip Origins trip origin and trip destination points. and Destinations Because of high capital costs, railroads o Minimum Need for Bridges and Tunnels 4L require a heavy volume of business in order to justify their construction. IL Once it has been determined that two areas may be profitably connected by a ICU, railroad, the most desirable route, will be the shortest straight-line distance between them, other things being equal. A number of considerations might move a railroad route away from the shortest distance. Because of their high construction costs, the need for bridges and tunnels should be avoided where possible. Slope is another im- portant factor. Railroad grades should not exceed 2%. Because of the lost of cutting and filling, level ground is desirable. Soil load bearing capacity is also an important consideration. 10, The only other requirement is land; a 4 200-foot right-of-way requires 24 acres _A6, a of land per mile. Because of rising energy costs, a_ railroads may in the future be able to c'6f- NY Ai.. dhh recapture some of the freight and passen- ho. ger traffic that they have lost to com- P_ petIng modes, chiefly trucks and auto mobiles. This loss to competing modes over many years has resulted in the A=t abandonment of many miles of rail I ine. These abandoned rights-of-way would be prime candidates for development if Double mam tnKk on t3n9ent railroad service were restored, since Use Descriptions and Cost Data /67 BASELINE UNIT COST: $ 00,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZEa I mile, single track Railrmds Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Slope 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 -117,000 -117,000 Medium 8 - 15 -175,000 -175,000 ry- 15+ % Soil Load Bearing High (1) 0 0 Capacity Medium -210,000 -210,000 Low Low -420,000 -420,000 E-v Short Distance (2) between Trip Origins and Destinations E-v I Minimum Need (2) for Bridges and Tunnels Basel.ine Specification NOTE: There can be considerable variation in railroad construction costs. The figure 5 for sIope and soil load bearing capacity are based on a 200-foot right-of-way with a 50-foot width graded, cut and filled. See Element Cost sheet for information concerning elevated structures and overhead railroad bridges. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 68/Coastal Development Potential Study Ports (major) Development Potential Factors A port facility typically consists, at * Undeveloped Land (at least 50 acres) minimum, of a berth for a ship, an apron * Access to Arterial Road (within 3 miles) adjacent to the berth, where the cargo is 0 Access to Railroad (within 5 miles) unloaded, and a transit shed, a covered 0 Access to Electric Power Transmission storage area for cargo awaiting transship- Grid ment. Space is also required for the load- 9 Access to 35-foot Channel ing of cargo to and from trucks and railroad cars. There has been a pronounced trend in o Marine Access (downstream from fixed Ports are transportation terminals recent years away from break-bulk cargo bridges of less than 35-foot vertical where waterborne freight and/or passenger toward containerization. This tends to clearance) traffic come ashore. In general, passen- require rather large amounts of open space, 0 Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center ger traffic is an insignificant proportion for the storage of containers. o Slope (nearly level) of total waterborne traffic, so ports may 9 Soil Load Bearing Capacity be regarded as cargo-handling facilities. 1 0 Access to Public Sewerage Within this general definition, there is a Access to Public Water Supply wide range of possible types of ports. Embayments They may be categorized in terms of cargo 0 Dredging Maintenance o Minor Tides (general cargo, dry bulk, break-bulk, con- tainerized, etc.), in terms of ownership (port authority, private industrial shipper), in terms of volume of trade, or in a number of other ways. For the pur- poses of this study, a major port is de- fined as one having a minimum channel 9. depth of at least 35 feet at mean low water. A minor port is one capable of handling small commercial vessels and barges, with drafts up to 12 feet. It is important to draw a distinction "S_ between general ports, open to all ship- L.@ pers, and marine terminals owned and oper- ated by private owners for their exclusive worz-. A use. A large steel mill or oil refinery, for example, might operate its own port facility for receiving shipments of iron ore or crude oil. However, the onshore 4 transportation requirements of such marine terminals may be rather different from those of a general port, since the cargo delivered to the private terminal is often to be used at the terminal site. For a general port, proximity to surface trans- portation modes, railroads, and highways, is of critical importance, since such ports are essentially transshipment points between water and surface modes. __ZZ 71 Use Descriptions and Cost Date /09 BASELINE UNIT COST: $30,000,000 DEVELOPWNT SIZE: 100 acres Ports (major) D Total Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Level ata Cost Cost/Unit of Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Cate ories + or - + or Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence ($) M M Undeveloped Land Access to 0 - 1/2 0 Public Sewerage 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 185,000 1 1/2 - 3 - 370,000 Medium 3+ miles - 555,000 F-c Access to Arterial 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to * 0 - 1/2 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 150,000 - 150,000 Public Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 115,000 1 1/2 - 3 - 300,000 - 300,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 - 230,000 Medium 3+ miles - 450,000 - 450,000 IT 3+ miles - 345,000 Access to Railroad 0-1 0 0 Embayments * Present (3) 0 0 1-3 - 600,00o - 6oo,ooo Not Present X X High 3-5 - 1,200,000 -1,200,000 Medium F-1 5+ miles - 1,500,000 -1,500,000 F-v Access to Electric 0-1 0 0 Dredging Maintenance * Adequate (3) 0 0 Power Transmission Not Adequate X X High Grid 1-3 - 300,000 - 300,000 3-5 - 600,000 - 600,000 Medium 5-10 - 1,125,000 125,000 F-c in4. ile. - I-qnn nnn :11 COO ago FV Access to 35-foot 0-1 0 0 Minor Tides 5 feet or less 0 0 Channel 1-3 - 5,000,000 -5,000,000 Greater than 5 feet - 4,000,000 - 4,ooo,ooo Low 3-5 -10,000,000 -10,000 000 Medium 5-10 -18,750,000 -18,750:000 C 10+ miles - -25,000.000 -25.000,000 V Marine Access Present (3) 0 0 Baseline Specification Not Present X X High T Proximity to Metro- 0-10 + 800,000 politan Service 10-20 + 4oo,ooo Cen ter 20-30 + 200,000 Medium 30-4o + 100,000 FV * 40+ miles 0 NOTE: The baseline unit cost assumes a container port with two berths, each log feet long. Cost of Access to 35-foot channel are based on a channel 120 feet Slope * 0-3 0 0 wi8e, with an average dredged depth of 18 feet. Unit cost for dredging 3-8 - 320,000 -320,000 is $5.00 per cubic yard. Slight currents are desirable, 1/2 to I knot: 8-15 480vooO 480,000 Medium they aid.in docking and undocking. Access to Arterial Road figures are 15+ % 740,000 740,000 based on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). Access F-V to Public Water Supply figures are ba sed on the use of an 8 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The A cce ss to Public Sewerage figures are Soil Load Bearing High (1) 0 0 based on the use of a 15 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 Capacity Medium - 1,000,000 -1,000tooo Low feet. Costs for port construction wi 11 be generally higher in the northern Low - 3,000,000 -3,000,000 portions of the state and somewhat lower in southern sections. IV, C = costs are constant per development Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 70/Coastal Development Potential Study . . ....... Ports minor GULKHW LM ANUZ VARMS Minor ports are those capable of han- J. dling small commercial vessels and barges up to 12 feet in draft. Such ports might handle small commercial fishing boats, or barges carrying bulk cargo from a larger port. An operations base serving Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) exploration or production activity would also be an exam- pie of a minor port. Minor ports fulfill essentially the same function of trans- shipment as do major ports, but the differ- ence in scale leads to qualitative differ- ences in requirements. Minor ports do not ACUTE ANQLE PIER 7 require access to a railroad in order to - be economically viable. Nevertheless, access to transportation remains of paramount importance. A minor port should have ready access to an arte- rial road for shipment of cargo by truck. A typical minor port might, at minimum, provide berths for 3 or 4 boats or barges of up to 100 feet in length. Space along Development Potential Factors the berths would be required for handling cargo, as well as an area for the loading * Undeveloped Land (at least 5 acres) or unloading of trucks. Marine fuel * Access to Arterial Road (within 2 miles) storage capacity would be necessary. * Access to Electric Power Distribution Line 9 Access to 12-foot Channel (within I mile) o Slope (nearly level) e Proximity to River and Bay Shore Frontage * Embayments * Marine Access (downstream from fixed bridges with less than 25-feet vertical clearance) o Dredging Maintenance. o Minor Tides U Wp RIGHT ANCA-P PiER Use Descriptions and Cost Data /71 BASELINE Lva COST: $4,ooo,oo( DEVELOPME14T SIZE: 5 acres Ports (minor) Dat Tota Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Level goa Cost Cost/Unit of Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Cate ries + or - + or Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence Undeveloped Land Minor Tides 5 feet or less 0 0 Greater than 5 feet - 700,000 - 700,000 Low 7V i f I Access to Arterial 0 1/2 0 00 0 1 Baseline Specification Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 150,0 150,000 1 1/2 @ 3 300,000 3000000 High IT 3+ miles -450,000 -45o,ooo Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 -50,000 50,000 Medium Line 1 1/2 - 3 -100,000 -100,000 Fc- 3+ miles "150,000 -150,000 Access to 12-foot 0 - ' 0 0 Channel I m 2 . 750,000 - 750,000 2 - 3 -1,200,000 -1,200,000 Medium 3 5 -2,000,000 -2,000,000 C 5+ miles -2,500,000 -2,5001000 Slope 0 -*3 0 0 3 8 8o'000 - 8o,ooo 8 - 15 120,000 -120,000 Medium F-v 15+ % -185,000 185,000 Proximity to River Adjacent 131 0 0 and Say Shore 0 - 1/2 X X Frontage 1/2 - I X X High I+ mile X X V Embayments Present [3 1 0 0 Not Present X X High Fv- Marine Access Present [31 0 0 Ht9h Not Present X X NOTE: The baseline unit cost represents a facility with two berths for barges, Fv each berth being 100 feet long. Access to 12-foot channel assumes a channel 80 feet wide, with an average dredged depth of 6 feet. Unit cost of Dredging Maintenance Adequate 131 0 0 High dredging is $5.00 per cubic yard. Access to Arterial Road costs are based Inadequate X X on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). As with major ports and marinas, the costs associated with minor ports are somewhat higher in northern New Jersey and less in southern sections of the state. C = costs are constant per development Baseline Specification V = costs vary with number of units 72/Coastal Development Potential Study Airports a they have the capability of accommodat- The list is further complicated depend- ing operations of the type and numbers ing on the type, size and instrumentation of aircraft forecast; of aircraft. This type of analysis is very site-specific and can only be accomplished 0 they have sufficient separation from using specially desioned models and techni- other aviation facilities to eliminate cal airport planning expertise. A more or minimize airspace conflicts; general planning process cannot account for all the requisite considerations in suffi- Airports are often classified by the 0 population, employment, and income dis- cient detail to be useful in siting air- types of aircraft they can accommodate. tribution; ports. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) classification system is used by the New 0 airport facilities available. Jersey State Airport System. The airports are classified as follows: Additional Factors for Consideration Include: Basic Utility Airports - accommodate almost all single-engine aircraft, and most twin- 0 Undeveloped land (100-200 acres for air- engine aircraft with less than 8,000 pounds port and buffer area) maximum weight. The runway generally mea- sures 2,200 to 3,200 feet in length. 0 Slope PREMNLING WIND ]@_n`gth, which allows for the __!@ i I CLAM General Utility Airports - provide addi- 0 Compatible land uses CLAM tional runway --- propeller driven air- ZONE requirements of all WAIN 5LD.-rLVAAWZ craft up to a maximum weight of 12,500 Its primary runway is general ly pounds. V 3,200 to 5,000 feet in length. Basic Transport Airports - accommodate most turbine aircrafT, rtually all piston aircraft, and business jets, up to a gross weight of 60,000 pounds. Its pri- mary runway is 5,000 to 6,000 feet in length. Air Carrier Airports - accommodate sche- duled air transport passenger service. The runway should range from a minimum of 7,000 feet to 12,000 feet in length and have sufficient strength to support aircraft from 100,000 pounds gross weight to the heaviest air carrier aircraft to be accommo- '.'r dated . The New Jersey State Airport Systems Plan shows existing demand areas (see accompanying rnap on the following page). These areas are determined based on the the following factors: . .... e they are within reasonable driving time (30 minutes) from urban centers; Use Descriptions and Cost Data /73 BASELINE UNIT COST: $20,000,000 OEVELOPMENT SIZE: 225 acres Airports Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories t or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Collector Road 0 - 1/2 0 1/2 - 1 1/2 -300,000 1 1/2 - 3 -6oo,ooo High C 3+ miles -900,000 Slope * 0-3 0 0 3-8 -1,6oo,ooo -1,6oo,ooo 8-15 -2,4oo,ooo -2,4oo,ooo Medium F-. 15+ % -3,700,000 -30m,000 Character gof * Compatible Land Use 0 0 Surroundin Area Other (3) X x High V Baseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost given here is for a general utility airport serving propeller planes only, with a 12,500 pound limit. The deficiency costs for Access to Collector Road are based on a Level 3 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 74/Coastal Development Potential Study SUSSEX NEI IORK New Jersey /"PASI AIC State Airpart system IIRREO 'l -E- Plan 1995 SEX ITLINTIC PENAMYLVANN, 9-- EE OCEAN OCEAN BURLINGTON \@c-.E. G@OUCESTER SALE. LEGEND AILA.T.C j B.- utility G..... I Utility CUIBERLAND 8-it, T.... Ai, C.,,i., 0 P,.,..Id At---- DELAIARE BAY Ai,,.", i Utilities I i I 76/Coastal Development Potential Study Liquid Waste Disposal range from vitrified clay to a newly devel- secondary treatment in order to pro@ide for oped fiberglass reinforced mortar plastic additional purification. pipe. In terms of the total cost of a sani- tary sewer system, the collection network The design of a sewerage system is pri- accounts for between 60 and 80 percent, and marily influenced by the definition of the treatment plants only 20 to 40 percent, service area and the projection of the final population size to be served. As part of a Treatment facilities in sewerage systems highly interactive system of land use, how- Liquid waste disposal within any commu- are designed to remove varying proportions of ever, the sewerage system both influences and nity is generally accomplished by means of solid and organic materials of domestic qual- is influenced by the pattern of development. a sewerage system, also termed a wastewater ity carried in the wastewater stream, as Academic studies tend to indicate that, with- system. The system may only allow for the defined by applicable regulations. To the in limits, construction of a new sewer system collection of sanitary waste, or it may pro- extent industrial and commercial waste is is often "self-insuring"; that is, by its vide for the collection of storm water as unsuitable for public treatment, pretreat- presence new development is attracted to the well, in which case the System is termed a ment on-site may be required prior to areas to be served, thus stimulating addi- "combined system''. The focus of this study release to the sewer system for treatment tional population growth and urban development,* will be upon sanitary sewerage systems. at the municipal (or private) plant. Once the service area and ultimate popu- lation are determined, the engineering as- A sewerage system is made up of two Wastewater treatment is of three general pects of the system design - choice of slope, components; the collection system (the types: primary, secondary, and tertiary pipe, number of pumping stations or manholes pipes) and the treatment plant. The treatment. Primary treatment refers to the and joint materials - becomes fairly straight-. majority of the sewer systems in existence removal of between 30 and 35 percent of the forward. and under construction are gravity-flow organic pollutants and up to one-half of the systems. Gravity systems generally conform suspended solids. The processes involved Development Potential Factors to geographic and topographic boundaries, include screening and skimming of solids, and e.g. water sheds, rather than political a settling period to remove heavier suspended e Undeveloped Land boundaries. The collection system is materials. Secondary treatment removes be- e Access to Local Road generally designed to assure self-cle3nsing tween 80 and 90 percent of the organic mate- e Access to Electric Power Distribution velocities, thus preventing sediment from rials and over 80 percent of the suspended Line collecting in the bottoms of the pipes. solids. Besides allowing for'further sedi- o Slope The minimum velocity required to sustain mentation of suspended solids, secondary o Soil Load Bearing Capacity solid transport is between 2.0 and 2.5 treatment involves a biological process which o Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage feet per second. Velocities are held to provides a further step in purification. a maximum of about 10 feet per second. Tertiary or advanced waste treatment is de- Energy conservation within the sewerage col- signed to remove one or more specific organic *Urban Systems Research and Engineering, lection system is therefore dependent on compounds, e.g. phosphates and nitrates. Inc. 1976. The Growth Shapers: The Land slope, with 0.5 to 2.0.percent normally Additional steps are added to primary and Use impacts of Infrastructure Investments; required to attain the necessary velocity. Washington, D.C.: CEQ To insure that adequate velocities are maintained, pumping stations or manholes may be installed. Where pumping is required over considerable horizontal distances the conduit (sewer line) is termed a ''force ROM" ma i n". Sewer pipes vary in size from 6 to3 8 inches for laterals, up to several hundred inches in diameter for interceptors. Inter- ceptors are generally collectors which lead to the wastewater treatment facility, while laterals are collectors into which residen- industrial connections -1 tial, commercial and flow. Materials used for sewer conduits Use Descriptions and Cost Date /77 BASELINE UNIT COST: $11,568,000 (plant and conveyance system) DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 10 acres (4 for plant, 6 for buffer) Liquid Waste Disposal Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or - + or - Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Local Road 0 - 1/2 0 0 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 150,000 -50 000 High 1 1/2 - 3 - 300,000 -300:000 FC 3+ miles - 450,000 -450,000 Access to Electric 0 - 1/2 0 0 Power Distribution 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 50,000 -50 000 Medium Line 1 1/2 - 3 - 100,000 -100:000 C 3+ miles - 150,000 -150,000 Slope 0 - 3 0 0 3 - 8 - 64,ooo -64 000 8 - 15 - 96,000 -96:ooo Medium F,-J 115+ % - 160,000 -)60,000 Soil Load Bearing High 0 0 Capacity Had i um - 120,000 -120,000 Low Low - 24o,ooo -240,000 V Proximity to River Adjacent 0 0 or gay Shore 0 - 1/2 - 80,000 -80 000 Medium Frontage 1/2 - I - 240,000 -240:000 11+ mile - 320,000 320,000 NOTE: lBaseline Specification The plant described here is assumed to have a capacity of 2 million gallons per day (MGD), and to serve a residential community of 10,000 persons, living in approximately 3,000 dwelling units, over an area of 3 square miles. A plant of this capacity, capable of secondary treatment with phosphorus removal, will cost $4,675,560. The cost of sewage treatment plants can be calculated using the formula c=2,523,000 (qo.89) where c is the dollar cost and I is the capacity in MGD. For the popula- tion density assumed, an average of 15 feet of pipe per person is a typi- cal total for the conveyance system. This is assumed to be 105,000 feet of 8" vitrified clay, 30,000 feet of 15" vitrified clay, and 15,000 feet of 2411 reinforced concrete pipe. The cost of the conveyance system is assumed to be $6,173,250. Four I MGD pumping stations at $180,000 each add an additional $720,000, for the total baseline unit cost of $11,569,000. Deficiency costs for Proximity to River or Bay Shore Front- age assume a 24" reinforced concrete force main costing $60 per foot. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units Harvest, may go to regional markets such as Vineland or Hightstown, to roadside stands, or to local processors. In any case, New Jersey is close enough to New York and Philadel- phia, and has a sufficiently dense road net- work, that location with respect to markets A number of different land and water is not a locational determinant. uses are considered under this category. Another consideration in the abstract They range from relati.vely capital-Inten- is proximity to what might be termed agri- sive land uses, such as greenhouses, to cultural infrastructure. This would in- the gathering of naturally-occurring water clude agricultural machinery sales and re- resources, such as shelifishing. What pair facilities, seed and fertilizer dealers, they have in common is the harvesting of and grain storage facilities. Of the nume- a resource. rous agricultural experts consulted in the course of this study, none thought that this Harvest uses tend to have qualitative- was a significant locational factor in New ly different locational requirements from Jersey. Although agriculture has experienced other forms of development. To illustrate, heavy pressure from other types of develop- residential or commercial or industrial ment In parts of the'study area, there is uses generally have a shopping list of still a sufficiently well-developed Infra- requirements which must be met, or which structure to support commercially viable must be weighed and traded off among each farming. other. This is not so much the case with harvest uses. Some uses simply require The various types of harvest uses are the presence of the resource. Shellfish- discussed individually below. ing, for example, requires the presence of shellfish, of necessity. All other Development Potential Factors are subsidi- ary to this one. Other harvest uses, such as greenhouses, have so few requirements as to be virtually completely footloose. They can locate almost anywhere. Still other uses, particularly the more land-extensive ones such as forestry,'are probably influ- enced'by the price of land as much as by anything else. In New Jersey, if a piece of land is left alone for a long enough time, it will become forest. Thus a sizable portion of the land under forest in New Jersey may be forest in default of any other use. In identifying lands with an especially high potential for harvest use in the ab- stract, it would be necessary to consider a number of factors in addition to soils. Access to market is an important considera- tion, for example. New Jersey field crops, such as wheat and soybeans, may be shipped to Philadelphia for export. More perish- able crops, such as fruits and vegetables 86/Coastal Development Potential Study Field Crops Development Potential Factors Undeveloped Land (at least 600 acres) Prime Open Agricultural Land Field crops are crops such as soybeans wheat, and alfalfa. They are characterized by extensive rather than intensive farming; that is, they tend to be grown on large acreages with relatively minor inputs of labor. As with most agricultural land uses, the quality of the soil is of preponderant importance. Above all else, the soil for field crops should be well drained. Open land classified by the Soil Conservation Service as being in Capability Classes I and 11 is considered prime open agricul- tural land. Such lands are ideal for field crops. The importance of soils may be seen from the table below. The Soil Conserva- tion Service rates each soil according to its estimated yield for a number of typical crops. Soils with the highest yield rating, 10, may yield up to ten times the crop per acre as soils with a yield rating of 1. Estimated yields per acre by soil yield rating* Crop Rating Tomatoes Corn Alfalfa Wheat Soybeans Tons Bu Tons Bu Bu 1 8 50 1.0 10 5 2 10 60 1.5 15 10 3 12 70 2.0 20 15 4 14 80 2.5 25 20 5 16 90 3.0 30 25 6 18 100 3.5 35 30 7 20 110 4.0 40 35 8 22 120 4.5 45 40 9 24 130 5.0 50 45 10 26 140 5.5 55 50 5 'Yield estimates prepared by interstate coordination in 1969. USDA, Soil Conservation Service. 1971. Soil Survey of Burlington County, New Jersey. Washington, DC Use Descriptions and Cost Data /87 BASELINE UNIT COST: $ 75,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 6. 00 acres Field Crops Total Factor Factor Level C.t:ata Cost Cost/Unit of Factor gories + or - + gr Confidence Undeveloped Land Capability Class Prime Open I & 11 Solis [31 0 0 Agricultural Land Capability Class IIII Solis [151 - 90,000 -90,000 Medium Soils for Special Fy Crops [11211X x Baseline Specification NOTE: The figure given in the baseline unit cost represents the total capital investm? nI needed for field crops (machinery, equipment and buildings). The def 'ciency cost for Capability Class III soils is based on the differ- ence in value between the best agricultural soils and those of only fair quality. Farmland assessment figures that evaluate agricultural land pure- ly on their value for agricultural and horticultural uses indicate that over the entire study area, this difference is roughly $150 per acre. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 8a/Coastal Development Potential Study Fresh Market Vegetables Development Potential Factors Undeveloped Land * Prime Open Agricultural Land * Surface Water Availability * Groundwater Availability Fresh market vegetables are crops such astomatoes, snap beans, peppers, straw- berries, and asparagus. They are character- ized by their perishability. They must be delivered to a processor or to the consumer within a short time after having been picked. Picking generally requires large inputs of labor. In New Jersey, this is frequently . . . . . . accomplished by contract workers brought up for the season from Puerto Rico. The labor requirements of vegetable farming are not a locational factor. There are two factors of paramount impor- tance for vegetable farms: soil quality and low water availability. Prime open agricultural land (SCS Capability Classes I and 11) is ideal, although soil slightly sandier than ps is desirable. would be ideal for field cro It'might be possible for a family to support itself raising multiple crops of mixed vege- tables on as little as 20 acres, but this calls for heroically intensive cultivation. A more representative minimum acreage, to support a farmer and his family, is 200 acres. Irrigation water is of critical impor- tance for vegetable farming. A crop of tomatoes may take as much as one-fifth of an inch of water per day. Over a 30-day grow- 0"r ing season, this is a total of 6 inches of water. In order to calculate in millions the amount of water of gallons per day (MGD) required, it will be necessary to multiply inches of water required times the minimum number of acres of such a farm. There are 27,000 gallons of water per acre-inch. Multiplying 27,000 gallons per acre-inch Ilk times 200 acres times one-fifth inch yields -4 a total of 1,080,000 gallons. Thus a 200- acre vegetable farm will require 1.1 MGD of irrigation water. This water need not be 7, of potable quality, but it should be of at least swimmable quality. Use Descriptions and Cost Date /89 BASELINE UNIT COST: $225,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 200 acres FreSh Market ftetable ToteI Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Catgo ries + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Capability Class Prime Open I & 11 Solis [31 0 0 Agricultural Land Capability Class III Solis [151 -30,000 -30,000 Medium Solis for Special 7 Crops [is] x x 0 - 1/2 [3,13,141 X x Surface Water 1/2 - I -1,500 -1,500 Availability I - 3 0 0 Medium 3 - 6 0 0 FL_j_FV 6+ MGD a 0 0 - 1/2 [3.13,141 X x Groundwater 1/2 - I -1,500 -1,500 Availability I - 3 0 0 Medium 3 - 6 0 0 FL2 FV 6+ MGD 0 0 1-111asellne Specification NOTE: The figures given in the baseline unit cost represent the total capita I investment needed for vegetable farming (machineryt equipment and buildings). it is assumed that harvesting of crops is done by hand. ?prox mate y . 0 irr ga size. Its source is unimportant. The deficiency cost for Capability Class III soils is based on the difference in value between the best agricultural soils and those of fair quality. Farmland assessment fig- ures that evaluate agricultural land purely on their value for agricul- tural and horticultural uses, indicate that over the entire study area, this difference is roughly $150 per acre. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 90/Coastal Development Potential Study Nurseries Nurseries are specialty operations in which plants, shrubs, and trees are grown for transplanting. Nurseries may raise trees and woody ornamentals for the retail trade, or they may specialize in cuttings and stock for the wholesale trade. Although these operations can be quite large, they need not be extensive. Certain types of nurseries can probably be as small as 3 acres, but a 5-acre minimum is more realistic. Soil is of great importance. Prime open agricultural land (SCS Capability Classes I and 11) is ideal. For nurseries which are selling stock balled and burlaped, slightly heavier soils are desirable, so, the rootballs hold together. Irrigation wat er is also important. Allowing one-fifth of an inch per acre per day, a 5-acre nursery would require irrigation water, from either surface or groundwater, of 27,000 gallons per day. This water should be of swimmable qua I i ty. Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land (at least 5 acres) * Access to Local Road * Prime Open Agricultural Land * Groundwater Availability * Surface Water Availability * Access to Public Water Supply Use Descriptions and Cost Data /91 BASELINE UNIT COST: $225,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 5 acres Nurseries Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence ($) ($) Undeveloped Land Access to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -150,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -300,000 Ec_ 13+ miles -450,000 -450,000 Capability Class Prime Open I & 11 Solis 0 0 Agricultural Land Capability Class III Solis -750 -750 Medium Solis for Special Fy Crops r3,121 X x Groundwater Greater than 27,000 Availability GPD 0 0 High Less than 27,000 GPD x x FL 17 T Surface Water Greater than 27,DOO Availability GPD 0 0 High Less than 27,000 GPD x x FL2TV Access to Public 0 - 1/2 Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100,000 - 100,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 - 200,000 FL2 FC 3+ miles - 300,000 F 300,000 Baseline specifications NOTE: The baseline unit cost given here is based on a nursery having build@ ings with a total area of 6,000 square feet and parking facilities for 20 cars. The baseline specification for groundwater availability is 0 - 1/2 million gallons per day (MGD). The presence of additional groundwater will not be useful to the operation. The deficiency cost for Capability Class III Soils is based on the difference in value between the best agricultural soils and those of only fair quality. Farmland assessment figures, which evaluate agricultural land purely on their value for ag- ricultural and horticultural uses, indicate that over the entire study area, this difference is roughly $150 per acre. Public water costs are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. C = costs are constant per development V - costs vary with number of units 92/Coastal Development Potential Study Gr,eenhouses Greenhouses are glass- or plastic- roofed structures in which plants are grown, protected from the weather. They will most likely be found as part of a nursery opera- J'_' tion- In those cases where they are inde- pendent of a nursery, greenhouses have virtually no locational requirements. Plants are grown in special growing media, so soils are not a consideration. One acre wo.ld be enough to support a good-sized greenhouse. Requirements of water, which is normally supplied from a well, are similarly modest. 5000 gallons per day of swimmable quality water should be adequate for a green- house on I acre. Greenhouses produce rela- tively high-value, low-bulk goods, which can be successfully marketed over a broad area, so proximity to markets is not a significant consideration. The only siting considera- tion, and it is more a convenience than a requirement, is well-drained soil, to avoid the problems of wet ground. Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land * Access to Local Road * Groundwater Availability * Access to Public Water Supply Use Descriptions and Cost Data /93 BASELINE LINIT COST: $275,000 DEvELoPWffr SIZE: 3 greenhouses, I acre Greenhouses Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Catgor les + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 150,000 - 150,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 - 300,000 -300,000 fC 3+ miles - 450,000 -450,000 * 0 - 1/2 113,141 0 0 Groundwater 1/2 - 1 0 0 Availability I - 3 0 0 High 3 6 0 0 FL -, Fj 6+ MGD Access to Public * 0 1/2 0 0 Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100.000 -100,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 -200,000 3+ miles - 300,000 -300,000 FL21 C I*. Baseline Specification NOTE: The figures given in the baseline unit cost are for three greenhouses, each with an area of 2,000 square feet. The baseline specification for groundwater availability is 0 - 1/2 million gallon per day (MGD). The presence of additional groundwater will not be useful to the greenhouse, and therefore the operation will not be willing to pay more money for it. The deficiency costs for Access to Public Water that are given here are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe, installed at a depth of 4 feet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 94/Coastal Development Potential Study Orchards An orchard is a plantation of fruit trees the two lead- or nut trees. In New Jersey, i ngorchard crops are apples and peaches. The requirements of apple and peach orchards are virtually identical to those of fresh market vegetable farms, with the exception that slightly more rolling topography is desirable. This is to ensure good air drain- age, so that pockets of cold air do not form causing frost damage. Although smaller acreages could probably support an orchardist if intensively culti- vated, 200 acres is a representative minimum acreage to support a family on a full-time basis. Soil requirements are very similar r, v@ to those for vegetables, but should be loamy rather than sandy. Prime open agricultural land (SCS Capability Classes I and 11) is ideal. Water requirements are on the order of 6 inches per acre. This requirement should be met by irrigation water availa- bility of 1.1 million gallons per day (MGD). This may be supplied either from surface or groundwater, but in either case it should be of swimmable quality. Labor requirements are similar*to vegetable farms, in similar ways. They are and are fulfilled not a locational determinant. Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land * Prime Open Agricultural Land * Slope * Surface Water Availability * Groundwater Availability * Access to Public Water Supply Use Descriptions and Cost Date /95 BASELINE UNIT COSTI: $ 700,000 DEVELOP14ENT SIZE: 200 acres Orchards TotaIFactor Factor Level 0 tat cost Cost/Unit of Factor Cate;ories + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Capability Class 131 Prime open I & 11 Solis 0 0 Agricultural Land Capability Class III Soils -30,000 - 30,000 Medium Solis for Special -V C roos Slope 0 3 - 6,000 - 6,000 3 8 0 0 8 15 -i0,000 - 10,000 Medium 15+ % -4o,ooo - 4o,ooo Surface Water 0 - 1/2 113,141 -1,500 - 1,500 Availability 1/2 - 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 Medium 3 6 0 0 FL 2TV 6+ MGQ 0 9 Groundwater 0 - 1/2 113,141 - 1,500 - 1,500 Availability 1/2 - 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 Medium 3 6 0 0 FL17V 6+ MGD 0 0 Access to Public * 0 - 1/2 [141 0 0 Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 -100,000 1 1/2 - 3 -200,000 Medium LF37C 3+ miles I-300,000 * Baseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost represents an inves-tment of $8 500 per acre for 'clearing and planting. Roughly 1.1 million gallons per day (MGD) of water is required at peak periods. This can come from any combination of the three sources listed. Surface water will generally be preferable, because it involves the least cost. The Access to Public Water figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The deficiency cost for Capability Cla ss III Soils is based on the difference in value between the best agricultural soils and these of only fair qual- ity. Farmland assessment figures , which evaluate agricultural land pure ly on their value for agricultural and horticultural uses, indicate that over the entire study area this difference is roughly $150 per acre. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 96/Coastal Development Potential Study Cranberry Farming Development Potential Factors Undeveloped Land (at least 300 acres) Soil Association (Atsion-Muck- Atsion-Muck -Alluvial Land, Sandy Soil Association - at least 60 acres � Surface Water Availability � Ground Water Availability Cranberries are grown under very special- ized conditions. Their soil requirements are very similar to those of blueberries. They need acid, sandy, peaty soils with a high water table. Soil pH should be between 4.5 and 5.0. In addition, however, cran- berries require huge amounts of water. This water is used to flood the cranberry bogs in winter, in order to protect the cranberries from cold weather. The Atsion-Muck-Alluvial land, sandy soil association, and the Atsion and Berryland soil series are ideal for cran- berries. Each acre of producing cranberry bog requires an acre-foot of reservoir storage capacity. Since these reservoirs average about 2 feet in depth, each acre of bog requires one-half acre of reservoir. Tradi- tionally the reservoir is constructed near the head of a natural watercourse, and the bogs are laid out in chains downstream. This facilitates flooding the bogs. It also takes advantage of the fact that the best soils are usually found next to streams. It would probably require about 60 acres of producing bogs to support a cranberry grower full-time. To this 60 acres must be added 30 acres for reservoirs. Sizeable additional acreage is highly desirable. to provide an aquifer recharge area for the large volumes of groundwater involved in ',r cranberry growing. A total of 300 acres of land is therefore taken as the minimum re- qu i red .For these 60 acres of bogs, 6.5 million gallons per day (MGD) of water should be available. This should be at least of swimmable quality. Use Descriptions and Cost Date /97 BASELINE UNIT COST: $630,000 DEVELOKEW'SIZE: 600 acres (60 acres of bogs, 30 acres of res-ervoir) Cranberry Farming Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Soil Association Atsion-Muck-Al Iuvial 0 0 Land, Sandy Soil Association High Other x x IT Surface Water 0 - 1/2 (3,14) X x Availability 1/2 - I x x I - 3 -2500 -2500 Medium 3 - 6 -1500 -1500 FL 17-V 6+ mGn 0 0 Groundwater 0 - 1/2 (3,14) X x Availability 1/2 - I x x I - 3 -2500 -2500 Medium 3 - 6 -1500 -1500 FL2 6+ MGD 0 0 111aseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost represents a cost of $7,000 per acre for clearing, grading diking, and planting 60 acres of bog, $4,500 per acre for clearing and grading 30 acres of reservoir, and $7,500 for machinery and equipment. The.soils in which cranberries are grown will nearly always be associated with an adequate amount of water for cranberry farming. Roughly 6.5 MGD of water is required at peak periods; this may come from either surface or groundwater. Surface water is preferable because there are no well-drilling or pumping costs. C = costs are constant per devel opment V = costs vary with number of units 98/Coastal Development Potential Study Blueberry Farming Blueberries require quite speciali7ed conditions in order to be grown commer- cially. They need acid, sandy, peaty soils with a high water table. Soil pH should be between 4.5 and 5.0, and the water table should be about 22" below the surface. The Atsion-Muc k-Alluvial land, sandy soil association, and the Atsion and Berryland soil series are ideal for blueberry raising. Blueberries have recently been commanding very high prices, and some better drained lands have been converted to blueberries. These marginal areas often require irriga- tion. However, they are not ideal for blueberries. The smallest acreage that could support a blueberry grower on a full-time basis, under a reasonable level of management, is around 50 acres. Water availability is not a locational consideration for blueberries because of the nature of the soils in which they grow. Development Potential Factors � Undeveloped Land � Soil Association (Atsion-Muck-Alluvial land, sandy soil association, Atsion and Berryland series Use Descriptions and Cost Date /99 WELINE UNIT COST: $150,000 DEVELMENT SIZE: 50 acres Blueberry Farmin Tote IFactor Factor Level Data cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Soil Association Atsion-Muck-Alluvial Land, Sandy Soil Association 0 0 High Other x x Baseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost for Blueberry Farming represents an Initial investment of $2,000 per acre for clearing, grading, and ditching, as well as $1,000 for blueberry plants. The soils in which cranberries are grown will nearly always be associated with an adequate amount of water to grow blueberries. C - costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units M/Coastal Development Potential Study Forestry Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land * Soils in Woodland Suitability Groups I and 2 * Prime Open Agricultural Land (soil In identifying areas with high for special crops/muck soils) potential for forestry use, two factors 0 Forest Cover Types; immature pine, are of preponderant importance: mature pine, oak, mixed hardwoods, existing vegetation and soils. At the white cedar present time, existing vegetation is the more important consideration. The most important trees commercially are pine, oak, mixed hardwoods and white cedar. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service classifies soils as to their suitability for woodland use. There are five woodland suitability groups. Soils in Group I have a very high potential productivity; thosein Group 2, high; 3, moderately high; 4, mod erate; and 5, low. Soils having development potential for forestry use j will be those in woodland suitabil i ty groups I and 2. In addition, muck soils have high potential for the growth of white cedar. The acreage of forest required to support a commercial 35., 0 forester and his family will vary P depending on the species of greatl'y, tree, but 500 acres is a representative f i g u r e . 74 *Source: New Jersey Bureau of Forestry. N.d. New Jersey's Forest Resources Present and Future. Trenton. 4 f Y Use Descriptions and Cost Date /101 BASELINE LINIT COST: $10,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 500 acres Forestry Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Soils and Forest Woodland Suitability Cover Type Groups I and 11 0 0 Muck Soils + 25,000 + 50 Immature Pine + 25,000 + 50 High Mature Pine + 125,000 1+ 250 Oak + 75 000 + 150 Mixed Hardwoods -350:000 + 700 White'Cedar I+ 475,000 + 950 Baseline Specifi-cation - NOTE: The baseline unit cost represents a value of $20 per acre for woodland. This figure, based on tax assessment figures, reflects only the value of the land for forestry use. The development size of 500 acres should be treated with caution, since the acreage required to support an individual in full-time forestry will vary widely with tree species and other factors. Two factors determine the suitability of land for forestry: soils and existing vegetation. Of these, the second is vastly more important. Soils in Woodland Suitability Groups I and 2 have potential for forestry use, and are taken as the baseline specification. In order to avoid problems of double-counting, this data category applies only to unforested land. The bonus figure for muck soils, which are ideal for growing white cedar, also applies only to unforested muck soils. The other bonus values reflect the relative worth of an acre of land under various types of forest cover. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of un itS 102/Coastal Development Potential Study Commercial Fishing Docks oProximity to community Service Center Approximately 150 finfish species oProximity to Fishing Community inhabit New Jersey's coastal waters or and Fish Processing Plants oAccess to Public Sewerage migrate through them, 30 of which are oAccess to Public Water Supply important to the fishing industry. Finfish oProximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage catches vary with seasonal migration pat- eEmbayment5 terns and cyclic or sporadic population oMinor Tides changes. Many species migrate northward and inshore from continental shelf waters (Parts of the following are extracted from aSe theroceannwater becomes warmer during Bonsall, 1977.) th sp ing a d summer months. The more important of these species include the Atlantic menhaden, weakfish (sea trout), scup (porgy), bluefish, fluke (summer The fishing industry is separated into two distinct yet interdependent groups flounder), Atlantic mackerel, black sea fishermen and fish processors. bass, puffer and butterfish. Further offshore the bluefin tuna, bonito, sword- fish, and white marlin move in a similar New Jersey's commercial fishing fleet migration pattern but do not all move as consists of approximately 3,200 vessels and far inshore. In the fall and winter these boats employing about 4,500 full- and part- Ike finfish species move offshore and/or time people. Eighty-six percent of these boats sail from three coastal counties: southward. Consequently the best fishing Ocean (47%), Atlantic (30%), and Cape May for these fish is during the warmer months (9%). The balance of the fleet originates from April to November. in Cumberland, Monmouth, Salem, and Bergen counties. The principal commercial fishing Another group of finfish, known as L anadromous because they spawn in fresh municipalities within each county are water, moves into the estuaries and as- Belford and Highlands, Monmouth County; cends tidal rivers during the late spring Point Pleasant and Barnegat Light, Ocean and early summer months. Included in County; Atlantic City and Ocean City, ..4 Atlantic County; Wildwood and Cape May, .ifr- this group are the striped bass, American Cape May County; and Port Norris and Bivalve, shad, blueback herring, alewife, and white Cumberland County. Z. perch. Good fishing for these fish occurs during periods of their upstream spawning Fishermen require minor ports or mari- runs. nas for docking. Different ports or mari- nas tend to specialize in catch depending A third group of finfish which in- on their proximity to the resource. Usually cludes the whiting (silver hake), cod, commercial fishing boats are separated from tlantic herring, ling (squirrel or red party boats at dock facilities. h ke), yellowtail flounder, and winter flounder, migrates southward and/or towards Commercial fishing docks are usually the coast during the fall and winter months. adjacent to boat maintenance and ice or Therefore, good fishing for these species freezer storage facilities. Channel depth __7 occurs during the late fall and early requirements for older boats are 12 feet; spring periods. newer vessels require up to 16 feet. however, New Jersey's coastal waters support Development Potential Factors abundant shellfish as well as finfish. " The soft clam is abundant inWhe bays and � Undeveloped Land rivers of the northern part of the state, � Access to Collector Road especially in Sandy Hook Bay, and the � Access to 16-foot Channel estuaries of the Navesink, Shrewsbury, � Marine Access Shark, Manasquan, and Metedeconk Rivers down to Forked River in Barnegat Bay. The hard clam, which is more widely distributed, Use Descriptions and Cost Data /103 BASELINE UNIT COST: $600,000 DEVELDPMENT SIZE: 50 slips, 10 acres Commercial Fishing Docks Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of TotaI Factor Factor Level g Data cost Cost/unit of Factor Cate ories + or - + or - Confidence Factor Categories + 0 r + or Confidence ($) ($) M ($) Undeveloped Land Embayments * Present [31 0 0 Not Present X X High V Access to Collector 0-1/2 0 0 Minor Tides * 2 feet or less 0 0 Road 1/2-1-1/2 -150,000 -150,000 Greater than 2 feet - 4o,ooo - 0,000 Low 1-1/2-3 -300,000 -300,000 High rc- 3+ miles -450,000 -450,000 F-V Access to 16-foot 0-1/2 0 0 Baseline Specification Channel 1/2-1 - 550,000 - 550,000 Medium 1-2 -1,100,000 -1,100,000 2+ miles -1,46o.ooo -1,46o.ooo F, Marine Access Present 131 0 0 Not Present X X High V Proximtty to 0-1 15,000 - 15,000 Community Service 1-3 5,000 - 5,000 Mad i um Center 3-5 1,000 - 1,000 FV 5+ miles 0 0 @roximity to Fishing 0-1 - 20,000 - 400 Community 1-3 - 10,000 - 200 3-5 - 2,000 - 4o Medium FT 5+ miles 0 0 Access to Public Sewerage 0-1/2 0 0 NOTE: 1/2-1-1/2 - 100,000 -100,000 Medium The baseline unit cost given here includes the cost of dredging 1-1/2 within the dock. Dredging costs for Access to 16-foot Channel are -3 - 200,000 -200,000 based on a channel 60 feet wide, with an average dredged depth of rc- 3+ miles - 300,000 -300,000 9 feet. Dredging cost can vary widely, from less than $2.50 per cubic yard to more than $10 per cubic yard depending on the amount and type of material, and the method of disposal. Costs given here Access to are based on a $6 per cubic yard estimate. Cost for Fishing Docks, Public Water Supply 0-1/2 0 0 1/2-1-1/2 - 100,000 -100,000 Medium as for Marinas and Ports, are generally somewhat higher in the north- - /2-3 - 200,000 -200,000 ern part of the state and lower in the southern section. Costs for [_C ;+lmiles - 300,000 -300,000 Access to Collector Road are based on a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). The Access to Public Water Supply numbers are Proximity to @Adjacent [31 0 0 based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe, installed at a depth of 4 River or Bay Shore 0-1/2 X X feet. The Access to Public Sewerage figures pre based on the use Frontage 1/2-1 X X High. of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. 1+ mile X X F_ C = costs are constant per development V V = costs vary with number of units Baseline Specification 104/Coastal Development Potential Study can be found in virtually all bays and bass, tilefish, Atlantic mackerel, blue- 2,000 people each year with Cumberland, rivers throughout the coast extending from fin tuna, bluefish, a:nd red hake. Shell- Cape May, Atlantic, Essex and Camden Coun- Raritan and Sandy Hook Bays in the north fish with greatest weight and dollar value ties each employing an average of 300 to Delaware Bay in the south. The surf in 1977 were the, surf clam, ocean quohog, people. New Jersey's processed fishery clam or sea clam is found in off5hore sea scallop, oyster, and hard clam. New products were valued at $60 million in marine waters all along the New Jersey Jersey ranked seventh nationally in com- 1975. coast, but is particularly abundant in the mercial fisheries landings by weight and southern half of the state from Little Egg thirteenth by dollar value in 1973. Fish processing plants arecovered Harbor to Cape May Point. under standard industrial classifications The fishing industry is beset with (SIC) in the Industrial chapter of this The ocean quohog or mahogany quohog is many problems which have evolved through report. These include: becoming an increasingly important shell- the years since World War 11. A major fish for harvesting in the light of declin- problem presently facing the industry is - 2031 Canned and Cured Seafood ing surf clam stocks. Ocean quohogs are factors have combined to produce this - 2032 Canned Specialties found off the New Jersey shore at depths sftuation including heavy foreign fleet - 2036 Fresh and Frozen Packaged Fish of 37 to 55 meters. Estimates of a stand- and domestic commercial fishing off New ing quohog crop in New Jersey waters is Jersey shores, a dramatic upsurge in rec- An example of the development potential 2.3 billion pounds. reational fishing, a sharp increase in factors for fish processing plants follows, estuarine water pollution, and disease. Keep in mind that this represents an aver- Oyster beds are located in Raritan A corollary problem is the industry's slow age fish processing facility that processes Bay, the estuaries of the Navesink, Toms, reaction to meet changing consumer prefer- a mixture of products from raw frozen fish Mullica, Tuckahoe, and Great Egg Harbor ences for fish and fish products in New filets to fish sticks, and employs approxi- Rivers, and in the upper Delaware Bay, Jersey and the United States. Consequent- mately 300 people. Requirements for water, Some of the beds in Delaware Bay are de- ly, commercial catch and market for fin- space, and energy would probably increase dicated to seed oyster production and after fish has declined throughout the years. as products become more specialized (i.e., several years growth, the young oysters At the same time some shellfish, such as breaded, pre-cooked fish sticks in ready- from these beds are transplanted to the surf clams, have increased. Certain species to-heat packages). lower Delaware Bay where the water is more are currently overharvested while others saline and conducive to growth. Bay scal- are not. In the future, catch will shift Development Potential Factors lops are found in Barnegat Bay from Barnegat to fish with higher potential for maintain- e Undeveloped Land Light south to Manahawkin Bay and Little ing a safe sustained yield. These fish a Access to Collector Roa .d Egg Harbor. with the greatest potential include whiting, o Access to Railroad ling, butterfish, squid, Atlantic mackerel, * Access to Electric Power The American lobster is another im- and herring. Meanwhile, fluke and ocean Distribution Line portant shellfish found along the New Jersey quohog appear to be approaching their o Proximity to Commercial Fishing Dock coast from nearshore waters to the 200 potential . o Proximity to Metropolitan Service fathom line. Major population areas include Center the Hudson Canyon, the slope of the Con- What happens to the finfish and shell- 0 Slope tinental Shelf, and limited rocky inshore fish once they are caught? For.the most o Soil Load Bearing Capacity areas of the northern part of the state. part, the finfish are sold at the dock to o Access to Public Water Supply Blue crabs are found in estuaries and near- be taken to the fresh fish markets in New o Potable Water Supply shore waters along the entire coast. York, Phi ladelphia and Baltimore. Shell- o Access to Public Sewerage fish are sold at the dock for the fresh Commercial fishermen operatino from New market as well, but are also sold to a Jersey landed approximately 121.6 million variety of processing plants located pounds of finfish and 42.1 million pounds of along the New Jersey coast. Of the 43 shellfish, valued at approximately $14,3 and wholesale dealers and processing plants in 30.2 million pounds respectively in 1978 (Eu- New Jersey, about half are devoted to proc- gene LoVerde, 1979). Eleven finfish species essing shellfish. The remaining plants comprised 95 percent of the catch in weight process finfish by filleting, freezing, and go percent of the dollar value, using canning, and smoking to pw@_bduce frozen 1976 data. These fish include the menha- dinners, soups, sauces, gefilte-fish, and den, whiting, porgy, weakfish, fluke, sea animal feeds. These plants employ about Use Descriptions and Cost Data /105 ELINE UNIT COST: $2,000,000 - $5,000.000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 4 acres (12 million pound processing piant with 2 production lines) Fish Processin Plants I I TotaI Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Leve Data +Cost Cost/Unit of Data Cost Cost/Unit of I Factor Categories or + or - Confidence Factor Categories + or + or Confidence ($) ($) ($) ($) Undeveloped Land Potable Water Supply FT Access to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 0 Access to Public 0 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 150,000 150,000 High Sewerage k - 100,000 - 100,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 300,000 300,000 It 3 - 200,000 - 200,000 3+ miles 450,000 450,000 3+ miles - 300,000 - 300,000 FE Access to Railroad 0 0 Baseline Specification k - 600,000 600,000, Medium 14 - 3 -1,200,000 -1,200,000 3+ miles -1,500,000 -1,500,000 F Access to Electric 0 - 0 0 Power Distribution k - 48,000 - 48,ooo Low Line It - 3 - 96,ooo - 96,000 3+ miles - 14li,ooo - 144,000 Proximity to Commer- 0 - 2 [161 cial Fishing Dock 2 5 5 10 104- miles F NOTE: Proximity to 0 15 [161 In developing a new processing plant it is assumed that a modern, Metro@olitan Service 15 30 relatively small, operation consisting of two production lines, each Center j30 45 producing 6 million pounds of product per year, would be constructed. 45 6o This type of plant includes machines for heading and gutting round 60+ miles fish, filleting them and producing blocks by the use of plate freezers. FT I The baseline unit cost includes $100,000 - $200,000 for the purchase slope 0 - 3 0 0 and installation of on-site equipment for fish waste disposal. 3 - 8 - 30,000 - 30,000 Essential cold storage is included in the cost. Additional cold storage 8 - 15 - 110,000 - IIOtOOO Medium is a significant additional investment. 15%+ 185,000 - 185,000 F Soil Bearing Capacity High [1] 0 0 Medium 7,000 - 7,000 Low Low 16,ooo - 16,000 V 0 0 0 Access to Public 115,000 115tOOO High Source: Arthur D. Little. 1979. Preliminary Feasibility Study of a Water Supply New Fish Processing Venture in Cape May County. Final report to . 3 230:000 230,000 Middle Township. 3+ miles 345 000 345tOOO C = costs are constant per development OC V = costs vary with number of units FBa;elne Specification 106/Coastal Development Potential Study 31 105e i Recreation i I 108/Coastal Development Potential Study Playing Fields Playing fields, for the purposes of this study, include areas for field sports, such as baseball and softball, and for IT court sports, such as basketball and tennis. individual basketball and tennis courts have L such modest siting requirements that a regional study cannot usefully deal with ------ them. Therefore, playing fields considered here will be large neighborhood or community facilities having a number of fields and paved courts together. Such facilities would be likely to range in area from 3 up 30 acres. A single regulation baseball fi id for example, requires as much as 4 toe acres . Such facilities may be expected to serve on the order of 10,000 persons within a dr ving ime Of 10 minutes. The principal i I f requirements o playing fields are level, well-drained ground within easy reach of an adequate number of users. Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land (3 - 30 acres) * Access to Collector Road * Soil Drainage Was-- * Slope (0 - 3%) Source: New Jersey Department of Environ- mental Protection, Office of Environmental Review. Outdoor Recreation in New Jersey. 1973. Use Descriptions and Cost Date /109 BASELINE WIT COST: DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 3 acres Playing Fields Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Collector Road 0 - 1/2 0 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -150,000 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -300,000 High C 3+ miles -450,000 -450,000 Soil Drainage High (1) 6 0 Medium - 3,000 - 3,000 Low - 5,000 - 5,000 Low V Slope 0-3 0 0 3-8 - 48,000 - 48,000 8-15 - 78,000 - 78,000 Medium 15+ % -120,000 -120,000 Baseline SpcificatIon I NOTE: Playing Fields may range in size from 3 to 30 acres. The larger acreages will contain baseball fields and other grass playing fields. Those with smaller acreages will usually contain a higher percentage of tennis courts, basketball courts, and tot lots. Rather than give a baseline unit cost that could not be representative for all types of playing fields, typical costs are given below for various kinds of playing fields and courts. Baseball field $45,000 Football field 45,000 T:nn urt 34,ooo 8 skeistbacoll court 11,000 Tot lot 7,000 Access to Collector Road costs are based on the use of a level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 110/Coastal Development Potential Study Golf Courses golf course architect, planner, and owner Development Potential Factors decide to lay the course. Many times, the golf course will be layed out within the 9 Undeveloped Land (100 - 175 acres per boundaries of a development. 18-hole course) 9 Access to Local Road There are five basic golf course design o Slope types, with several possible options each, o Soil Drainage which can facilitate the particular needs of o Groundwater Availability In most cases, a regulation golf course an individual development. After a feasible o Surface Water Availability has a par of 70, 71, 72 or occasionally 69 location has been determined by studying the o Access to Public Water Supply or 73. Many older courses built in the topography and the natural site characteris- o Visual Amenities United States play to a total par of 70. tics the developer and design team can deter- Topography However, in recent years par 72 has become mine which type, or combination of types, Vegetation the standard of excellence in the minds of would be most appropriate for the project many developers and golfers. It should be from every standpoint. stressed, however, that the size and natural characteristics of a site determine what the The five basic prototypical configura- total par should be; therefore, many courses tions for an 18-hold regulation golf course are built outside the standard par 72. In are: (1) single fairway 18-hole course with many cases the golf course architect will returning nines, (2) single fairway contin- determine that a shorter par 70 course many uous 18-hole course, (3) double fairway indeed be much better than a forced par 72 18-hold course with returning nines, (4) because it is more demanding and natural. double fairway continuous 18-hole course, Neither par nor total yardage should be the and (5) 18-hole core golf course. criterion of quality, for the objectives of the recreational development golf course The United States Golf Association has should be that it be fair and enjoyable to set a general standard for par in relation play. to the yardage of any given hole: ''Par is the score that an expert golfer would be A regulation golf course comprises 18 expected to play without flukes and under holes with a combination of par 3s, 4s, and ordinary weather conditions allowing two 5s, the sum of which equals pars 70 to 73. strokes on the putting green." The method The standard mix for a par 72 golf course for computing par on any hole is as follows: is Len ya, @, "O.r pa, 3@, dl,j i'v- P- 5- Par7lcourses generally drop a par 4 and replace it with a par 3 or drop a par 5 and Distance in Yards replace it with a par 4. A par 70 golf course generally has either six par 3s, Men Women Par 71 eight par 4s, and four par 5s or four par 3s, twelve par 4s, and two par 5s. A par 73 golf course generally has an additional par Up to 250 Up to 210 3 5 in place of a par 4. It is these combina- 251 to 470 211 to 4oo 4 tions of pars which comprise what is con- 471 and over 401 to 575 5 sidered to be the norm to qualify a course 576 and over 6 as "regulation" in the minds of golfers. However, it is neither total yardage nor par which determines the amount of area used, ]LInited States Golf Association. 1969. Golf the quantity of lot frontage, and the cost Committee Manual and USGA Golf Handicap of maintenance and control of the golf facil- System. ity once it is built. The needs of the project, the shape of the total property, and the physical characteristics of the site all have an influence on how and where the Use Descriptions and Cost Data /111 BASELINE UNIT COST: $1,250,000 DEVELOPMENT S17E: 100 acres, 18 holes Golf Courses Total Factor Factor Level D;ta Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Cate 0 ,ies + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 @)50,000 .150,000 High 1 1/2 - 14 000 300 000 A00: 450:000 3+ miles 5 000 C Slope 0-3 - 75,000 75,000 * 3-8 0 0 Medium B-15 -110,000 -110,000 F.- 15+ % -185,000 -185,000 Soil Drainage * High 0) 0 0 Medium - 48,ooo -48 000 Low Low - 96,ooo 96:000 Groundwater 0-1/2 (13,14) - 1,500 - 1,500 Availability 1/2-1 0 0 1@3 0 0 Medium 3-6 0 0 0 0 Ll 6+ MGD Surface Water 0-1/2 (13,141 1,500 - 1,500 Availability 1/2-1 0 0 1-3 0. 0 Medium 3-6 0 0 6+ MGD 0 n Access to Public o - 1/2 0 0 Water Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 -115,000 '115,000 1 1/2 - 3 @230,000 -230,000 Medium NOTE: 3+ miles @345,000 -345,000 Existing topography, soil conditions, vegetation and surface water will dictate the amount of land required for a golf course. Generally 13 C the following space requirements apply: a standard 18-hole golf course, 120 to 160 acres; a standard 9-hole golf course, 70 to 90 acres; a 9-hole Visual Amenities Topography + 95,000 + 95,000 ?ar-3 golf course, 45 to 60 acres. These acreages are sufficient to Vegetation + 70,000 + 70POOO Low include a practice putting green, a practice driving range, a clubhouse, Other 0 0 and parking facilities. The baseline unit cost given here does not in- clude the cost of a clubhouse. Water has not been included as a visual amenity since water hazards are usually developed as part of the base- line cost. The costs for Access to Local Road are based on the use of @W te r il,ty to P ublic @_*,Baseline Specification a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). The figures are based on the use of an 8 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 112/Goastal Development Potential Study Seashore Amusement Parks seashore amusement Parks are located a long the boardwalks of heavily visited seashore communities. These amusement parks do not draw many visitors in and of themselves, but rather they are a part of the overall recreational ambience of the They provide alternative activity shore. for people who have been drawn to the ._rz@ shore primarily for beach bathing. Amusement parks typically provide a number W .of rides, a Ferris wheel, a roller coaster, a midway with games of skill, and small take-out food shops. The use of these parks is highly seasonal, concentrated mainly on summer weekends. Because so much of their business is concentrated in such short periods of time, amusement parks depend on the presence of large customers. numbers of potential Seashore amusement parks are heavy iii L-iiiS Of yeai- traffic generator!, nuL long average volumes, but in terms of 44 summer weekend peak loads. These sites having potential for development as sea- shore amusement parks should have access to a collector road. A portion of the acreage should be devoted to parking Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land *Access to Collector Road *Proximity to Resort Communities *Access to Public Sewerage *Access to Public Water Supply *Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage *Characler of Surround;nj Area Use Descriptions and Cost Date /113 BASELINE UNIT COST: $1,200,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 5 acres Seashore Amusement Parks Total Factor Factor Level D;ta Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Cat. or ies + or + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Access to Collector 0 - 1/2 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 150,000 150,000 1 1/2 - 3 - 300,000 300,000 High C 3+ miles - 450,000 450,000 Proximity to 0 - + '200,000 + 200,000 Resort Communities I - 3 + 1.00,000 + 100,000 Medium 3 - 5 + 50,000 + 50,000 F-v 5+ miles 0 Access to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Sewerage 1/2 - 1 1/2 - - 1 1/2 - 3 Med I um 17 3+ miles - - kccess to Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 dater Supply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100,000 - 100,000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 - 200,000 3+ miles - 300,000 - 300,000 Fc- Adjacent [31 0 0 Proximity to Ocean 0 - 1/2 - - Beach Frontage 1/2 - 1 1/2 - - High 1 1/2 - 3 - - 3+ miles - - FT Character of Compatible Land Use 0 0 Surrounding Area (31 High Other X X Fy- Baseline Specification NOTE: The baseline unit cost given here is based on a park having three major rides costing an average of $250,000 each, (though a roller coaster can cost anywhere between $1,500,000 and $5,000,000) as well as buildings for arcades, and provisions for parking. Deficiency costs for Access to Collector Road are based on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). Costs for Access to Public Water Supply are based on the use of a 6-inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4-feet. The Access to Public Sewerage figures are based on the use of an 8-inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4-feet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 114/Coastal Development Potential Study Campgrounds provide natural screening around individ- -N) ual campsites. Development Potential Factors o Undeveloped Land o Access to Collector Road o Proximity to Public Open Space Campgrounds are facilities provid- o Soil Drainage o Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal Systems ing campsites for travellers and vaca- o Public Sewerage tioners with tents or trailers. Camp- o Public Water Supply JA grounds may be geared to accommodate o Potable Water Supply either trailer or tent campers, but o Acceptable Water Quality - Fishing most commonly, they can accommodate both. o Acceptable Water Quality - Swimming Campgrounds generally provide water and o On-Site Amenities electrical connections, and some combi- o Visual Amenities nation of sewer hook-ups, flush toilets, and dumping stations. Hot showers, laundry facilities, propane gas, gro- ceries, ice, and refreshments are also often available. Recreational facili- ti@es usually include, at a minimum, pic- nic tables and fireplaces. Larger camp- grounds may have a clubhouse, playground, swimming Ceither in a natural water body or a pool), fishing, boating, miniature golf, outdoor movies, and square dancing. Campground users are vacationers. While campgrounds seek to provide as many recreational facilities as they can, it is highly desirable that they be located near some recreational facility or area that is sufficiently attractive to draw users from a considerable dis- tance. New Jersey's Atlantic coastline is such an area, as are Federal open space and recreation areas, and State parks, forests, natural areas, and recreation areas. A campground may be several hundred acres in size, or even larger. Many, however, are significantly smaller, and 20 acres is taken here as a reasonable minimum. The traffic generated by a campground could in general be handled by a collector road. However, location on an arterial road is desirable because of the greater number of travel- lers such roads carry. Host other siting considerations are straightforward. Among on-site amenities, however, vegetation is of particular importance, in order to Use Descriptions and Cost Date /115 BASELINE UNIT COST: $15,000 $30,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 140 units, 20 acres Cam grounds Total Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Data Cost cost/Unit of Factor Catgo ries + or - + or Confidence Factor Categories + or - + or Confidence M ($) Undeveloped Land Acceptable Water Available 0 0 Medium Quality - Swimming Not available - 12,000 - F-v Access to Collector 0 1/2 0 0 On-Site Amenities Vegetation + 17,000 + 120 Medium Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -1,070 High Other 0 0 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -2,150 3+ miles -45o,ooo -3,200 F-c 0 - ) +40,000 +285 ry Proximity to I - 3 +@ 25,000 +175 Medium Visual Amenities Woodland + 10,000 + 70 Low Public Open 3 - 5 +12,000 @+ 85 * Other 0 0 Space 5 - 10 +3,000 + 20 E-y * 10+ miles 0 0 Ev boll Drainage * High 0 0 * illaseline Specification Medium -5,600 -4o Low LOW -13,000 -92 F-V Soils Suitable for * slight 0 0 On-Site Disposal moderate -98,000 - 700 Low Systems FL 7-Y Severe Limitations -185,000 -1,300 Access to 0 - 1/2 Public Sewerage 1/2 - 1 1/2 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 3+ miles Access to 0 - 1/2 Public Water Supply 1/2 - 1 112 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 3+ miles Ll C Potable Water Available 0 0 High supply Not Available X X NOTE: The baseline unit cost given for Campgrounds is based on a density of 7 units per acre, although slighter densities are frequently encount- L2 V ered. The costs for Access to Collector Road are based on a level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). The deficiency costs for Access Acceptable Water Available 0 0 M .edium to Public Water are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at Quality - Flshl-ng Not Available -8,000 a depth of 4 feet. The Access to Public Sewerage figures are based on the use of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units Baseline Specification 116/Coastal Development Potential Study Summer Campgrounds Development Potential Factors 0 9 Undeveloped Land --- ---- Access to Local Road 0 Proximity to Public Open Space o Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal Systems ems o Access to Public Sewerage o Access to Public Water Supply tion o Potable Water Supply Summer camps are summer vaca N facilities for s Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage chool-age children. o Generally, they provide a wilderness o r o Acceptable Water Quality Fishing % Swimming semi-wilderness experience for children, o Acceptable Water Quality who may stay for a week up to several o On-Site Amenities r weeks. Emphasis is on outdoor sports o Character of Surrounding Area and activities, usually with particular regard for nature-related activities. Arts and crafts, hiking, swimming, canoeing, and nature lore are generally . ........... popular in summer camps. The larger and more elaborate camps might have playing fields for softball or soccer, as wel I as tennis or basketball courts. . Housing for campers can vary quite widely, from tents raised on platforms at the more rus tic camps, to log cabins -style buildings, or wood frame barracks up to masonry dormitories. Meals are taken communally. Because a sense of isolation is such an important part of camping, it is de- sirable to have relatively large acreages. The size for a taken to be 100 acres. Camps are pri- OL in the market place for users. This puts vately owned, and must, therefore, compete 7@- a premium on a pleasant and attractive environment. Thus, on-site amenities Wt .1, @6* are specially important for summer . ,1% . n camps, since these constitute much of 16-Ii. what they are offering. There should be woodlands on the site, and a body of water providing fishing, boating, and swimming. Access to at least a local road is also necessary. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /117 BASEQNE LNIT COST: $ '000 DEVELK)RIIENT SIZE: 100 acres Summer Cam grounds Total Factor Factor Level Tot:CI Factor Facto r Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Data ost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Factor Categories or + or Confidence Undeveloped Land Acceptable Water Available + 5,000 + 5,000 Medium Quality - Swimming 171 * Not Available 0 0 Access to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 On-Site Amenities Vegetation + 2,000 + 2,000 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 50,000 -50 000 High * Other 0 0 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 - 100,000 -100:000 F-c 3+ miles - 150,000 -150,000 _V Proximity to 0 - I + 10,000 +10,000 Character of Woode + 5,000 + 5,000 Public Open Space I - 3 + 8,ooo +8,ooo Surrounding Area Rura Id + 2,000 + 2,000 Medium 3 - 5 + 5,000 +5,000 Medium Other 0 0 5 - 10 + 3,000 +3,000 r_V * 10+ miles 0 0 Fy So lls Suit :bD1e * Slight [51 0 0 Baseline Specification for On-Sit Isposal Moderate - 1,000 -1,000 Medium Systems Severe Limitations - 2,000 -2,000 7 Acce;asgeto Public * 0 - 1/2 0 0 Sewe 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100,000 -100 000 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 -200:000 Medium F- 3+ miles - 300,000 -300,000 C Acc ;sSt Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Wat: .0pply 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 100,000 -100 000 Medium 1 1/2 - 3 - 200,000 -200:000 5 Fc 3+ miles - 300,000 -300,000 Potable Water Supply Available [3,41 0 0 Not Available X X 4igh F _F L2 V NOTE: Proximity to River Adjacent 20,000 +20,000 Summer camps for children are highly varied in terms of the sorts of or Bay Shore Frontage 0 - 1/2 2,000 +2,000 Medium experience they offer. The baseline unit cost given here is based on a rustic camp with a wilderness atmosphere. Camps which heavily emphasize 1/2 - 1 500 + 500 activities such as tennis will have higher baseline unit costs. The cost 1+ miles 0 associated with Access to Local Road are based on the use of a Level I V access road (see Element Cost Sheet). The Access to Public Water Supply figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe, installed at a depth Acceptable Water Available 2,000 2,000 Medium of 4 feet. The deficiency costs associated with Access to Public Sewerage Quality - Fishing Not Available D are based on the use of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units Baseline Specification 7 118 /Coastal Development Potential Study Parks CAIIIIAUMMAI PARK in this study, are t Parks, as defined large facilities offering passive recreation Parks may range to large numbers of people. .0 While .'4 lift 'I A 100 or more. in area from 30 acres to they parks may include some playing fields, 71,, will generally be less intensely developed, offering activities such as picnicking, hik ing, and nature study. The requirements of such parks are rather different from those of more intensive recreational facilities 4 Far from requiring level ground, a certain amount of topographic reliet may be quite desirable for esthetic purposes, and to pro- vide isolation from adjacent developed areas. Water on the site is also a very attractive feature. Floodplains, which are generally unsuitable for more intensive forms of development, may be ideal for inclusion in . .... ... parks. Such parks are not intended to compete with state parks, which offer a wilderness Rxperience to Deople who are willing to travel relatively long distances. Rather, they provide a natural experience for nearby residents. Therefore, in order to be access- ible to a sufficiently large number of users, these parks should be located in areas where 77 roughly 50,000 people reside within a 20- =::izz minute drive. ,Development Potential Factors * Undeveloped Land acres) (30 to 100+ * Access to Local Road * Slope * Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage * Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage * On-Site Amenities * Visual Amenities * Population Density Source: New Jersey Department of Environ- mental Protection, Office of Environmental Review. Outdoor Recreation in New Jersey. 1973. and Cost Date /119 Use Descriptions BASELINE UNIT COST: DEVELOWENT SIZE: 4 acres Parks Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Catego 'i.. + or - + or Confidence W Undeveloped Land Access to Local Road 0 - 1/2 0 0 1/2 - 1 1/2 -150,000 -150,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 -300,000 -300,000 FE 3+ mi -les- -4.5o,ooo -450,000 Slope 0 3 0 0 3 8 0 0 Medium 8 15 0 0 15+ % 0 0 V Proximity to River Adjacent +50,000 +50,000 or Bay Shore 0 - 1/2 +20,000 +20 000 Medium Frontage 1/2 - I +5,000 f5:000 1+ mile 0 0 V Adjacent +200,000 +200,000 Proximity to Ocean 0 - 1/2 *30,000 + 30,000 Beach Frontage 1/2 - 5 6,000 + 6,ooo Medium 5 - 15 1,000 + 1,000 V 15+ miles 0 On-Site Amenities Topography + 1,000 +1,000 Medium Other 0 0 V Visual Amenities Vegetation + 2,000 + 2,000 Medium other 0 0 V, Population Density Less than 1,000 people NOTE per square mile X X High The baseline unit cost of Parks has been left blank because it is Greater than 1,000 impossible to put a dollar value on Parks. The figures that are given people per square mile 0 0 are for a 4 acre park, but parks can range from less than an acre to Fy_ 100 acres. Smaller parks are considered as Playing Fields and larger Baseline Specification parks have been termed Natural Areas for the purposes of this study. No baseline specification has been given for slope, since the sort of topo- graphy derived for parks may vary widely. The costs for Access to Local Road are based on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 120/Goastal Development Potential Study .0@ Beach Bathing Beach bathing in this study refers to shwater bath- There are fre ocean bathing. but the beaches ing beaches in New Jersey, tend to be small, and it is difficult to e scale at identify suitable areas at th is being done, Ocean which this study orm of outdoor is the most popular f bathing recreation in New Jersey. on an average Z eekend day, there are 775,000 peak season w recreation days of demand for sw imming." (A recreation day is one person engaging in for an entire day; thus the one activity total number of people swimming on a given considerably higher then day might be 775,000.) Bathing is distributed all along New Jersey's 127 miles of Atlantic coastline between sandy Hook and Cape May. Within the locational require- 7, this broad area, ments of bathing beaches are relatively modest. Water quality should be adequate tor swimming. Areas or neavy boating, as inlet, shou Id be avoided. at the mouth of an Also, area subject to rip tides should be s avoided, where they can be identified. The only other consideration is accessibility. Tno Bathing beaches should be adjacent to or accessible from a road, and parking areas should be nearby. Development Potential Factors 9Undeveloped Land oAccess to Local Road *Proximity to Parking *Proximity to Oz-ean Beach F,ontage *Acceotable Water Quality - swimming *Sourcez New Jersey Department of Environ- mental Protection, Office of Environmental Review, Outdoor Recreation in New Jersey 1973, Use Descriptions and Cost Data 1121 BASELINE LVIT COST: --- DEVELOPNENT SIZE: 2 acres Beach Bathing Total ctor Factor Level Co:a 'ata t Cos t/Unit of Factor Catego r les + or - + or Confidence M M Undeveloped Land Access to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 Road 1/2 - 1 1/2 - 150,000 -150,000 High 1 1/2 - 3 - 300,000 -300.000 3+ miles - 450,000 -45o,ooo Proximity to Parking 0 - 1/2 + '30,000 +30,000 1/2 - I + 15,000 +15,000 Low 1+ mile 0 0 FT Adjacent 0 0 Proximity to Ocean 0 - 1/2 X X Beach Frontage '/2 - 5 X X High 5 - 15 X X ry- 15+ miles X X Acceptable Water Acceptable 0 0 Quality Swimming Not Acceptable X X High IBaseline Specification NDTE: No baseline unit cost has been given for Beach Bathing because it i impossible to put an accurate dollar value on beaches. The figu;es that are given here pertain to a 2 acre parcel. However, bathing beaches can be of any size. The costs given for Access to Local Road are based on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost Sheet). C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 122/Coastal Development Potential Study Annual-1976 Person-Days Sport FiShing Participants Recreation Ocean fishing 493,000 17,000,000 Estuarine fishing 483,000 20,000,000 Surf fishing 231 000 11,000,000 Crabbing 645,000 25,000,000 Recreational fishing in New Jersey takes Clamming iiS,ooo 10,000,000 many widely different forms. There is stream 1,868,000 83,000,000 fishing from banks, bridges and stream beds; Total Total freshwater fishermen also fish from boats in the state's rivers, lakes, and bays. Salt- Source: Figley (1976) water f i shi ng i s s i mi lar I y d i v ided among surf fishermen and those who fish off piers, those Marine fishing is estimated to provide who fish from private and charter boats in 36.07 million person days of recreation in the ocean, and those who are involved in New Jersey with approximately $10.42 expen- shellfishing. ditures/day yielding a total of $375.8 million to the state economy. Of this total, All these diverse types of fishing have finfishing yielded approximately $217.2 two requirements in common: the accessibility million and shellfishing $158.6 million. by fishermen, and the presence -- or at least the hope -- of fish. Streams where fish may Twelve species comprise 95 percent of all be expected to be found can be readily iden- the recreational finfish species caught off tified from historical fishing data, stocking the New Jersey Coast. These include the blue- records, and stream quality data. Locating fish, Atlantic Mackerel, striped bass, weak- fish in more open bodies of water and in the fish, white perch, winter flounder, summer ocean is more problematic. Access to fishing flounder (fluke), black sea bass, porgy, cod, areas for f i shermen i s not of pr i mary impor- red hake (ling), and silver hake (whiting). tance, since a degree of isolation may be Recreational shellfishermen engage mainly in highly desirable for recreational fishermen. clamming and crabbing. (Bonsall, 1977). Access is of more concern to those fishing from boats, in that they require access Development Potential Factors either to boat-iaunching ramps or to marinas (q.v.). Surf fishing - ocean 9 Ocean beach frontage Of the 2.7 million fishermen engaged o Jetties, groins, piers annually in recreational fishing and she]]- Fresh water fishing - streams fishing, sixty percent reside in New Jersey * Acceptable water quality - fishing with the balance coming mainly from Pennsyl- o Bridges over streams vania and New York (Bonsall, 1977). The Fresh water fishing - navigable waters estimated number of participants and person- I * Acceptable water quality - fishing days of recreation provided to New Jersey are o Proximity to marinas and boat estimated to be: launching ramps Use Descriptions and Cost Date /123 BASELINE UNIT COST: DEVELOPMENT SIZE: Sport Fishin TotaIFactor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories t or - + or - Confidence SURF FISHING - OCEAN Proximity to Ocean Adjacent [31 0 .0 Beach Frontage 0 - 1/2 X X 1/2 - 5 X X High 5 - 15 X X Fy_ 15+ miles X X Jetties, Groins, Present +100 + 100 Piers Not Present 0 0 Low @V FRESH WATER FISHING - STREAMS Acceptable Water * Available [31 0 0 Quality - Fishing Not Available X X High V Bridges over Present +100 + 100 Streams * Not Present 0 0 Low V ,. I I FRESH WATER FISHING - NAVIGABLE WATERS Acceptable Water * Available [31 0 0 High Quality - Fishing IT Not Available X X Proximity to * 0 - 1 0 0 Marinas and Boat I - 3 - 25 - 25 Launching Ramps 3 - 5 - 50 - 50 Low 5 - 10 - 75 - 75 10+ miles -]Do - ]Do NOTE: FV Sport fishing refers to both fresh water and salt water fishing. The factors refer to the presence or absence of fishing opportunities. There Baseline Spe0fication are three basic types of sport fishing. Surf fishing in the ocean requires only the ocean. The dollar figure given as a bonus for jetties, groins, and piers should be regarded only as a default number, acknowledging that these features generally provide better-than-average fishing opportunities. Fishing in streams requires a stream with water quality acceptable for fishing. The bonus.figure for bridges over streams is a default figure, that recognizes that bridges may provide unusually good fishing opportuni- ties. Fishing in navigable waters, that is, from boats, requires only water of quality acceptable for fishing. Fishing areas near marinas or boat launching ramps will tend to be favored over more distant fishing areas, and the deficiency numbers simply recognize that fact. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 124/Coastal Development Potential Study Marinas Development Potential Factors epesentative plan a Undeveloped Land 5 Access to Local Road Access to 6-foot Channel 3 0 Access to Public Sewerage 9 o Access to Public Water Supply e Proximity to River or Bay Shore 2 Marinas may be public facilities or may Frontage be private business operated independently * Embayments or in association with a residential commu- o Minor Tides nity. Marinas typically provide boat launch- ing and storage facilities, boating supplies, and services for boat operation and mainte- 7t nance. They also may include restaurant and motel accomodations. Each additional serv- ice, such as boat sales, adds to the attrac- tiveness of the marina as a recreational facility and helps to ensure its financial success. It has been found that a marina which is associated with a residential community must be economically independent of the residential community to ensure success. In order that this be so, marina-related faci,lities are usually designed as a unit within the site plan of the residential community or are associated with adjacent marina facilities where possible. 14 There are three basic types of marinas: lk wet marinas 'aith open stib@Luie@, where open Pa. pilework and/or floating breakwaters are used; wet marinas with solid structures, where bulkheads and landfill are used as moorings; and dry marinas, where boats are stored on land in warehouses, often in multi-level racks, and are moved to and from the water by cranes. Dry marinas are typi cally for boats measuring less than 24 feet in length. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /125. BASELINE UNIT COST: $750,000 DEVELOWENT SIZE: 100 ships, 5 acres Marinas Total Factor Factor Level at Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Cat:goalies + or - + or Confidence Undeveloped Land c -ess to Local 0 - 1/2 0 0 r Road 1/2 - I - 150,000 - 1 500 High I - 3 - 300,000 - 3:000 3+ miles - 450,000 - 4,500 Access to 6-foot * 0 - 1/2 0 0 Channel 1/2 - I - 120,000 - 1,200 Medium I - 2 - 24o,ooo - 2,4oo Fc- 2+ miles - 320,000 - 3,200 Access to Public * 0 - 1/2 0 0 Sewerage 1/2 - I - 100,000 - 100,000 Medium I - 3 - 200,000 - 200,000, 3+ miles - 300,000 - 300,000 Ace ss t Public 0 - 1/2 0 0 Wat:r Suopply 1/2 - I - 100,000 - 100,000 Medium I - 3 - 200,000 - 200,000 3+ miles - 300,000 - 300,000 C Proximity to River Adjacent [3) 0 0 or Bay Shore 0 - 1/2 X X High Frontage 1/2 - I X X 1+ mile X X Ev-1 Embayments Present (31 o 0 High NOTE: Hot Present X X The baseline unit cost for Marinas includes the cost of dredging within the marina. Dredging costs for access to a 6-foot channel are based on a V channel 40 feet wide, with an average dredged depth of 3 feet. Dredging costs can vary widely, from $2.50 per cubic yard, or less to more than $10 Minor Tides 2 feet or less 0 0 per cubic yard, depending on the amount and type of material, and the Greater than 2 feet - 50,000 - 500 Medium method of disposal. Costs were assumed to be $6 per cubic yard. General- ly, marina costs are higher in the northern part of the state. The amount of land required for marinas is highly variable depending on the amount of parking and boat storage provided by the facility. Access to Local Road costs are based on the use of a Level 2 access road (see Element Cost 1-11 lBaseline Specification Sheet). The Access to Public Water Supply figures are based on the use of a 6 inch steel pipe installed at a depth of 4 feet. The deficiency costs for Access to Public Sewerage are based on the use of an 8 inch vitrified clay pipe installed 4 feet deep. C = costs are constant per development V = costs vary with number of units 126/Coastal Development Potential Study Natural Areas and Rivers WILD RIVER AREAS on the river may be allowed, where con- tributing to the overall scenic quality @Development Potential Factors and character of the area. e It demonstrates a free-flowing character, RECREATIONAL RIVER AREAS except that occasional and unobtrusive low dams, diversions, or other minor ar Development Potential Factors tificial alterations which do not cause inundation of the natural river bank may 9 It demonstrates an essentially free- Natural areas are areas of land or remain or a significant body of still flowing character, except that minor al- water which have retained their natural water remains; and terations, diversions or impoundments character, although they are not necessar- . over minor distances remain; and ily completely undisturbed; or which con- 0 It is generally inaccessible except by o The river is readily accessible by road, tain rare or vanishing species of plant trail, allowing only that an occasional with the likelihood of paralleling roads and animal life; or which possess similar and unobtrusive improved road or a simil- along major reaches of the river bank; features of interest which are worthy of lar easement may be allowed; occasional and preservation for the use of present and ford or crossing by a vehicle trail may future residents of the state. remain; and 9 Shorelines may have some extensive devel- opments, although not being of a pri- Three classifications are used for 9 Shorelines are primitive, allowing only marily developed character; and natural areas. These are: that an occasional remote and unobtrusive dwelling, historic or special district, 49 Wat Class I - Areas which demonstrate out- or similarly unobtrusive agricultural use ier quality meets or is capable of standing examples of ecosystems, biotic or service structure minor in character be ng restored to meet minimum standards types and geologic types or formations may remain; and for desired recreation and of supporting that are common to this State, or biotic aquatic life indigenous to the stream. and geologic types which are atypical to Water quality meets or is capable of being this State, or habitats of rare and vanish- restored to meet minimum standards for pri- DEVELOPED RECREATIONAL RIVER AREAS ing species or which are fragile and highly mary contact recreation and to be capable sensitive to the impact of man. of supporting aquatic life indigenous to Development Potential Factors the stream. Class 11 - Areas which demonstrate the 0 Significant impoundments, diversions or nbtural values which are lised for Class 1, SCENIC RIVER AREAS alterationq hp n-sent-, nr virl-4 but which would not be significantly dam- Development Potential Factors river character and appropriate recrea- aged or altered through interpretive use tional opportunities are preserved; and or through recreational use compatible with It demonstrates a free-flowing character 0 The river is readily accessible to the interpretive use. except that occasional and unobtrusive public, with the likelihood of parallel- Class III - Areas which demonstrate the low dams, diversions, or othe@r minor ing roads; where railroads, utility natural values of Class 1, but whose natural artificial alterations which do nQt easements or roadways restrict general values would not be significantly damaged cause inundation of the natural river access, opportunity for water-borne or altered through permitted recreational bank may remain or a significant body of recreation may qualify the river for use. still water remains; and inclusion in the System; and These areas provide research and recre- e It is generally inaccessible by road, 6 Shorelines are extensively developed, ational opportunities and public education allowing only that occasional short urban in character; where development facilities. They may include trails for approached by conspicuous improved roads restricts general access, opportunity for hiking and bicycling. Acreages of exist- or longer reaches of inconspicuous and water-borne recreation may qualify the screened roads or railroads paralleling river for inclusion; opportunities for ing natural areas range from 10 to 2,500 the river may be allowed; and some natural shoreline are desirable; and acres. These acreages include a natural buffer zone. Owners of natural areas may Shorelines are largely primitive; short 0 Water quality meets or is capable of be- be public or private; however, inclusion reaches approached by small communities, ing restored to meet minimum standards of areas as designated natural areas is historic or special districts, or agri- for desired recreation and of supporting determined*by field study. cultural- practices not adverse in effect aquatic life indigenous to the stream. Use Descriptions and Cost Data /127 Natural Areas and Rivers Total Factor Factor Level Total Factor Factor Level Data Cost Cost/Unit of Data Cost Cost/Unit of Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Factor Categories + or + or Confidence Natural Areas and Recreational River Rivers Areas Biotic Types Typical Free Flowing 100% in Natural Atypical Characteristics Condition Other 75% in Natural Condition 50% in Natural Condition Geologic Types Typical 25% in Natural Atypical Condition Other River Accessibility Public Road in Corridor Public Road not in Habitats of Rare and Presence of rare and Corridor Vanishing Species Endangered Species Absence of Rare and Endangered Species Shorelines of Rivers Natural Corridor, Other Major Ecosystems Present Acceptable Surface Available [31 0 Not present Not Available x Wild River Areas Developed Recreational Area Free Flowing 100% in Natural Free Flowing 100% in Natural Characteristics Condition Characteristics Condition 75% in Natural 75% in Natural Condition Condition 50% in Natural 50% in Natural Condition Condition 25% in Natural * 25% in Natural Condition Condition River Accessibility Public Road in River Accessibility * Public Road in Corridor Corridor * Public Road not in Public Road not in Corridor Corridor Shore Lines of River * Natural Corridor Shorelines of Rivers Natural Corridor Other Other Acceptable Surface * Available [31 0 Acceptable Surface Available [3) 0 Water Quality Not Available x Water Quality Not Available x q Baseline Specification Baseline specificatiom 128/Coastal Development Potential Study FOOTNOTES additional charge of $0.40 for each mile it 16No figures have been given for Proximity must be hauled. to Metropolitan Service Center since, for industrial use, the costs are opera- 7This factor may become irrelevant if the ting expenses rather than siting expenses. facility provides its own bus service. 8Though theoretically possible to site a ]Deficiency costs associated with soil mobile home park on land with ocean front- age, there is so little probability of this drainage, soil load bearing capacity, occurring that any figures employed here and deep foundation suitability are ne- Would be little more than fantasy. cessarily general in the absence of site-specific information 9These figures can only be considered 2The amount paid for public sewerage and/ rough approximations. Accurate figures or public water is determined by the cost would require detailed knowledge of both of alternative systems. For example, in the system and the specific site. areas having few constraints for alterna- 10 tive systems, a developer would pay very Portions of the utility cost can usually little extra for public sewerage and/or be shared with the municipality and the public water supply, but in the areas utility company. where alternative systems were constrained, a typical developer might pay two or three 11 Although safety considerations dictate times more for a parcel of land with pub- that communication towers must not be near lic sewerage and/or public water supply. airports, no extra costs can be assigned 3An "x" indicates that, in the absence of more than five miles away from an airport the baseline factor, the project would not 12 be undertaken. While this factor is an important consi- deration, no data categories or costs can 4- be generated in the absence of project rULdUl@ WaLer becomes a oeveiopmental Tac- specific intormation. tor only in areas that are not serviced by public water supplies. In such areas 13The baseline specifications for this fac- the absence of potable water will preclude any schemes for development.. tor is all that is needed for this use. Additional quantities of the factor are superfluous and additional sums of-money 5The factor, Soils Suitable for On-Site would not be expended for them. Disposal Systems, becomes important only in those cases where public sewerage is 14 not available. The source of water is unimportant. It is assumed that the user will pick the 6 least expensive source, or combination of Structures may be built in the 100-year sources flood prone area if they are raised above the level of the 100-year flood, either 15This figure is based on the average dif- on fill or on pilings. It is impossible ference between gross receipts on yields to assign costs to this factor without knowing the characteristics of a particu- between Soils of Caipabilit@ Class I and lar site. Compacted fill will probably soils of Capability Class 11. cost about $5.50 per cubic yard, with an I C ha pter 3 Factor Information i I 130/Coastal Development Potential Study categories. A data factor is a class of that is descriptive in natur-e; quantitative information that is examined: "access to data involves measurements and/or calcula- roads" or "proximity to resort communities", tions. For example, an embayment is a for example. Data categories are the factor described as "a water body protected divisions used to communicate information from extreme wind and wave action." Embay- about the factors. Access to railroad ments are mapped as water bodies. Availa- categories might.be "0-1 " "1-3," "3-5," bility of groundwater is quantitative, as it or "5+ miles." is mapped according to groundwater yields in units of gallons per day. The term "spatial" The data needs of a study as compre- Table 5 identifies all 65 of the refers to data that is available in a map hensive as this one are obviously large. Over 300 sources were considered. The factors considered in this study. Also format; the term "non-spatial" refers to data shown are the date on which the data were in chart, table or manuscript form. objective of this data collection task was 'led, the source agencies, or the to compile, record and map the relevant compiles who prepared the data. The levels When data were not mapped, or when data available data where reasonably possible. agenci Not all data needs could be met in this of confidence in the data were also noted had not been mapped and we compiled and were initial effort, however. The available in terms of the consultant's use and under- able to map them, or when there were no data suffers from several problems common standing of how the information was com- available data compiled for mapping, we to most data systems: piled, mapped and updated. The asterisks included a Factor Dis cuss ion Sheet. These in the first column indicate maps produced sheets describe why the factor was not *A dearth of information on certain by Rogers & Golden. mapped or how the factor might be mapped in topics and a wealth of information To record the sources and other perti- the future, if possible. on others nent information about the data, a form was 0Varying sophistication of data in developed: the Factor Information Sheet. different technical fields One such sheet is provided for each data factor used. In some cases, where a single 0Incomplete recordkeeping. source was used for several factors, all factors were written up in a single Factor Collection and evaluation were the Information Sheet (e.g. "access to channel"). beginning points in developing a compre- Each sheet gives a detailed profile of the ,1- --. - --.. ;.,l ... 4;- hensive daca sysrem for iand use pianning ------ in New Jersey's coastal zone. map title, source agency, the person who knows how the data was compiled, agency Data requirements were dictated by addre ss, use prepared for, informed agency the Development Potential Factor list people, date compiled, and date published. developed for each use. (Development Potential Factors are elements or char- Data format (map or table), scale, acteristics of the natural or built measurement units (miles, municipalities, environment that are required for success- parks, gallons per day), geographic units ful development of a use, or that are (roads, channels), geographic are@ covered desirable and enhance the attractiveness (state, coastal zone), source data cate- of a location for development.) gories/map legend, reliability and accur- acy, usefulness of data in this study, Some Development Potential Factors comments (including the map legend used in are use-specific, such as mineral resources this study), and source citation are also for the extraction industry, while other provided. factors, such as access to road, apply to almost all uses. Moreover, the * search for Another section of the Factor Informa- ordinal categories of suitability (i.e. tion Sheets indicates whether or not the high, medium and low) dictated that factors data is computer encoded and what type of be divided into different levels or incre- data (quantitative or qual'itative data, ments of cost. Data were therefore consi- spatial or nonspatial representation) it dered in terms of both data factors and data is. The term "qualitative" refer's to data Factor Information/131 TABLE 5. FACTOR INFORMATION SHEET INDEX 'lapped Mapped Fact r Factor fory Da Source Leve Factor Factor foryl Da Source Level of 0 tud Co te Agenc of Number tud mpi er y I Co te Numb S mpi led Confidence S led Agency Confidence I Undeveloped Land 1972-1974 USGS High 41 River Accessibility 1977-78 HCRS High 2 Access to Roads 1978 NJDOT High 42 Shorelines of Rivers 1977-78 HCRS High 3 Access to Railroads 1978 NJDOT High 43 Biotic Types 1977-78 HCRS High 4 Access to Electric Power 44 Geologic Types 1977-78 HCRS High Transmission Line 1977 NJDOT Med 45 Proximity to Ocean Beach frontage 1975 NJDEP High 5 Access to Electric P3wer 46 Proximity to River and Bayshore Distribution line 1975 NJBPU Med Frontage 6 Access to Channel 1975 NOAA Med 47 Minimum Need for Bridges and 1975 NJDEP High 7 Marine Access 1979 NOAA High Tunnels R&G 8 Proximity to Metropolitan Service 48 Embayments 1975 NJOEP High Cent rs 1979 R&G High 49 Visibility From Roads 1979 R&G High 9 Proximity to Regional Service 50 Dredging Maintenance D&M Centers 1979 R6G High 51 Acceptable Water Quality 1972 NJDEP Med 10 Proximity to Community Service 52 On-site Amenities Centers 1979 R&G High 53 Character of Surrounding Area 11 Proximity to Fishing Communities 1979 R&G High 54 Visual Amenities 12 Proximity to Resort Communities 1979 R&G High 55 Short Distance Between Trip 13 Proximity to Public Transportation 1973 NJDOT Med Origins and Destination 14 Proximity to Marinas and Boat 56 Jetties, Groins and Piers Launching Ramps 1974 NMFS High 57 Bridges Over Streams 1978 NJDOT High 15 Proximity to Parking R&G 58 Population Density 1976 NJDEP Med 16 Proximity to Commercial Fishing 59 Labor Force Availability 1979 NJDLI tied Docks 1979 R&G High 60 Minor Tides 1979 NOAA High 17 Proximity to Public Open Space 1977 NJGAP High 61 Soil Drainage varies SCS Med- 18 Proximity to Disposal Sites 1975 NJDEP Med-Low 62 Forest Cover (1980) NJDEP tied 19 Proximity to Ports 1979 NJDLl High 63 Historical Sites 1979 NJDEP Med 20 Proximity to Airports 1975 NJDOT High 64 Archaeological Sites 21 Prime Open Agricultural Land 1975 NJDEP Me@ 1971 USDA Med 65 Gas Pipelines 1977 NJDEP Med 22 Woodland Suitability Group varies SCS Med-High I I I 1 1 23 Soil Association varies SCS Med-High LEGEND: 24 Flooding 1976 NJDEP Med 25 Slope 1975 NJDEP tied 26 Shallow Foundation Suitability varies SCS Med-High USDA United States Department of Agriculture 27 Soil Load Bearing Capacity varies SCS tied-High SCS USDA. Soil Conservation Service 28 Deep Foundation Suitability D&M NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 29 Availability of Mineral Resources D&H NMFS NOAA. National Marine Fisheries Service 30 Thickness of Overburden D&M USGS United States Geological Survey 31 Soils Suitable for On-site Disposal NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Systems varies SCS Med-High NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation 32 Surface Water Availability D&M NJBPU New Jersey Board of Public Utilities 33 Groundwater Availability D&M NJDLl New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry 34 Access to Public Sewerage 1975 NJDEP Med NJGAP NJDEP. Green Acres Program 35 Access to Public Water Supply 1975 NJDEP Med HCRS Heritage Conservation and Recreation Services 36 Potable Water Supply varies NJDEP Med D&M Dames & Moore 37 Depth to Water Table varies SCS Med-High R&G Rogers s Golden 38 Major Ecosystems 1954 SCS Ned NOTE: 39 Free Flowing Characteristics 1977-78 MCRS High 40 Habitats of Rare and Vanishing Species 1977-78 HCRS High No dates or Tevels of confidence could be provided for some unmapped factors. These have been left blank. 132/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 1 Factor Information Sheet 2 Factor: UNDEVELOPED AND PUBLICLY OWNED LAND Factor: ACCESS TO ROADS Source Map Title: Land Use and Land Cover, 10711-1974. SC2-anton, PA; NY and Nr: Source Map Title: New Jersey Highway Map and Guide Newark, NJ; PA and NY: Wilmington, DE; JVJ; PA and MD: Salisbury, AD; DR; NJ and VA. Source Agency: U.S. Geological Survey Source Agency: N.J. Department of nansportation Phone: (609) 292-8501 Person: Person: Address: National Cartographic Information Center, U.S. Geologic Survey, National Address: 1035 Parkway, Trenton, New Jersey Center, Reston, VA Use Data Prepared For: Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: DaVe Cox Date Compiled: 1972-1974 Date Published: 1976, 1977 Date Compiled: 1978 Date Published: 1979 Data Format: Type of Data: (check boxes) Data Format: map Type of Data: (check boxes) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial -X uon-Spatial Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial . X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Feet and Kilometers Computer Encoded? Yes No X Measurement Units: miles and kilometers Computer Encoded? Yes No If yes, what format? If yes, what format? Geographic Unit: Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Mid-AtZantic Region Geographic Area Covered: entire state Source Data Categories/Map Legend: 1. Urban or Built-up Land 2. Agricultural La?z& Source Data Categories/Map Legend: State Highways, Toll Highways, Other Divided 3. Range Land 4. Forest Land 5. Water, 6. Wetland 7. Barren Land Highways, Secondary Roads, Connecting Roads, Local. Roads. Reliability & Accuracy: Most accurate mapping of undeveloped Land available at this Reliability & Accuracy: Very reliable and accurate. scale. Will require periodic updating. Usefulness of Data: This factor is required in locating all Land uses considered in Usefulness of Data: This factor identifies proximity to roads, and it is needed for this study. most land uses. Connents: Publicly owned Land (Factor 17) was added to developed and both were Comments: This factor &we mapped at a scale of 1:250.000 for this study. The mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. Legend shows distances from roads, 0- 112, 112-1 1/2, 1 112-3, and 3+ miles. Source Citation: U.S. Department of the Interior, Geologic Survey. Land Use Series. Source Citation: N-w Jersey Department of Transportation. 1978. New Jersey Official Open File 77-664-1, 77-665-1, 76-636-1, 77-063-1. Highway Map and Guide. NJ Department of Transportation. Rogers & Golden Rog ers & Golden Factor Information/133 Factor Information Sheet 3 Factor Information Sheet 4 Factor: ACCESS TO RAILROADS Factori ACCESS TO ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION LINE Source Map Title: Railroad Service Map Source Map Title: Utility Map Series - Electric Services Overlay Source Agency: New Jersey Department of Phone: (609) 292-7080 Source Agency: Bureau of Geology and Topography Phone: 292-2576 Transportation N.J. Department of Environmental Protection Person: Kevin Kyte Person: Kemble Widmer, State Geologist Address: Department of Transportation Address: 1474 Prospect Street, Trenton, New Jersey Use Data Prepared For: Common Carrier Planning Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledqeable People: !!iformed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: 1978 Date Published: 1978 Date Comp I I ed: 1977 Date Published: 2977 Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: map Type of D ata:'(check boxes) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial = Non-spatial Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial _7 Non-spatial Measuremert Units: feet Computer Encoded? Yes No y Measurement Units: Corn uter Encoded? Yes No X 'P If yes, what format? Geog raph i c Ur i t: Railroad Tracks Geographic Unit: Electrical power lines Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Geographic Area Covered: entire state Source Data Categories/Map Leaend: Data Categories/Map Legend: transmission substation -passenger station -rapid transit -abandoned lines generating station - nuclear electric transmission right of way with number .-Passenger and freight line -freight service generating station - fossil fuel of overhead lines and voltage generating station - pump storage proposed electric transmission line Reliability & Accuracy: underground electric The data presented on this map is reliable and accurate. Reliability & Accuracy: utility company service area boundaries Information may be out of date. This factor WiZZ require periodic updating as changes Usefulness of Data: are made in electric transmiasion grids. This factor is useful in locating areas suitable for sports, warehousing and Usefulness of Data: various industries dependent on rail transportation. This factor locates areas where various industries and majior ports Puy locate. Comments: Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250@000 for this study. The legend displays legend shows proximities of 0-1, 1@3, 3-5, 5-10 and 10+ miles. the following proximities: 0-1, 1-3, 3-5, and 5+ miles. Source Citation: Source Citation: New Jersey Department of Transportation, 1978 Railroad Service Map, Trenton, NJ. N.J. Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Geology and Topography. 1977. Utility Map Series, Electrical Services Overlay, Trenton, New Jersey. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 134/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 5 Factor Discussion Sheet 5 Factor: ACCESS TO ELECTRIC POWER DISTRIBUTION LINE Factor: ACCESS TO ELECTRIC POWER DISTRIBUTION LINE- Source Map Title: Electric power distribution lines are the final link in the delivery system Source Agency: Board of Public Utilities Phone: (201) 221-3733 by which electric power is conveyed from the generating plant to the end users. Most uses require electricity. Therefore, the location of existing distribution Person: George 11. Barbow (President) lines is a consideration, since proximity to existing lines Minimizes the cost of connecting to the system. Address: 1100 Raymond Boulevard, Newm*, NJ Distribution tines cover the state quite densely. There are a number of Use Data Prepared For: variables in distribution lines. Among these are voltage of the line, amperage, and phase,'and whether the line is overhead or underground. To map all these Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: variables for the entire study area at a scale of 1:250.000 would be impossible. Too much information is involved, and it is too dense to be revealed at that scale. Date Compiled: Date Published: Sources: Data Format: Type of Data: (check.one) Qualitative Quantitative Beckman, David. 1979. Transmission Section, Atlantic City Electric Company, Sca I e: Spatial Non-Spatial Atlantic City. Personal communication. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No KZem, Nick. 2979. Residential and ConnerciaZ,Distribution, Atlantic City Electric Company, Atlantic City. Personal communication. Geographic Unit: Thayer, EduxL-d H. 1979. Supervisor-Area Engineering, Jersey Central Power Geographic Area Covered: and Light Company, Aeburnj Park. Personal communication. Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate areas for residential. commercial and industrial land uses. Comments: See note on following page. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/135 Factor Information Sheet 6 Factor Information Sheet 7 Factor: ACCESS TO CHANNEL Factor: MINE ACCESS Source Map Title: Naut@oal Charts Z23Z4,1231.6,Z2324,12326.*NeW Jersey Source Map T I t I e: Nautical Chart 12316: New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway: Little Intracoastal Waterway and Deleware Bay Egg Harbor to Cape May. Source Agency: National oceanic and Atmospheric Phone: Source Agency: National Oceanic and Atmosphez-*, Phone: Administration Administration. Person: Person: Address: Address: Use Data Prepared For: National Ocean Survey Use Data Prepared For: National Ocean Survey Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Michael Hochman Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Michael Hochman Date Compiled: 1975 Date Published: 1975 Date Compiled: 1975 Date Published: 1975 Data Format: map Type of Data: (check.one) Data Format: map Type of Data: (check.one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative x Quantitative Scale: 1:40,000 Spatial X Non-Spatial Scale: 1:40,000 Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Mi Les Computer Encoded? Yes _ No X Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No x Geographic Unit: Channels Geographic Unit: channeZs Geographic Area Covered: Little Egg Harbor to Cape May Geographic Area Covered: Little Egg Harbor to Cape May Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Navigation aids, bottom characteristics, dangers, Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Navigation aids, bottom characteristics, dangers, Light characteristics. Light characteristics. Reliability & Accuracy: This information is reliable and accurate, but should be Reliability & Accuracy: This data is reliable and accurate. checked and updated periodically. Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate areas suitable for Major and Minor Usefulness of Data: This factor is needed to locate potential developments sites for Ports, Commercial Fishing Docks and Marinas. major and minor ports. Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The Legend Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250.000 for this study. shows those areas having access to 6 foot, 12 foot, 16 foot and 35 foot channels. Source Citation: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Source Citation: U. S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1975. Nautical Chart 12316 New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway: Administration. Z975. Nautical Chart 12316 New Jersey Intracoastal Waterwa Little Egg Harbor to Cape May. Washington, DC Little Egg Harbor to rape May. Washington, D.C. y Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 136/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet .8 Factor Discussion Sheet. 8 Factor: PROXIMITY TO METROPOLITAN SERVICE CENTERS Factor: PROXIMITY To METROPOLITAN SERVICE CENTERS Source Map Title: Proximity to Metropolitan Service Centers Proximity to to various goods and services is a prime consideration in the sit' .1'n Source Agency: Rogers and Golden Phone: (215) 563- 4220 of many land uses. Those goods and services involved in this study originally consifered individual services: proximity to health care facilities, proximity to shopping, proxi- Person: Joanne Jackson mity to employment, proximity to schools, proximity to recreation, and proximity to religious and cultural activities. As the study progressed it became evident that both Address: 1427 Vine Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102 developers and house buyers did not weigh these individual factors in making the decision to site a housing development or buy a house. Instead, the total range of goods and U.-e Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study services do tend to cluster in more populated areas. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: As a result those factors that are clustered in urban areas were not considered as separate entities and assigned bonus values or deficiency costs. However, distinctions were made between levels of service. Those areas have a population of greater than Date Compiled: 1979 Date Published: 1979 1,500,000 were designated as Metropolitan Service Centers. Those areas with a seasonal population of more than 7,000 or which are County Seats were called Regional Service Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check boxes) Centers. Community Service Centers are those areas which have a population of less than Qualitative X Quantitative ?,000, but which do offer some services.. Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial Non-Spatial only two cities qualified for the designation of Metropolitan Service Centers - Measurement Units: .,Miles Computer Encoded? Yes No X Philadelphia and New York. Although both of these 'cities are outside of New Jersey, If yes, what format? their role in shaping the development of New Jersey is undeniable. Geographic Unit: Zone of influence After service centers were categorized, their drawing power was assigned. It was Geographic Area Covered: Coastal Study Area assumed that the greater number of services available within a service center, the greater its appeal. The rationaZeis that bigger pZaces-with unique services can attract people from greater distances. Metropolitan Service Centers in New Jersey were assumed to have a-drawing power radius of 60 miles. Source Data Categories/Map Legend: A-1-A 77... 30-45 mites 60+ miles Z5-30 miles 45-60 mites Sources: Reliability & Accuracy: This data is reliable and accurate. Craig, William J. 1978. "Accessibility Measurement and Use in Land-Use Planning," Journal of Environmental Systems. Vol. 8 (3) 201-217. Usefulness of Data: Isard, Walter. 1956. Location and Space - Economy. Cwnbridge, MA: The MIT Press. This factor aids in the location of areas desired for various housing, commercial and industrial land uses. OZason, C. 1965. Distance and Human Interaction.Bibliography Series, No. 2. Comments: Philadelphia: Regional Science Institute. This factor locates those areas having a population of more than 1,500,000 and Rand A"aZZy and Company. 1972. Standard Reference Map and Guide of New Jersey. the proximities to those areas. Chicago. U.S. Geologic Survey. 1962 revised 1976. Topographic Maps at 1:250,000 of Scranton FA, NY and AV; Newark, NJ, PA; Wilmington, DE ai@d NJ. Reston,- VA. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/137 .Factor Information Sheet 9, Factor Discussion Sheet 9 Factor: PROXIMITY TO REGIONAL SERVICE CENTERS Factor: PROXIMITY To REGIONAL SER VICE CENTERS Source Map Title: Proximity to Regional Service Centers Those areas with a population of 7,000, but less than a million and a half Source Agency: Rogers and Golden Phone: (215) 563-4220 have been designated as Regional Service Centers. Though this category seems unusually broad, it reflects the distinctions made by builders and developers Person: Joanne Jackson in Now Jersey. Regional Service Centers nay only have a seasonal population of Address: 1427 Vine Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102 more than 7,000, or they may be County Seats. AZZ areas termed Regional Service Centers are assumed to have a post office, Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study several banks, a high school, a newspaper (daily or weekly), a new car dealer, a pubZic*library and at least one medical doctor. most Regional Service Centers Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: influence development within a 15 mite radius. Date Compiled: 1979 Date Published: 1979 Sources: Data Format: map Type of Data: (check boxes) Craig, William J. 1978. "Accessibility Measurement and Use in Land-Use Qualitative X Quantitative Planning", Journal of Environmental Systems. Vol. 8(3) 201-217. Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Feet Computer Encoded? Yes No X Isard, Walter. 1956._Location and Space Economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. If yes, what format? Geographic Unit: Zone of Influence OZeson, C. 1965. Z@Istance and Human Inter-action. Bibliography Series No. Geographic Area Covered: Coastal Study Area 2. Philadelphia, PA: RegioaZ Science Institute. Rand McNaZZy Company. Z972. Standard Reference Map and Guide to New Jersey. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally Press. Data Categories/Map Legend: U.S. Geological Survey. 1962 (revised 1976). Topographic Maps at 1:a50,000 0-2 miles 745 miles of Scranton, PA. NY, and NJ; Newark. NJ, PA. and NY; Wilimington US, N.T, PA 2,7 miles 15+ miles and MD; Salisburnj, MD, DE, NJ Reliability & Accuracy: This map is accurate, however since no distinction has been made of type or size of Regional Service Centers, some Regional Service Centers may have a greater influence thein.that indicated by the map legend. Usefulness of Data: This factor aids in the location of areas suitable for various housing types, hotels and motels. Comments: This factor locates those areas having a population of 7,000 (can be seasonal) and county seats. These areas are presumed to offer a variety of services, including stores, higher education facilities, health care facilities, cultural and religious facilities mid employment opportunities. Rogeis & Golden M 138/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 10 Factor Discussion Sheet 10 Factor: PROXIMITY To COMMLlNITY SERVICE CENTERS Factor: PROXIMITY TO COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTERS Source Map Title: Proximity to Community Service Centers Those areas that have banks, post offices and full size supermarkets-but that are Source Agency: Rogers and Golden Phone: (215) 563-4220 not County Seats and have populations less than 7,000-were designated as Community Person: Joanne Jackson Service Centers. Address: 1427 Vine Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102 This type of service center is of importance in siting residential land uses. They affect development within a radius of 5 miles. Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Source: Date Compiled: 19?9 Date Published: 1979 Craig, William J. 1978. "Accessibility Measurement and Use in Land-Use Planning." Journal of Environmental Systems. Vol. 8 (3). 201-217. Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative x Quantitative Isard, Walter 1956. Location and Space - Economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT P@ess. Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial X Non-Spatial olsson, C. 1965. Distance and Human Interaction Bibliography Series, No. 2. Measurement Units: miles Computer Encoded? Yes No X. Philadelphia: Regional Science Institute. Geog raph I c Un i t: Zone of Influence Rand McNalZy & Company. 1972. Standard Reference May and Guide of New Jersey Chicago. Geographic Area Covered: Coastal Study Area U.S. Geologic Survey, 1962(revised 1976J. Topographic Maps at 1:250.000 of Scranton PA, N.Y. and NJ; Newark, NJ, PA; Wilmington, DE and NJ Reston, VA. Source Data Catecories/Map Legend: 1 1 _17- 3-5 1-3 miles 5 + miles Reliability & Accuracy: This data has not been thoroughly fie Zd checked. Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful in locating potential sites for various housing types, Comments: This factor locates those areas offering minimal services. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/139 Factor Information Sheet 11 Factor Discussion Sheet 11 Factor: PROXIMITY TO FISHING COI`VUNITIES Source Map Title: proximity to Fishing Co=mities Factor: PROXIMITY TO FISHING COMMUNITIES Source Agency: Rogers and Golden Phone: (215) 562-4220 7he major percentage of commercial fishing boats currently sail from three coastal counties - Ocean, Atlantic and Cape Aty. Others sail f@rom Cumberland. Monmouth, Salem Person: John Rogers and Bergen Counties. The principal commercial fishing communitiea within each county are Belford and Highlands, Monmouth County; Point Pleasant and Barnegat Light; Ocean Address: Z427 Vine Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 19102 County; Wildwood and Cape May; Cape My County; and Port Norris and Bivalve, Cumberland County. Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study Other potential areas along coastaZZy linked navigation channels which contain Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: entertainment (i.e., restaurants and tap rooms), and services (i.e., boat maintenance, ice making and freezer storage) have potential as major fishing communities. Date Compiled: 1979 Date Published: Z9?q Source: Data Format: map Type of Data: (check.one) Qualitative Quantitative - Bon8all, Susan. 1977. The Fishing Industry of New Jersey. Rutgers, N.T: Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial Non-Spatial _ Rutgers, N.T: Rutgers University, Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies. Measurement Units: feet Computer Encoded? Yes No x Geographic Unit: communities Geographic Area Covered: Coastal study area Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Fishing commmitiee and distances f@mom them, 0-1, 1-3, 3-5, 5 + miles. Reliability 6 Accuracy: This information is reliable and accurate. Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate areas suitable for commercial fishing docks. Comments: This factor was mapped for this study at a scale of 1:250,000. Rogers & Golden 140/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 12 Factor Discussion Sheet 12 Factor: PROXIMITY TO RESORT COMMUNITIES Factor: PROXIMITY TO RESORT COMMUNITIES Source hap Title: Proximity to Resort Communities Source Agency: Rogers and Golden Phone: (215) 563-4220 New Jersey has long been famous for its resort communities. There is great diversity among these communities. Atlantic City is known for glitter and Person: Joanne Jackson flash, while Cape May City is recognized for Victorian elegance. Still others are virtually unknown-even though their summertime population may be several times greater Address: 1427 Vine Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102 than their winter population. This last category serves fa:milies who own homes or who rent them for the season and they have little to offer the weekender or two-week Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study vacationers. This map identifies only those communities which cater to day trippers and weekenders. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: 19?9 Date Published: 19?9 Source: Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check boxes) Heil, j. and Gzark, Hazel F. 19?8. What to Do in New Jersey., Chappaqua, N.Y.', Qualitative Quantitative what to DO County Publications, Inc. Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial X Non-Spatial e Mole, Michela M. 1976 (4th ad.) Away We Go! Measurement Units; feet Computer Encoded? Yes No X New Brunswick, NJ.: Rutgers University Press. If yes, what format? Geographic Unit: Resorts Rand McNally and Company, 1978 mobil Travel Guide: Middle Atlantic States. Chicago: Rand McNally Travel Research Center. Geographic Area Covered: Coastal Study Area Source Data Categories/Map Legend: 0-1, 1-2, 2-3, 3 + miles Reliability & Accuracy: See note on following page. Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful in identifying areas where hotels and motels may wish to locate. Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:260,000 for this study. The legend shows distance from resort communities. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/141 Factor Information Sheet 13 Factor Information Sheet 14 Factor: PROXIMITY TO PLBLIC TRANSPORTATION Factor: PROXIMITY To MARINAS AND BOAT LAUNCHING RAMPS Source Map Title: Existing Bus Transportation System Source Map Title: Angters"Guide to the United States-AtZantic Coast, Section III Source Agency: New Jersey Department of Phone:(609) 292-8340 Source Agency: Nctional Marine Fisheries Service Phone: Transportation Person: Wade Lawson Person: Bruce L. Freeman and Lionel A. Watford Address: Lawrence Shopping Center, Trenton, NJ Address: Use Data Prepared For: Use Data. Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: James T. GalZagher Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: 1972-1973 Date Published: 1972-1973 Date Compiled: Date Published: 1974 Data Format: maps Type of Data: (check.one) Data Format: maps Type of Data:' (check one) Qualitative x Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative X Scale: varies by county Spatial x Non-Spatial Sca I e: 111 = 3 112 nautical miles Spatial X Non-Spatial - Measurement Units: 141 Zee Computer Encoded? Yes No x Measurement Units: nautical miles Computer Encoded? Yes No X Geographic Unit: county Geographic Unit: Marinas and Boat landings Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Geographic Area Covered: Block Island to Cape May Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Source Data Categories/Map Legend.: Types of fish, and type .a of boating facilities Bus routes by number. by Zocation Reliability & Accuracy: Reliability & Accuracv: This information is outdated in some instances. This informafion my be slightly outdated. Usefulness of Data: Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to determine desirable locations for most residential This factor is useful in locating areas for sport fishing. Zand uses. Comments: Comments This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The legend This factor was mapped at 1:250,000 for this study with proximities of 0-1, 1-3, 3-5, shows distances from bus routes at 0-1, 1-2, 2-3 and 3+ miles. 5-10, and 10+ miles. Source Citation: Source Citation: National Marine Fisheries Service, National oceanic and Atmosphere New Jersey Department of Transportation. Existing Bus Transportation Sys- Administration, 1974. Anglers Guide to the United States Atlantic Coast, Section III. tema. Trenton, NJ. Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 142/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 15 Factor Discussion Sheet 15 Factor: PROXIMITY TO PARKING Factor: PRDXIMITY TO PARKING Source Map Title: not mapped For most uses that require parking, the required area has been included in the Source Agency: Rogers & Golden Phone: land requirement. The only use for which parking areas are a significant consideration, and for which a Land requirement for parking cannot reasonably be included in the use Person: description, is Beach Bathing. Other things being equal, beaches which have parking are a nearby will have a higher potential for development than beaches which do not Address: have nearby parking. Use Data Prepared For: Information on existing parking facilities, on a state-wide basis, does not exist. In addition, since a bathing beach may be of any size, it is impossible to know how many Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: parking spaces will be require in the absence of information about a particular beach. Finally, most of the areas along New Jersey's ocean front are exten8ively-Weveloped, and this study does not address itself to the analysis of developed lands. Therefore, parking Date Compiled: Date Published: Lots in developed areas cannot be identified. Data Format: Type of Data: (check.one) Source: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Environmental Qualitative Quantitative Review, 1973. outdoor Recreation in New Jersey: New Jersey Statewide Comprehensive Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Outdoor Recreation Plan. Trenton. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This fact is a consideration in Locating areas having development potentials for Beach Bathing. Comments: See Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/143 Factor Information Sheet 16 Factor Discussion Sheet16 Factor: PROXIMITY TO COMMERCIAL FISHING DOCKS Source Map Title:Proximity T&@CommerciaZ Fishing Docks Factor: PROXIMITY TO COMMERCIAL FISHING DOCKS Source Agency: Rogers and Golden Phone: (215) 563-4220 Person: John Rogers Most; commercial fishing boats sail from Ocean County, Atlantic County or Cape May County. There are additional commercial fishing docks in Cumberland, Monmouth, salem, Address: 1427 Vine Street and Bergen Counties. Distance between a commercial fishing dock and a fish processing plant is an important consideration in siting processing plants. Operatin4 costs will Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study vary 'depencling on location and mode of transportation. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Susan BcneaZZ (Marine Advisory Service) Date Compiled: 1979 Date Published: 1979 Source: Data Format: map Typeof Data: (check.one) BonsalZ, Susan. 1979. Rutgers University, Center for CoaetaZ and Environmental Qualitative _ Quantitative Studies. Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial x Non-Spatial Measurement Units: miles Computer Encoded? Yes _ No x Geographic Unit: Fishing Docks Geographic Area Covered; Coastal Area Source Data Categories/Map Legend: The location of fishing docks and distances to them, 0-5, 5-10, 10-20 and 20 + miles, were mapped for this study at 1:250,000. Reliability & Accuracy: This information is reliable and accurate. It should be updated periodically. Usefulness of Data: This data is usefulin locating areas for Fish Processing Plants. Comments: See Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden 144/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 17 Factor Discussion Sheet 17 Factor: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC OPEN SPACE Source Map Title: Major Public Open Space and Recreation Areas in New Jersey Factor: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC OPEN SPACE Source Agency: Green Acres Program Phone: 609-292 2455 NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection Person: Ken Boated This factor is used in siting only one use, Campgrounds. Therefore, the 1:250,000 Address: Green Acres, 1301 Parkside Ave, Trenton, NJ map portrays only large (over 100 acres) areas of public open space. In the event that Proximity to Public Open Space becomes a factor for other Land uses or for studies Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan mapped at a larger scale, there are sources that provide lists of all public open space. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: 1977 Date Published: 1977 Sources: Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. 1975. Federally Owned Real Property I Qualitative X Quantitative Trenton: Division of State and Regional Planning. Scale: 1@-- 4 miles Spatial X Non-Spatial New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. 1974. County Owned Real Property in Measurement Units: Miles Computer Encoded? Yes No X New Jersey. Trenton: Division of State and Regional Planning. Geographic Unit: State New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. 1973. State Owned Real Property in New Geographic Area Covered: Entire State Jersey. Trenton: Division of State and Regional Planning. Source Data Catecories/Map Legend: Federal open Space and Recreation Areas Watershed Areas. Interstate Open Space and Recreation Areas County Open Space and Recreation Areas Reliability & Accuracy: This map only show Large areas - over 100 acres - of open space. Usefulness of Data: This factor locates areas where campgrounds may desire to Locate. Comments: This factor was mapped at 1:250,000 for this study with proximity mapped in the following increments: 0-1, 1-3, 3-6, 5-10, 10 + miles. Source Citation: N.J. Department of Environmental Protection, 1977 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, Major Public Open Space and Recreation Areas in New Jersey (map), Trenton N.J. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/145 Factor Information Sheet 18 Factor Information Sheet 19 Factor: PROXIMITY TO DISPOSAL SITES Factor: PROXIMITY TO PORTS Source Map Title: Sewage, Landfill overlay Source Map Title: Ports and Navigable Waterways of New Jersey Source Agency, N_Jb?r�a=nWTEnvi=entaZ Phone:(609)292-2576 Source Agency: New Jersey Department of Labor and Phone: (201) 648-3518 0 gy ov Ppotection, Bure opograp y. Industry. Division of Economic Development Flerson'K&nble Widmer, State Geologist Person: J.F. Brody Address:Z414 Prospect Street, Trenton, NJ Address: Use Data Prepared For: State environmental overlay series Use Data Prepared For: Resource document informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: Z9?5 Date Published: Z975 Date Compiled: unknown Date Published: unknown Data Format: map Type of Data: (check.one) Data Format: map Type of Data- (check,one) Qualitative x Quantitative Qualitative x Quantitative _ Scale: 1:63,3610 Spatial x Non-Spatial Scale: 1M--16 miles Spatial x Non-Spatial _ Measurement Units: Miles Computer Encoded? Yes _ No x Measurement Units: Miles Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Uni t: Landfill Sites Geographic Unit: Ports Geographic Area Covered: hmtire state Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Area served by public sewage, area not presently Source Data Categories/Map Legend: served by sewage, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment plants (Zess than and greater Major ports minor ports, and channels Vim 0.3 mgd), major sewage transmission lines, township, county and state boundaries. Reliability & Accuracy: Relies wholly upon county comprehensive plans, master plans, an Reliability & Accuracy: seweraqe studies. Information may be outdated in some cases. Drafti-ng transfer from the or-iginaZ county maps and reports is inaccurate. This information may be outdated. Usefulness of Data: This factor locates those areas where fish processing plants and Usefulness of Data: other industrial uses may locate. This factor is needed to find locations for warehousing. Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of Z:250,000 for this study. The legend Comments: displays the following distances to sanitary landfills: 0-5, 5-Zo, 10-20, 20 + miles. This factor was mapped at a scale of 1,250,000 for this study. The legend shows distances to Porte 0-1, 1-5, 5-10, 10-15, and 15+ miles. Source Citation: N. J. Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Geology Source Citation: and Topography. Z975. Sewage, Landfill overlay, sheets 21-3?. Trenton_ New Jersey. New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry, Division of Economic Development. Da te known. Ports and Navigable Waterways of New Jersey. Trenton, NJ. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 146/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 20 Factor Information Sheet 21 Factor: PROXIMITY TO AIRPORTS Factor: PRIME OPEN AGRICULTURAL LAND Source Map Title: New Jersey State Airport System Plan Source Map Title: Prime Open Agricultural Land Source Agency: Bureau of Aviation Planning Phone: (609) 292-3052 Source Agency: State Soil Conservation Committee Phone: (201) 246-1205 New Jersey Department of Transportation and the. USDA Soil Conservation Service Person: Person: Carl Eby Address: Address: Soil Conservation Service, 1370 Hamilton Street, Somerset, N.J. 08873 Use Data Prepared For: 1975 Summary Report for the New Jersey Airport System Use Data Prepared For: Regional and spatial location of prime agricultural soils Plan, 1975-1980 Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: Date Published: 1975 Date Compiled: 1971 Date Published: - 1971 Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: 1'@--20 mi. Spatial X Non-Spatial Scale: 1'@--4 mi. Spatial X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Miles Computer Encoded? Yes _ No X Measurement Units: capability classes Computer Encoded? Yes No X Geographic Unit: Airports by type Geographic Unit: state Geographic Area Covered: 'entire state Geographic Area Covered: entire state Data Categories/Map Legend: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Soil of Land Capability CLacces.1 and II, Soil basic utility air carrier military airports of Land Capability class III, Soil Used for Special Crops The SCS ' iS gqneraZ utility proposed airports preparing a soils map of the state(1:250,000). Important basic transport commuter airports Farmland maps are also scheduled to be prepared (Z:50@000). Reliability & Accuracy: Reliability & Accuracy: Map represents generalized @ocation of prime agricultural Scale of map too small to allow accurate spatial Location of facilities. soils. information accurate and reliable given the scale of the map. This factor will require periodic updating as airports are expanded and new facilitiez keWuhness of Data: Usefulness of Data: This factor is necessary in locating areas suitable for Field This factor locates areas where warehousing and various industries may Locate and Crops, Fresh Market Vegetables, Nurseries and Orchards. where communication structures will not locate. Comments: Comments: This factor was mapped at 1:250,000 for this study. The map legend displays the following categories: Capability Class I and II Soils, Capability This factor was mapped at a scale of Z:250,000 for this study. The legend Class III, and Soils for Special Crops categories show proximities of 0-1, 1-5j 5-10, 10-15, and 15 + miles. Source Citation: Source Citation: State Soil Conservation Connittee, D@Ivision of Rural Resouroes of New Jersey Department of Transportation, Bureau of Aviation Planning. 1975. Summary the New Jersey Department of Agriculture. 1971. Primary Agricultural Lands, Trentai, Report of the New Jersey State Airport System Plan, Plate III-1, Trenton, New Jersey. New Jersey. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Gold en Factor Information/147 Factor Information Sheet 22 Factor Discussion Sheet 22 Factor: WOODLAND SUITABILITY GROUP Source Map Title: County Sigil Survey Factor: WOODLAND SUITABILITY GROUP Source Agency: Soil Conservation Service and the Phone: (201) 246-1205 N.J. Agricultural Experiment Station Person: Carl Eby Woodland Suitability is traditionally considered to be a factor in selecting areas suitable for forestry. However, many foresters feel the woodl4,nd suitability rankings Address: Soil Conservation Service, 1370 Hamilton Street, Somerset, NJ 08873 given in soil surveys are inaccurate. This is especially true in New Jersey because Use Data Prepared For: those areas suitable for white cedar would appear as having the lowest ranking. When resource document siting areas for forests it may be wise to determine the tree type before deciding on Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: development potential factors. Date Compiled: varies Date Published: varies Source: Data Format: county reports, with maps Type of Data; (check one) Perry, John E. 1979. Regional Forester. Burlington and Ocean Counties, New Jersej Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: 1:15,840 Spatial X Non-Spatial Bureau of Forestry, Lonoka Harbor, New Jersey. Personal commmication. Measurement Units: soil series and phases Computer Encoded? Yes _ No X Geographic Unit: county Geographic Area Covered- entire state Source Data Categories/Map Legend; SoiZa mapped by series and phases. Descriptions of each soil series within the text contains a woodland suitability rating. Reliability & Accuracy: Most accurate source of soils related information available. Accuracy of the mapped data varies from county to county. Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful in Locating suitable areas for forestry. Comments: Source Citation: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, and the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, County Soil Surveys, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Rogers & Golden 14-8/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 23 Factor Information Sheet 24 Factor: SOIL ASSOCIATIONS Factor: FLOODING Source Map Title: County Soil Survey Source Map Title: Drainage Basin Overlay Source Agency: Soil Conservation Service and the Phone: (201) 246-1205 New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station Source Agency: New Jersey Department of Environment- Phone: (609) 292 -2576 Person: Carl Eby al Protection, Bureau of Geology and Topography Person: Kemble Widmer, State GeoLogist Address: Soil Conservation Service, 13?0 Hcanilton Street, Somerset, NJ 06873 Address: 1474 Prospect Street, Trenton, NJ Use Data Prepared For: Resource document Use Data Prepared For: State environmental overlay series Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: George J. HaLasi-Kun Date Compiled: varies Date Published: varies Date Compiled: 1976 to Date Published: 1976 to Present Present Data Format: map, with text Type of Data: (check boxes) Data Format: map Type of Data@ (check one) Qualitative x Quantitative _ Qualitative *X Quantitative Scale: l:Z26,720 Spatial X Non-Spatial _ Scale: 1:63,360 Spatial X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes - No x Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X If yes, what format? Geographic Unit: Soil Associations Geographic Unit: plood-prone Areas Geographic Area Covered: entire state Geographic Area Covered: The only drainage basin overlay sheet that has been' published at this time is Sheet 25. Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Soil associations by physiographic region Source Data Categories/Map Legend: drainage basin boundary streams and rivers river basin boundary flood prone areas Reliability & Accuracy: Due to extremely small scale of this map, this information drainage basin name should be regarded as generaLized-and.not site-specific. Reliability & Accuracy: This map must be uDdated as additional information is made available. In some areas flood plains are distinct. in other areas.they are more Usefulness of Data: These data are useful in locatinq_.areas generally suitable difficult to locate. -for blueberry, cranberry, fieff crop and vegetable farming. A stateoicde Usefulness of Data: being prepared at a scale of (1;250,000). This factor is used to identify flood prone areas for residential land uses. Coments: This factor has been mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The Comments: legend shows the Atsion-Muck-Sandy alluvial soil association, which is the soil The one published overlay sheet was used in the mapping of this factor at required for cranberry and blueberry farming. a.scale.of 1.250.000. Other flood-prone area maps are avaitabLe ?no_m_the Source Citation: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and the USGS (scale, 1:24,00(l) N.J. Agricultural Experiment Station, County Soil Surveys. U.S. Government Printing Source Citationt Office. Washington, D.C. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Geology and Topography. 1976. Drainage Basin Overlay, Sheet 25. Trenton, NJ. USDA Northeast TCS. 1979. FZoodplain delineation using the "Combination Method". Engineering Bulletin No. N-40-9-3t. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden Factor Informatim/149 Factor Information Sheet 25 Factor Information Sheet2e Factor: SLOPE Factor: SHALLOW FOUNDATION SUITABILITY Source map Title: Slope Alaps Source Map Title: County Soil Surveys Source Agency: Office of Environmental Analysis Phone: (215) 563-4220 Source Agency: Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and Phone: (201@ 246-1205 The New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station Person: Michael flocAmn Person: Carl Eby Address: Address: Soil Conservation Service, 1370 RamiZton Street, Somerset, N.J. 08873 Use Data Prepared For: Resource Document Use Data Prepared For: Resource Document Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: Z975 Date Published: Z975 Date Compiled: varies Date Published: varies Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: Maps, with text Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: 1:24,000 Spatial - Non-Spatial Scale: 1:15,840 Spatial X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: percent slope Computer Encoded? Yes - No X Measurement Units: Soil properties Computer Encoded? Yes - No X Geographic Unit: slope Geographic Unit: Soil series Geographic Area Ccrvered: Entire state Geographic Area Covered: Entire state, each county is published separately Source Data Categories/Map Legend: @wALw,@ @2, OMIDE CrA57AL ZOAr @JZ Source Data Categories/Map Legend: 2- % 3-82 Slight z5_1 2 @155 Moderate 96.5 Severe Reliability & Accuracy: Photo-mechanicaZ deterninations were used. This technique Reliability & Accuracy: is very accurate except in ri@ge anYvalZey areas where steeper slopes may be shown. Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful for locating areas having developmental Usefulness of Data: potential for all uses that require the construction of buildings, and for all transportation facilities. For houses of three stories with or without a basement and small industrial, commercial and institutional buildings Comments: Comments: This data should be considered on site. The SCS is currently developing a statewide soils map useful for general planning purposes (scale 1:250,000) Source Citation: Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Environmental Soufce Citation: I Analysis. 1975. Slope Maps. Trenton, N.T. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station. County Soil Surveys. U.S. Govprmnent Printing Office. Washington, D.C. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 150/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 27 Factor Discussion Sheet 27 Factor: SOIL LOAD BEARING CAPACITY Factor: SOIL LOAD BEARING CAPACITY 0 Source Map Ti-tie: Not mapped. Bearing capacity of the soil is a critical factor in determining a given site's Source Agency: Dames and Moore Phone: (201) 272-8300 capability to support built structures. It is therefore imperative to consider soil load bearing capacity for those Land uses which involve construction of buildings Person: Jim Cool and for highways. Existing sources of information consist of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Address: 6 Commerce Drive, Cranford, NJ County Soil Surveys and the Engineering Soil Surveys for New Jersey published by Rut- Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Development Potential Study gers University. Specifically, Table 6 of the Soil Surveys list the AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) classifications for each Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Phil Hopkins soil series. Date Compiled: Date Published: Recommended Mapping Procedure: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) 1. Locate the AASHTO classifications for the soil series in the appropriate Qualitative x Quantitative county soil survey or in the Engineering Soil Survey. Scale: Spatial - Non-Spatial x 2. Categorize each soil series' AASHTO classification as high, medium or low Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No x bearing capacity (example: A-1 through A-3 as high capacity; A-4 through A-5 as medium capacity; A-6 through A-7 as*low capacity). Geographic Unit: 3. Locate and map the soil series by category. Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Sources: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service. County Soil Surveys. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Rutgers University. 1954. Engineering Soil Surveys for New Jersey. Rutgers Reliability & Accuracy: University, New Brunswick, NJ. Soil load bearing capacity is useful for roads. small buildings and other light uses. It is not useful for muZti-story buildings or heavy commercial or industrial uses. (This publication has both maps (scale 1:63,360) and text on soils Usefulness of Data: for engineering use. Unfortunately the accuracy of this data is This factor is a consideration in locating areas having development potential very suspect. it does howevercover the entire state. It is not for highrise structures such as hotels, apartment buildings, and communication recommended for use here.) eowntyres, and for railroads and highways. e s: See Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/151 Factor Information Sheet 28 Factor Discussion Sheet-28 Factor: DEEP FOUNDATION SUITABILITY Source Map Title: Factor: DEEP FOUNDATION SUITABILITY Source Agency: Dames and Moore Phone: (201).-272-8300 Person: Jim Cool Deep foundation suitability applies to major industrial uses and structures whiah will be over 3 to 4 stories tall. The soil survey data is reliable only down to 60_jnches. Address: 6 Commerce Drive, Cranford, New efersey Therefore, deep foundation suitability is not directly napped. Use Date Prepared For: Recommended mapping Procedure: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: 1. Using the State Geologic map and the underZying formations noted in the Engineering Soils Survey of New Jersey determine: Date Compiled: Date Published: a - depth to bedrock b - parent material Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative - Quantitative 2. Interpret Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial (Quatified Soils Engineer Required) and indicate initial, planning assessment of foundation suitability. Well core data, *if Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No available, is also needed. It should be enphasized that on-site investigations are the only accurate way to assess deep foundation Geographic Unit: suitability. Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: @ellabllity & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is a consideration in locating larger structures such as industrial building, hotels and motels. Comments: The soil conservation Service is preparing a soil map for the entire state tha.- urtZl be useful for general planning purposes. Saufte Citation: Rogers & Golden 152/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 29 Factor Discussion Sheet-29 Factor: AVAILABILITY OF MINERAL RESOURCES Source Map Title: State Atlas Sheet (in progress) Factor: AVAILABILITY OF MINERAL RESOURCES Source Agency: Bureau of Geology and Topography Phone: Person: @he location of mineral resources is requisite for understanding the potential location 'f extraction industry. State Atlas Sheets are being prepared which will show Address: the location of major mineral resources. Use Data Prepared For: General Recommended Mapping Procedure: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Kimble Widmer 1. Using the State geology maps locate major mineral bearing formations. (Sand is not mapped in the coastal zone because it is so prevalent). Date Compiled: in progress Date Published: 2. The Mineral Yearbook published by the Bureau of Mines, Department of Interior, gives verbal location descriptions of major mineral Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check one) resources whidh are currently being worked. Qualitative Quantitative Scale: 1:63,360 Spatial Non-Spatial 3. Combining these two sources of information would produce a map show- Measurement Units: importance of mineral Computer Encoded? Yes No ing locations of commercially viable mineral operations (mines, deposit gravel pits, etc.). Geographic Unit: Formation 4. Expand knowledge of important mineral deposits through interviews Geographic Area Covered: Entire state with informed sources. Widmer, K. 1979. State Geologist. (personal communication). Source Data Categories/Map Legend: .Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: Extraction industry location Comments: Soufte Citation: Rogers & Golden Factor Information/153 Factor Information Sheet 30 Factor Discussion Sheet 30 Factor: THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN Source Map Title: County Geology and Groundwater Resource Circul@ra Factor: THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN Source Agency: Dames S Moore Phone: (2Gl)-272-8300 Person: Jim Coot Overburden is a very inexact term; it could mean anything from the total amount Address: of soil and unconsolidated materials over bedrock to amount of soil lying over a level of gravel desired to be mined. It is, however, a concept used in the extraction industry. Use Data Prepared For: Recornmended Mapping Procedure: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: 1. Use Geology and Groundwater Resources circular for each county to deter-mine: te Compiled: Date Published: a - generalized surface geology b - depth contours for bedrock c - configuration (including thickness) :aat:,Format: Type of Data: (check one) of major formations S Qualitative x Quantitative d - type of deposit by forination ca Spatial _X Non-Spatial x Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No x 2. By combining the descriptions of these major formations with the Geographic Unit: surface map of major geologic formations, an estimate of the thickness of overburden can be determined Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful for locating the volume of economic deposits for extraction industry. Comments: Souice Citation: Rogers & Golden 154/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 31 Factor Discussion Sheet 31 Factor: SOILS SUITABLE FOR ON-SITE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS Source Map Title: not mapped Factor: SOILS SUITABLE FOR ON-SITE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS S@urcg Agency: Phone: Soil absorption of septic tank effluent has been the usual process by which domes tic liquid waste is disposed in areas beyond the reach of municipal sewerage Person: facilities. Although the U.S. Department of Agriculture's County Soil Surveys do list soils suitable for septic systems, this information is not very accurate. Soil Address: percolation tests should be conducted whenever a septic system is being considered. Use Data Prepared For: Recently a number of alternatives to septic systems and municipal sewerage facilities have been developed. Most noted of these are package treatments and Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Lagoons, however a number of other innovative systems exist. At the present time there is no source of mappable data that wi IZ identify soil suitabilities for all of the available systems. Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Sources: Qualitative Quantitative Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Bauma, J. et at. 1972. Soil Absorption of Septic Tank Effluent. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Leckie, J. et at. 1975. Other Homes and Garbag .e. San Francisco: Sierra Geographic Unit: Club Books. Geographic Area Covered: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. County Soil Surveys. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. J. Tourbier and R. W. Pierson, Jr., eds., Biological Control of Water Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Pollution, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1976. Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate areas suitable for housing and campgrounds in those areas not served by public sewerage. Comments: See comments on Factor Discussion Sheet. Source Citation: Rogers & Golden Factor information/155 Factor Information Sheet 32 Factor Discussion Sheet 32 Factor: SLRFACE WATER AVAILABILITY Source Map Title: Not mapped Factor: SURFACE WATER AVAILABILITY Source Agency: Dames and Moore Phone: (201) 272-8300 Land uses requiring surface water availability considerations generally are those which require irrigation, processing water, or municipal water supply. Among Person: Jim Cool these uses are Fresh Market VegetabZes, Nurseries, Orchards, Cranberries, Golf Courses, and Standard Industrial Classifications. Address: 6 Commerce Drive, Cranford, NJ To determine minimum safe yields and storage capacity for potential surface water Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Development Potential Study supplies, historical data and estimates should be obtained from public and private local water supply companies. Daily flow, seasonal f7uctuations in flow and drain- Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Phil Hopkins age basin areas of streams may be determined by consulting the appropriate U.S. Geological Survey stream gauging station data. Date Compiled: Date Published: Recommended Mapping Procedure: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative x Quantitative 1. Map water bodies according to storage and safe yields. Scale: Spatial - Non-Spatial _X_ 2. Estimate allowable pumping or use of surface water resources in mgd (mil- Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No x Zion gallons per d2y) based on local demand and per capita use rates (in- cluding potential industrial and commercial users). Locate these rates Geographic Unit: on the map. Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Sources: N.J. Department of Geology. Map of New Jersey's Surface Waters (1:250,000). Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Trenton, NJ. U.S. Geological Survey. Strewn C4Wing Station Data. Reston, VA. Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is a consideration in locating areas having development potential for moat harvest uses, and for golf courses. Comments: See commente on Factor Discussion Sheet. Roagers & Golden 156/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 33 Factor Discussion Sheet 33 Factor: GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY Factor: GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY Source Map Title: Not mapped Groundwater availability is an alernative to surface Later availability in the Source Agency: Dames & Moore Phone: (201) 272-8300 siting of many harvest uses. Existing documentation of groundwater resources are special reports issued jointly by the United States Geological Survey and the Person: Jim Cool New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (Division of Water Resources). These reports list the location of aquifers and existing yields (safe sustained Address: 6 Commerce Drive, Cranford, New Jersey yields sometimes included) for wells drawing from various aquifers. The yield of the aquifer is usually given in gallons per minute per foot of drawdown. In de- Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Development Potential Study termining groundwater availability the maps and well log data are compiled and the informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Phil Hopkins units are converted from gallons per minute (gpm) to gallons per day (mgd). Recommended Mapping Procedure: Date Compiled: Date Published: 1. Use geologic maps and groundwater resource publications to map the Location Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) of known aquifers which are Likely to be used. Qualitative Quantitative Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial X 2. Use well togs to identify existing yields in mgdlaquifer. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X 3. Supplement these data with estimates of yields contained in the geology and groundwater resources publications. Geographic Unit: 4. Map estimated yields of knorwn aquifers. Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful for Locating areas having development potential for most harvest uses, and for golf courses. Comments: See comments on Factor Discussion Sheet. Source Citation: Rogers & Golden Factor Information/157 Factor Information Sheet 34 Factor Information Sheet 35 Fact.)r: ACCESS TO PUBLIC SEWERAGE Factor: ACCESS TO PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY Source Map Title: Sewage, Landfill Overlap Source Map Title: Water Supply Overlay Source Agency: N.J. Department of Enviromental Phone: (609) 292-2576 Source Agency: N.J. Department of Environmental Phone: (609) 29S-2576 Protection, Bureau of Geology and Topograph,, Protection, Bureau of Geology and Topography Person: Kemble Wi&ner, State Geologist Person: Kemble Widmer, state geologist Address: 1474 Prospect Street, Trenton, NJ Address: 1474 Prospect Street, Trenton, N.J. Use Data Prepared For: State environmental overlay series Use Data Prepared For- State eftviztw=entaZoverZay series Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Comoi led: 19?5 Date Published: 1975 Date Compiled: 1976 Date Published: 1975 Data Fornar: Map Type of Data: (check boxes) Data Format: map Type of Data: (check boxes) Qualitative X Quantitative Qual itatl ve X Quantitative Scale. 1:63,360 Spatial Non-Spatial Scale: 1:63,360 Spatial X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Conputer Encoded? Yes No X Measurement Unitsi Computer Encoded? Yes No X if yes, what format? If yes, what format? Geociraphic Unit: State Geographic Unit: state Geoqraphic Area Covered: Entire State Geographic Area Covered: entire state lource Data Categories/Map Legend: Area served by public sewerage, area not presently Source Data Categories/Map Legend: area served by private water service companies, served by public sewage service, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment plants area served by regionally owned water service companies, area served by municipally (1.3 mgd, 5. 3 mgd capacityl, major ge,.g, transmission lines, township boundaries, owned water service companies, area not served by water service, public supply wells, county boundaries, states boundaries. surface water intake, major water basins, township, county, and state boundaries. Reliabilivi 6 Accuracy: Reliability & Accuracy: Data my be outdated in some areas. @elies wholly upon county comprehensive plans and master plans. Informa- tion may be outdated in some cases. Drafting transfer from the original country maps and reports is inaccurate. Usefulness of 'Data: Usefulness of Data: This factor is needed in the location of various housing types This factor locates those areas where various housing t@ypes and assorted industries as well as many industrial and recreational land uses. may locate. Comments: Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The legend displays legends show the following distances to public water supply: 0-k, Aj-1k, lk-3, and the following distances to public sewerage: O-@, k-1k, 1@-3, 3+ miles. 3+ miles. Source Citation: Source Citation: Now Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Geology N.J. Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Geology and Topography, and Topography. Z975. Water Supply Overlay, Sheets 21-37. Trenton, New Jersey. 1975, Sewage Landfill Overlay, sheets 2.1 through 37, Trenton, NJ Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 158/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 36 Factor Discussion Sheet 36 Factor: POTABLE WATER SUPPLY Factor: POTABLE WATER SUPPLY Source Map Title: not mapped The Bureau of Geology has considerable data on Potable Water Supply. There are Source Agency: NJ Department of Environmental Phone: (609) 292-2576 summaries of ground water conditions for most counties that have been prepared by Protection, Bureau of Geology U.S.G.S., in addition to the well files maintained by the Bureau. The well files are Person: Kemble Widmer, State Geologist updated constantly. Address: 1414 Prospect Street, Trenton, NJ Source: Johnson, Steve. Z979. Bureau of Geology. Department of Environmental Use Data Prepared For: Resource Documents Protection. Trenton, NJ. Personal Corrm4nication. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Carol LucylSteve Johnson Date Compiled: varies Date Published: varies 1960-1970 1960-1970 Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) data is on file Qualitative Quantitative X Scale: Spatial X Non-Spatial - Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: entire.8tate Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: generally reliable Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate areas suitable for housing and camp grounds in those regions not served by public sewerage. Comments: See comments on Factor Discussion Sheet. Source Citation: Well Files Bureau of Geology. Department oil Environmental Protection. Trenton, NJ. Rogers & Golden FaUor Information/159 Factor Information Sheet 37 Factor Information Sheet 38 Factor: DEPTH TO WATER TABLE Factor: MkJOR ECOSYSTIM Source Map Title: County Soil Surveys* Source Map Title: Land Type Areas of New Jersey Source Agency: Soil Conservation Service Phone: (20@) 246-1205 Source Agency: New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Phone: station and the Soil Conservation Service. Person: Carl Eby Person: G. A. Quakenbush and J.C.F. Tedraw Address: Soil ConservationService, 1370 Hamilton Street, Somerset, N.J. 08873 Address: Use Data Prepared For: Resource Document Use Data Prepared For: Reference document Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: varies Date Published: varies Date Compiled: 1954 Date Published: 1954 Data Format: Map, with text Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qua Iit.tive Quantitative Scale: 1:15@840 Spa tial Non-Spatial Scale: 1 inch = 8 miles Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No x Geographic Unit: Geographic Unit: phyoiographiclgeo logic provinces Geographic Area Covered: Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Source Data Categories/Map Legend:' Feet below soil surface Younger glacial mater-ial regions, older glacial material region, inner coastal plain, outer coastal plain, miscellaneous. Reliability & Accuracy: Reliability & Accuracy: This map should be updated. Usefulness of Data: Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful in locating areas suitable for natural This factor is useful in any facility which has potential groundwater contamination areas and rivers. problems, or where dewatering is necessary Comments: Comments: This factor was maped at 1:250,000 for this study. SouiFce Citation: Source Citation: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and the New Jersey New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, 1954. Land type areas of New Jersey, Agricultural Experiment Station. County Soil Surveys. U.S. Government Printing Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Planning office. Office. Washington, D.C. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 160/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 39 Factor Discussion Sheet 39 Factor: FREE-FLOWING CHARACTERISTICS Source Title: Amount of Corridor in Natural Condition Factor: FREE-FLOWING CHARACTERISTICS Source Agency: Heritage Conservation and Phone: (215) 597-7385 The Free-Flowing Characteristics of a river may be an important factor in evaZu- Recreation Service ating a river for The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study (P.L. 95-625) or Person: Glenn Eugster in New Jersey's decision to preserve a section of a river corridor as a Natural Area. The Studies Division of the Northeast Regional office of the Heritage Conservation and Address: Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, Room 9310, Philadelphia, PA 19106 Recreation Service has prepared data sheets for rivers within the state. These data Use Data Prepared For: Wild and Scenic River System sheets note the percentage of river corridor in natural condition. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Sources: Eugster, Glenn. 1979. Studies Division, Heritage Conservation and'Recreation Date Compiled: 1977-1978 Date Published: Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia, Personal communica- tion. Data Format: Data Sheets Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative Quantitative X McKenzie, Ricki. 1979. State Planning Division, Heritage Conservation and Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Recreation Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia. Personal communication. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes _ No _X Boated, Ken. 1979 . Green Acres, New Jersey Department of Environmental Geographic Unit: Protection. Trenton. Personal communication. Geographic Area Covered: New Jersey river corridors Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Miles with 100% of corridor in natural condi- tion, Miles with 75% of corridor in natural condition, Miles with 50% of corridor in natural condition, Miles with 25% of corridor in natural condition. Reliability & Accuracy: This data is reliable and accurate. Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate Natural Areas and Rivers. Comments: See notes on Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden 0 Factor Information Sheet 40 Factor Discussion Sheet 40 Factor: HABITATS OF RARE AND VANISHING SPECIES Factor: HABITATS OF RARE AND VANISHING SPECIES Source Title Rare and Endangered Species Source Agency Heritage Conseration and Phone: (215) 597-7385 The existence of rare or endangerea species may be an important factor in evalu Recreation Service ating a river for The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study (P.L. 95-625) or in Person: Glenn Eugster New Jersey's decision to preserve a parcel of land as an Natural Area. The Studies Division of the Northeast Regional Office of the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Address: Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, Room 9310 Service has prepared data sheets for many rivers within the state. These data sheets Philadelphia, PA 19106 note the presence or absence of rare and endangered species within one mile segements Use Data Prepared For: Wild and Scenic River System of each river corridor. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Sources: Date Compi led: 1977-1978 Date Published: Eugster, Glen,. 1979. Studies Division, Heritage Conservation and Service. U.S. Department of the Tnterior. Philadelphia. Personal Data Format: Data sheets Type of Data: (check one) communication. Qualitative Quantitative X Scale: Spatial X Non-Spatial McKenzie, Ricki. 1979. State Planning Division, Heritage Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X Recreation Service. U.S. Department of the Interior Philadelphia Personal communication. Geographic Unit: Boated, Ken. 1979. Green Acres, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Trenton. Personal communication. Geographic Area Covered: New Jersey river corridor Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Presence of rare and endangered species Absence of rare and endangered species Reliability & Accuracy: This data is incomplete. Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate Natural Areas and Rivers Comments: See notes on following page.. Rogers & Golden 162/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Shpet 41 Factor Discussion Sheet 41 Factor- RIVER ACCESSIBILITY Source Title: @ :.nds , Accesr Factor: RIVER ACCESSIBILITY Source Agency: Heritage @.cmserva*4,, Phone: (215) 597-7385 Type of access to a river is an important factor in evaluating a river for The Recreation [email protected] National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study (P.L. 95-625). The Studies Division of Person: Glenn Eugster the Northeast Regional Office of the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service has prepared data sheets for many rivers within New Jersey. These sheets note the type Address: Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, Roont 9310 and frequency, of access within one mile segments of each river corridor. Philadelphia, PA 19106 Use Data Prepared For: Wild and Scenic Rive7, ,stem Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Sources: Eugster, Glenn. 19?9. Studies Division. Heritage Conservation and Re,ireation Date Compiled: 1977-1978 Date Publishea- Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia, Persor,71 communication. McKenzie, Riokt. 1979. State Planning Division. Heri@age Conservation and Data Format: Data sPepts Type of Data: (ct)eck one) Recreation Service. U.S. Department of f,e Interior. PhiLade7rhia. Personal .ual;tative Quantitative X communication. Scale: Spatial 7- Non-Spatial - Measurement Units: omputer Encoded? Yes No X Boated, Ken. 1979. Green Acres, New Jersey Department ;)f Environmental Protec- tion. Trenton. Personal communication. Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: New Jersey river !orridors Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Miles with public road in corridor, Miles with public road within -@ mile of corridor, Rumber of bridge crossinos, Number of road endings in corridor, Number of railroad crossings, other Reliability & Accuracy: Very reliable and accurate Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate Natural Areas and Rivers. Comments: See notes on following page. Rogers & Golden Factor Information/163 Factor Information Sheet 42 Factor Discussion Sheet 42 Factor: SHORELINES OF RIVERS Source Title: Characteristics of Shoreline Conditions Factor: SHORELINES OF RIVERS Source Agency: Heritage Conservation and Phone: (215) 597-7385 The type, or types, of shoreline of a river may be an important factor in evaluating Recreation Service a river for The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study (P.L. 96-625) or in New Person: Glenn Eugster Jersey's decision to preserve a section of a river corridor as a Natural Area. The Studies Division of the Northeast Regional Office of the Heritage Conservation and Address: Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, Room 9310 Recreation Service has prepared data sheets for many rivers within the state. These data PhiZadelphic, PA 19106 sheets note the number of miles of shoreline with a continuous natural corridor, the number of miles of shoreline more than a 4 mile from a public road, the number of miles Use Data Prepared For: Wild and Sienic River System of shoreline with 50 percent or more forest land, and the number of miles of shoreline Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: with significant topographic diversity. Date Compiled: 1977-1978 Date Published: Sources: Data Format: Data sheets Type of Data: (check one) Eugater, Glenn. 1979. Studies Division, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Qualitative _ Quantitative x Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia. Personal communication. Scale: Spatial x Non-Spatial _ McKenzie, Ricki. 19?9. State Planning Division. Heritage Conservation and Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes _ No X Recreation Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia, Personal communication. Geographic Unit: Boated, Ken. 19?9. Green Acres, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protec- Geographic Area Covered: New Jersey river corridors tion. Trenton. Personal comainication. Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Miles with continuous natural corridor, Miles i@ mile or more from public road, PAZes with 60% or more forest land, Miles with significant topographic diversity Reliability & Accuracy: This data -,*a reliable and accurate. Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate Natural Areas and Rivers. Comments: See notes on foZZowing page. Rogers & Golden 164/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 43 Factor Discussion Sheet 43 Factor: BIOTIC TYPES Factor: BIOTIC TYPES Source Title: Vegetation Diversity of Plant Communities Source Agency: Heritage Conservation and Phone: (215) 597-7385 The existence of common biotic types andlor atypical biotic types may be an Recreation Service important factor in evaluating a river for The National Wild and Scenic Rivers Systems Person. Glenn Eugster Study (P.L. 95-625) or in New Jersey's decision to preserve a parcel of land as a Natural Area. The best way to judge biotic types is by on-site inspection, there is no Address: Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, Room 9310 up to date source of information that covers the entire coastal zone. The most cza@rent Philadelphia, PA 19106 data for river corridors in New Jersey has been assembled by the Studies Division of Use Data Prepared For. the Northeast Regional Office of the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. One Wild and Scenic River System topic covered on their data sheets, Vegetation - Diversity of Plant Communities, notes Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: high diversity, moderate diversity, or low diversity. Date Compiled: 1977-1978 Date Published: Sources: Data Format: Data sheets Type of Data: (check one) Eugster, Glenn. 1979. Studies Division, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Qualitative - Quantitative X Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia. Personal communica- Scale: Spatial X Non-Spatial tion. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X McKenzie, Ricki. 1979. State Planning Division, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia, Personal Geographic Unit: conym4nication. Geographic Area Covered: New Jersey river corridors Boated, Ken. 1979. Green Acres, New Jersey Department of &ivironmentaZ Protection. Trenton. Personal cormunication. Source Data Categories/Map Legend: High diversity Low diversity moderate diversity Reliability & Accuracy: This factor is reliable and accurate. Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate Natural Areas and Rivers. Comments: See notes on following page. Rogers & Golden L Factor Information/165 Factor Information Sheet 44 Factor Discussion Sheet 44 Factor: GEOLOGIC TYPES c Factor: GEOLOGIC TYPES Source Title: Prominent Natural Features Characteristi@ of the Physiographic Regio Source Agency: Heritage Conservation and Phone: (215) 597-7385 The existence of common geologic types or atypical geologic types or both may be Recreation Service Person: Glenn Eugster an important factor in evaluating a river for The National wild and Scenic Rivers System Study (P.L. 95-625). The Studies Division of the Northeast Regional Office of the Her- Address: Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, Room 9310 itage Conservation and Recreation Service has prepared data sheets for many rivers Philadelphia, PA 19106 within New Jersey. One topic covered by these data sheets, Prominent Natural Features Use Data Prepared For: Characteristic of thePhysiographic Region, notes the existence of many examples, some Wild and Scenic River System examples, few examples, or no examples, within one mile segments of each river corridor. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: There is an alternative to the use of data collected by the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. The Geologic Overlays, prepared for the New Je@-sey State Atlas Date Compiled: 1977-1978 Date Published: Series by the Bureau of Geology and Topography of the Department of knvironmentaZ Protection, could be used in making assessments of geologic types within the coastal Data Format: Data sheets Type-of Data: (check one) zone. Qualitative Quantitative X Scale: Spatial _X Non-Spatial Sources: Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No X Eugster, Glenn. 1979. Studies Division. Heritage Conservation and Recreation Geographic Unit: Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia. Personal communication. McKenzie, Ricki. 1979. State Planning Division. Heritage Conservation and Geographic Area Covered: New Jersey river corridors Recreation Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. Philadelphia. Personal communication. Bosted, Ken. 1979. Green Acres, New Jersey Department of Environmental Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Protection. Trenton. Personal com=ication. Many examples Few examples Some examples No examples Widmer, Kemble. 1979. Bureau of Geology and Topography, New Jersey Department Reliability & Accuracy: of E@ivironmental Protection. Trenton. Personal communication. Very reliable and accurate Usefulness of Data: This factor is used to locate Natural Areas and Rivers. Comments: See notes on following page. Rogers & Golden 166/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 45 Factor Information Sheet 46 Factor: PROXIMITY TO OCEAN BEACH FRONTAGE Factor: PROXIMITY To RIVER AND BAY SHORE FRONTAGE Source Map Title: Water Body Types Source Map Title: Water Body Types Source A ency: NJ Department of Environmental Phone: (609) 292-9765 Source Agency: Office of Coastal Zone Management Phone: (609) 292-9765 ctg Prote on, Office of Coastal Zone Management Person: Michael Hochman Person: Michael Hochman Address: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal Zone Address: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal Management, P.O. Box 1889, Trenton, NJ 08625 Zone Management, P.O. Box 1889, Trenton, NJ 08625 Use Data Prepared For: Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Stewart McKenzie Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Stewart McKenzie Date Compiled: 1975 Date Published: 1977 Date Compi led: 1975 Date Published: .1977 Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative x Quantitative Scale: 1 inch equals 15 miles Spatial No6-Spatial Scale: 11@--15 miles Spatial _x Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Water body types Computer Encoded? Yes No X Measurement Units: water body types Computer Encoded? Yes No x Geographic Unit: Water body Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: -open bay -man-made harbor open bay man made harbor -semi-enclosed and back bay -inlets semi-enclosed and back bay Large river -inland basins inland basins inlets Reliability &Accuracy: This data is reliable and accurate. Reliability & Accuracy: This data is reliable and accurate. Usefulness of Data: This factor is desired by most housing and recreation types. Usefulness of Data: This factor is required by most housing and recreational types. Comments: Thissfactor was mappedlor thi a stui t Zelof 1:250,000. The map Comments: a sca -5, 5- 5 and 15+ miles. shows distance fr adjacent, k This factor was mapped for this study at a scale of 1:250.000. The map also shows distances from rivers and bays at 0-112, 112-1, and 1+ mile distances. Source Citation: Office of Coastal Zone Management. 1977. A Coastal Management Source Citation: Strategy for New Jersey. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Office of Coastal Zone Management. 1977. A Coastal Management Strategy of New Jersey. New Jersey Dep@@ent of Environmental Protection. Trenton, NJ. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden Factor Information/167 Factor Information Sheet 47 Factor Discussion Sheet 47 Factor: MINIMUM NEED FOR BRIDGES AND TUNNELS Factor: MINIMUM NEED FOR BRIDGES AND TUNNELS Source Map Title: Not mappable In planning aZignmente for transportation facilities, such as highways and railroads, Source Agency: Phone: it is i@mportant to beariii mind that the cost per linear foot for either tunnel construction @r bridge @onstruction can be several timesmore expensive than construction on grade. Thus, Person: in connecting two points with either a highway or a railroad, it may be Less expensive to construct a long facility that avoids the need for a bridge or tunnel, rather than to Address: construct the shortest alignment with a bridge or tunnel. The process of trading off the cost of increased linear distance against the cost of tunnel or bridge construction is a Use Data Prepared For: complex one, and cannot be done without knowledge of the starting and end points of the Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: proposed facility. Since these points are not known, this factor cannot be mapped. Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Source: Paquette, Radnor J., et al. 1972. Transportation Engineering: Planning and Design. New York: Ronald Press. Qu:litative Quantitative Scale: Sp tia I Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit- Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is of consideration when 8iting roads and railroads. Comments: See Factor Discussion Sheet. Rooers & Golden 168/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 48 Factor Information Sheet 49 Facto EMBAYMENTS Factor: VISIBILITY FROM ROAD Source. Map Title: WAter ndy Types Source Title: National Forest Landscape Source Agency: Office of Coastal Zone Management Phone: 609-292-9765 Source Agency: Rogers & Golden Phone: (215) 563-4220 Person: Michael Hochman Person: John Rogers Address. New Jersey Dept of Environmental Protection, Office of Coastal Zone Address: 1427 Vine Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102 Management , P.O. Box 1889, Trenton, New Jersey 08625 Base Data Prepared For: Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Coastal Development Potential Study Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Stewart McKenzie Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled 1975 Date Published: 1977 Date Compiled: 1979 Date Published: 1979 Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check boxes) Data Format: Map Type of Da Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: inch equals to miles Spatial X Non-Spatial Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial X Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Water body type Computer Encoded? Yes No X Measurement Units: Feet Computer Encoded? yes NO X If yes, what Format? Geographic Unit: Water Body Geographic Unit: Set-back line Geographic Area Covered: Entire State Geographic Area Covered: Coastal Study Area Data Categories/Map Legend: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: -area visible from road -open bay -man-made harbor -semi-enclosed and back bay -large river -inland basins -inlets Reilability & Accuracy: Reliability & Accuracy: Areas within one quarter of a mile are considered in the foreground of the landscape and easily discernible. The only case where this reliable and accurate factor would not be totally reliable is if there is a barrier screening the view of the observer. Usefulness of Data: Usefulness of Data: This factor is required in the location of regional shopping This factor locates areas where marinas may locate which have relatively few centers. Developers of Shopping Centers feel visibility from at least one road problems with water movement. This factor is required for marine locations. is requisite in siting a regional Shopping Center. Comments: Comments: This actor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The legend set-back line is one quarter of a mile from collector roads excluding collector category shows embayments. roads. The quarter mile set-back assumption for visibility is based on the U.S. Forest Service Study cited below. Source Citation: Source Citation: Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1975. Chapter 1, Office of Coastal Zone Management. 1977. A Coastal Management strategy for The Visual Management System in National Forest Landscape. Washington, DC. U.S. New Jersey. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Government Printing Office. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden Factor Information Sheet 50 Factor Discussion Sheet 50 Factor: DREDGING MAINTENANCE Factor: DREDGING MAINTENANCE Source Map Title: Source Agency: Dames and Moore Phone: (201) 272-8300 Information concerning Dredging Maintenance will be available shortly for the entire state. Michael Hockman in the Division of Coastal Resources is and informal Person: Jim Cool source. Address: 6 Commerce Drive, Canford, NJ Land uses concerned with this factor include Ports, Marinas, Commercial Fishing Docks and the like. The frequency and amount of dredging maintenance required at any given site are determined by accessibility status (type of shoaling and/or acces- Use Data Prepared For: New Jersey Development Potential Study sibiity at low tide), the intensity of boating activity; local bathymetry, turbid- ity, river and for harbor currents, river flow, topography of the upstream water- Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Phil Hopkins shed, erodibibity of soils in the watershed degree to which the watershed has been developed. Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Recommended Mapping Procedure: Qualitative x Quantitative Mapping of the necessity or frequency of dredging required involves the following: Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial x 1. Determine sediment roads and runoff characteristics of the streams in ques- Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No x tion, based on topography and soil characteristics of the watershed. Geographic Unit: 2. Determine the streamflow (cfs) with the estimated soil load and turbidity. Geographic Area Covered: Entire state 3. Check with existing marinas, harbormasters, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to estimate historic deposition rates, dredging frequencies and type and amount of use. Source Data Categories/Map Legend: 4. After all harbors have been given an estimate of yearly sediment accumulation, assign each to a high, medium and low maintenance category (high every 5 years and less; medium every 5-10 years; low every 15 years or more). Reliability & Accuracy: Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. County Soil Surveys. Usefulness of Data: Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing office. This factor is a consideration in locating areas having development potential for major and minor ports. U.S. Geological Survey. Surface Water Supply Records. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Comments: See comments on Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden 170/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 51 Factor Discussion Sheet 51 Factor: ACCEPTABLE WATER QUALITY Source Map Title: New Jersey Surface, Water Classification Map Factor: ACCEPTABLE WATER QUALITY Source Agency: NJDEP Division of Water Resources Phone: Person: Surface waters of New Jersey are identified as Fresh (FW), Tidal (TW), and Coastal (CW). This includes both interstate and intrastate waters. Address: The uses which the different classes are suitable for are listed below. Use Data Prepared For: Surface Water Quality Standards Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: SUITABILITY (FW1)(FW2)(FW3)(TW1)(TW2)(TW3)(CW1)(CW2) PROTECTION X Date Compiled: 1972 Date Published: 1974 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY X X X Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check one) POTABLE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY (TREATED) X X X scale: 1:250,000 Qualitative Quantitative X MAINTENANCE,MIGRATION AND PROPAGATION X X Spatial X Non-Spatial _ OF NATURAL AND ESTABLISHED BIOTA Measurement Units- Water Quality Criteria Computer Encoded? Yes No X MAINTENANCE, MIGRATION AND PROPAGATION X X OF FISH POPULATIONS Geographic Unit: Classifications MIGRATION OF ANADROMOUS FISH X X Geographic Area Covered: Entire State PRIMARY RECREATION X X X SECONDARY RECREATION X X X INDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL WATER SUPPLY X X OTHER REASONABLE USES X X X X X X X Source Data Categories/Map Legend: MAINTENANCE OF WILDLIFE X X FW-1 TW-1 CW-1 SHELLFISH HARVESTING WHERE PERMITTED X X X FW-2 TW-2 CW-2 WATERS 1500 FEET FROM MEAN LOW TIDE SHORELINE FW-3 TW-3 OR TO A DEPTH OF 15 FEET BELOW MEAN LOW TIDE X Reliability & Accuracy: ATLANTIC OCEAN WATERS BEYOND THOSE ESTABLISHED UNDER CW1 TO THE THREE MILE LIMIT X The map is an approximation Usefulness of Data: Helpful in determining water supply location and recreation potential of areas Comments: This map was traced directly onto mylar: the legend is the same as the source map. Source Citation: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Resources, 1974. N.J.A.C., 7:9-4 et. seq. Surface Water Quality Standards. Docket No. DEP 012-74-11 Rogers & Golden Factor Information/171 Factor Information Sheet 52 Factor Discussion Sheet 52 Factor: ON-SITE AMENITIES Source Map Title. Not mappable Factor: ON-SITE AMENITIES Source Agency: Phone: On-Site Amenities are defined as vegetation for the purposes of this study. Vegetation can consist of anything fr-om a stand of White Cedar trees to a patch of day Person: lilies Left in place by a developer. Though these On-Site Amenities do represent a Address: fairly significant cost consideration, they are too small in scale to be mapped for this study. Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Sources: Harper, D. and warbach, .7. 1976. Visual Quality and the Coastal Zone. Date Compi led: Date Published: Syracuse, NY: SUN , College of Environmental Science and Forestry. Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Zube, E.H., et al. 1975. Landscape Assessment. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Qualitative Quantitative Hutchinson and Ross, Inc. Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend-. Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is a consideration in the location of all housing types. Comments: See connents on Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden '172/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 53 Factor Discussion Sheet 53 Factor: CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA Factor: CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA Source Map Title: not mapped Ady maintain that the Character Source Agency: Phone: most builders and developers interviewed for this sti of the Surrounding Area is an important factor in siting housing developments. Yet the Person: term seems to have a variety of meanings. Some builders define Character of surrounding Area as having to do with the price of existing housing. To others it has to do with Address: crime rates. Use Data Prepared For: Rogers & Golden interpreted Character of Surrounding Area as either compatible or Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: not compatible Land uses in the case study that was performed for this report. Uncom- patible land uses for housing were defined as industrial Land uses, sewage treatment plants and airports. This factor was only mapped at 1:24,000. Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Scale: Qualitative Quantitative Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered; Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: Comments: See Factor Discussion Sheet Source Citation: Rogers & Golden Factor Information/173 Factor Information Sheet 54 Factor Discussion Sheet 54 Factor: VISUAL AMENITIES Source Map Title: Not mappable Factor: VISUAL AMENITIES Sourtib Agency: Phone: Visual Amenities are determined, in part, by the type of land use being considered. For Rural Housing, Visual Amenities can consist of a view of a forest or woodland, an Person: agricultural landscape, or visually interesting topography. For High Rise Housing, a tozmecape my be a visual amenity. In addition, Visual Amenities are determined by Address: location and the siting of a particular house or development. Therefore, it is impos- sible to map. visual amenities for this study. Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Sources: Harper, D. and harbach, J. 1976. Visual Quality and the Coastal Zone. Date Compiled: Date Published: Syracuse, NY: SUZ .. College of Environmental Science and Forestry. Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Zube, E.H., et al. 19?5. Landscape Assessment. Straudeburg. PA: Dowden, Qualitative Quantitative Hutchinson and Ross, Inc. Scale: Spatial Non-spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/map Legend- Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is a consideration in the location of all housing types. Comments: See commenta on Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden 174/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 55 Factor Discussion Sheet .55 Factor: SHORT DISTANCE BETWEE.@ TRIP ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS FaLtor: SHORT DISTANCE BETWEEN TRIP ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS Source Map Title: Source Agency: Phone: Person: In planning highway or railway alignments, it is useful to bear in mind that the shortest distance between two points is a straight Line. Other things being Address: equal, a straight line between two areas to be connected by transportation facility @ill present the least cost. However, without knowing which areas are to be connected Use Data Prepared For: It is impossible to map the shortest distance between them. Many factors, such as topography, soils, existing Land use and drainage patterns, may suggest other than Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: a straight-lin, alignment. These can only be addressed on a case-by-case basis, when t@e starting point and end point of . proposed facility are known. Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative Quantitative Source: Paquette, Radnor J., et. aZ. Z9/2. Transportation Engineering: Planning Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial and Desiqn. New York: Ronald Press. Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: Phis factor is of consideration when siting roads and rai Zroads. Comments: See Factor Discussion Sheet. Factor Information/175 Factor Information Sheet 56 Factor Discussion Sheet 56 Factor: JETTIES, MINS AND PIERS Factor: JETTIES, GMINS AND PIERS Source Map Title: not mapped .Tettie8, Groins and Piers is a factor in locating areas for surf fishing. Though Source Agency: Phone: this factor is not mapped at present, it could easily be done. U.S.G.S. topographic Person: quad sheets (1:24,000) do not show the location of such structures. Address: Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative _ Quantitative Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes _ No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/lIsp Legend: present, not present Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Date: This factor is used in locating areas suitable for Sport Fishing. Comments: Source Citation: Rogers & Golden 176/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 57 Factor Information Sheet 58 Factor: BRIDGES OVER STREAMS Factor: POPULATION DENSITY Source Map Title: New Jersey Highway Map and Guide :Source Map Title: Population Overlay Source Agency: New Jersey Department of Phone: (609) 292-8501 Source Agency: New Jersey Department of Environmental Phone: (609) 292-2576 Transportation Protection, Bureau of Geology and Topography Person: Person: Kemble Widmer, State Geologist Address: 1035 Parkway, Trenton, NJ Address: 1474 Prospect Street, Trenton, NJ Use Data Prepared For: Use Data Prepared For: State Environmental Overlay Series Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Dave Cox Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: 19?8 Date Published: 1979 Date Compiled: 19?6 Date Published: 1976 Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: Map Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative _ Quantitative _X Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial _X Non-Spatial Scale: 1:63,360 Spatial X Non-Spati.al Measurement Units: miles and kilometers Computer Encoded? Yes No X Measurement Units: persons per square mile Computer Encoded? Yes No X Geographic Unit: Geographic Unit: state Geographic Area Covered: Entire state Geographic Area Covered: entire state Source Data Categories/Map Legend: State highways, tall highways, other divided Source Data Categories/Map Legend: County boundary, municipal boundary, population highways, secondary roads, connecting roads, local roads. density in personslaq. mi., area in sq. Mi., % area of municipality on map, marked roads, urbanized areas, state boundary. Reliability & Accuracy: This data is very reliable and accurate. Reliability & Accuracy: Mapped information taken wholly from U.S. Census Bureau, 1970 Census of Population and Housing; this is the most accurate source.of popula- tion information available. It should be updated to reflect population changes. Usefulness of Data: This factor is of consideration in locating areas suitable for Usefulness of Data: This factor locates areas where industries, shopping q .enters, Recreational Fishing. liquid waste, and water supply facilities may wish to locate. Comments: This factor was Mapped at 1:250,000 for this study. The legend shows the Comments: This was mapped at 1:250,000 for this study. The legend shows location of bridges. populations of @-200,200-500, 500-1000, 1000-2500, 2500-5000, and 5000+ per square miles. Sourt;e Citation: New Jersey Department of Transportation. 1978. New Jersey Official Source Citation- New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of . Highway Map and Guide. New Jersey Department of Transportation. Geology and Topography. 1W6. Population Overlay, Sheets 21 through 37, Trenton, New Jersey. Roaers & Golden Rogers & Golden Factor Information/177 Factor Information Sheet 59 Factor Discussion Sheet 59 Factor: LABOR rOPCE AVAILABILITY Factor: LABOR FoRcE AvAiLABILITY Source Map Title: not mapped Source Agency: Department of Labor and industry Phone: (609) 292-2423 Labor Force Availability is a complex factor that is composed of at least three Division of Planning & Research variabtes--the size of the Labor force., the size of the work force and the amount of Person: Don Scarry unemployment. The Department of Labor and industry has a number of publications that deal with these variables. Economic Indicators is a monthly publication that presents Address: Department of Labor and industry, Research Division, Labor and Industry statistics on the labor forcT the -zoork force and unemployment. in addition, each Building, Trenton, iv Labor market area (Labor markets are usually counties) has a monthZy newsletter. These Use Data Prepared For: Resource Document publications are available from Robert Dunkel, Department of Labor and industry, Division of Planning and Research. Office of Publications, Box 2765, Trenton, NJ. informed Sources/Knowledgeable People.- For Long range planning, population projections may also be useful. This type of information is available from Shirley Getz, Department of Labor and Industry, Office of Date Compiled: Date Published: Demographic and Economic Research, Labor and Industry Building, Trenton, 17J. Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Source: Scarry, Don. 1979. Division of Research and Planning, Department of Labor Qualitative Quantitative and Industry. Trenton, NJ. Personal Communication. Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: This factor is useful in locating various industrial Land uses. Commen t s :See Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden 178/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 60 Factor Discussion Sheet 60 Factor: MINOR TIDES Factor: MINOR TIDES Source title: 'Tide Table of East Coast and North and South America The best source of information on tides is found in ZiOAA 'a tide tables. 1"hese are printed annually. However, the figures given on the tide tables must be inter- Source Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Phone: Administration poZated to determine minor tides. Person: Address: Use Data Prepared For: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: annually Date Published: annually Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative Quantitative Sea I a: Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered- East coast and North and South America Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: Comments: Source Citation: Rogers & Golden Factor information/179 Factor Information Sheet 61 Factor Information Sheet 62 Factor: SOIL DRAINAGE Factor: FOREST CMIEP Source Map Title: County Soil Survey Source Map Title: Forest Cover ofNew jersey Source Agency: Soil Conservation Service and Phone: (201),246-1205 Source Agency: WDEP - Bureau of Forestry Phone: (609) 292-2733 the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station Person: Carl Eby Person: Tom Taylor Address: Soil Conservation Service, 1370 Hamilton Street, Somerset, N.J. 08873 Address: DEP, 1301 Parkside Avenue, Trenton, 17J 08625 Use Data Prepared For: Resource document Use Data Prepared For: Foreb lAmnagement Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Date Compiled: varies Date Published: varies Date Compiled: 1978 - 1979 Date Published: due 1980 (Zate) Data Format: Maps, with text Type of Data: (check one) Data Format: Map and summary Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative X Scale: 1:15,840 Spatial Non-Spatial Scale: 1:24,000 Spatial x Non-Spatial - Measurement Units: soil properties Computer Encoded? Yes - No X Measurement Units: Acres Computer Encoded? Yes No X Geographic Unit: soil series or types Geographic Unit: Dominant specieslacre Geographic Area Covered: entire state; each county is published separately Geographic Area Covered: State Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Source Data Categories/Map Legend; Dominant species Soils are mapped by series and phases. Reliability & Accuracy: Reliability & Accuracy: Since this map has not been completed it is impossible Most accurate source of soil drainage information available is the County to comment on the accuracy of the map. However, it,is known that LANDSAT Soil Surveys. land cover assessment was supported by ground truth eivdence. Usefulness of Data: Usefulness of Data: This jl@actor is used in siting areas suitable for Forestry and may be useful when compiZirh7 a map for Visual Amenities and On-Site Amenities. Comments: Comments: This factor should be included in the Department of Coastal Resources map collection when completed. This data should be mapped on site. The SCS is currently developing a statewide soils map useful for general planning purposes (scale 1:250,000) Soufce Citation: Source Citation: N.J. Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Forestry, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and the New Jersey Division of Parks and Forestry. In press. Forest Cover of New Jersey. Agricultural Experiment Station. County Soil Surveys. U.S. GoveyrAent Printing Trenton, [Jew Jersey. Office. Washington, D.C. Rogers & Golden Rogers & Golden 180/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 63 Factor Discussion Sheet 63 Factor: HISTORIC SITES FACTOR: HISTORIC SITES Source Map Title: Not mapped Source Agency: NJDEP Phone: (609) 292-2023 Though not currently used as a factor for any land use in this study, this facto may be useful in determs'ning Character of Surrounding Area for various housing types. Person: judith Blood, Chief The report published by the office of Historic Preservation is updated semi-annualty and includes the addresses of the various sites. Address: DEP, Office oil Historic Preservation, P.O. Box 1420, 7renton NJ 08625 Use Data Prepared For: State and Federal Registers SOURCE: Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: B"'ZZ 11cCrey DEEP4 Office of Historic Preservation, 1979. State and XationaZ Historic Places. Trenton, New Jersey. Date Compiled: Annual Date Published: Annual up-date Data Format: Booklet Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative X Quantitative Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial x Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes NO X Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: Comments: Rogers & Golden Factor Information/181 Factor Information Sheet 64 Factor Discussion Sheet. 64 Factor: ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES Factor: ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES Source Map Title: Although not currently used as a factor for any land use in this study, this Source Agency: DEP - Office of Environmental Phone: (609) 324-3889 factor nay be useful in locating suitable sites for Parks and dataraZ Areas. 1-he and Cultural Services information for this factor is found in two locations. DEP'a office of EnvironmentaZ Person: Laurance Schmidt and Cultural Services (P.O. Box 13Co, Trenton, w) has napped (1:24,000) those areas of the state that have been surveyed for cultural resources. These maps show both Address: archeologic and historic sites. The New Jersey State 1-juseum (205 West State Street, Trenton, NJ) has mapped (1:63,360) all historic and archeoZogic sites. Dr. Lorraine Use Data Prepared For: Williams is curator of the State i@luseun collection. Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People: Olga Cheater Source: Chester, Olga. 1979. Office of E@zvironzrentaZ and Cultural. Pesources. Department of Environmental Protection. Trenton, NJ. Personal Cav.=Mication. Date Compiled: Date Published: Data Format: Type of Data: (check one) Qualitative Quantitative Scale: Spatial Non-Spatial Measurement Units: Computer Encoded? Yes No Geographic Unit: Geographic Area Covered: Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Reliability & Accuracy: Usefulness of Data: iday be useful in locating areas for Parks or ;atural Areas. Comments: See Factor Discussion Sheet. Rogers & Golden 182/Coastal Development Potential Study Factor Information Sheet 65 Development Potential Ana. sis, or for Another data consideration is that that matter any other planning ool, is only very little effort has been expended in as good as the data used to produce the re- maintaining up-to-date fun@tional capacity Factor: ACCESS TO GAS PIPE LINES sults. Unfortunately, the data needs of information. In many instances, data are Source Map Title: Utility 11ap Series, Gas Pipeline Overlay this study extended beyond the available available on the location of roads, land- data. If this approach is to be implemented fills, sewer and water lines and treatment Source Agency: Bureau of Geology and Topography Ph:)ne: (609) 292-2576 as a useful tool for decision makers, addi- plants, power lines and gaslines. However, tional efforts in data collection, analysis the functional capacities for these facil- Person: Kemble Widmer and formatting are required. ities to support increased use are not well documented. Although an effort was made in Address: In several cases, the data were several this study to include functional capacities, years old or were compiled at different the data available were insufficient to Use Data Prepared For: Reference document times for different areas. When the data is all w this to be done. relatively static in nature, as is the case Informed Sources/Knowledgeable People; with soils and geology data, the difference To assure confidence in the results of in time is not significant. However, with the Development Potential Analysis data, data on sewer and water facilities, land use managers must keep the data up-to-date, Date Compiled: 1977 Date Published: 1977 and other changeable factors, this limita- fill the necessary data gaps and include tion can become important and can affect the functional capacities as part of the data reliability of the data across the stud@ base. Without a strong commitment by the Data Format: map Type of Data: (check one) area. State in these areas, the Development Poten- Qualitative X Quantitative tial Analysis will lose its usefulness as a Scale: 1:250,000 Spatial T_ Non-Spatial Many of the available data are updated decision making tool Measurement Units: milealkiZometers Computer Encoded? Yes No X by different local, state and federal agen- cies on a regular basis. The data base should be updated as the data become avail- Geographic Unit: gas pipe lines able. Geographic Area Covered: entire state For certain factors, data are available but could not be used for this study: they are either not compiled for planning purposes Source Data Categories/Map Legend: Gas pipeline (w1diameters of pipeline), Service or usefully formatted, or both. Factors Area Boundary, Gate Station. Gas Company names appear on pipelines and metering that need work include Proximity to Public Transportation, Soil Load Bearing Capacity, stations. Deep Foundation Suitability, Availability of Reliability F Accuracy: Information may be out of date. This factor will require Mineral Resources, Thickness of Overburden, periodic updating as changes are made in gas transmission. Character of Surrounding Areas, Soil Drainage, Access to Electric Power Distribution Lines, and Acceptable Water Quality. Of particular Usefulness of Data: This factor locates areas where various industries may locate. importance is Groundwater and Surface Water Availability. Soils data also falls into this cate- Comments: This factor was mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 for this study. The gory. Most of the information contained in legend shows proximities of 0-1, 1-3, 3-5, 5-10, and 10+ miles. soil surveys is very useful in land planning. Unfortunately, there currently is no estab- lished base map for the entire state with Source Citation: N.J. Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Geology and data categories detailed enough to be used Topography. 1977. Utility Map Series, Gas Pipeline Overlay. Trenton, New Jersey. in siting and planning studies. The Soil Conservation Service is developing a map for the entire state at a scale of 1:250,000. This map will begin to fill the need. Rogers & Golden I Chapter 4 i Case Stu'dies 184/Coastal Development Potential Study A This chapter presents three case stud- Factors ies--Marinas, Fish Processing Plants and Single Family Detached Housing--to illus- Undeveloped Land trate the Development Potential Analysis Method. Lower Cape May County was chosen Access to Local Road as the case study area because it is Access to collector Road representative of the coastal zone in terms of development pressures, physiographic Access to Railroad features, and growth potential, and because Access to Electric P-r Distribution Line it has a complete data base mapped at a common scale (1:24,000). Prox imi ty to metropolitan Service Center The mapping for the case studies was Proximity to Regional Service Center done at two separate scales (1:250,000 and Prox imi ty to Community Service Center 1:24,000). The smaller-scale maps (1:250,000) were used only for factors that Soi I Load Bearing Capacity 0 were necessary or mandatory for siting the Proximity to Public Transportation development. These necessary factors are Character of Surrounding Area shown as dots in Table 6. Mapping them C) first enabled us to eliminate areas that Visual Amenities (D were not feasible for siting a facility. The study of desirable factors for each Soil Drainage 0 use then focused on the feasible areas Slope 0 0 only. The 1:250,000 maps for each case study are shown in Figure 3. These three Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal 0 maps illustrate how the necessary factors Access to Public Water Supply System 0 0 0 influence the study of different uses. Factors considered as necessary in siting Potable Water Supply 0 0 a given use can be very restrictive, as in Access to Public Se,erage 0 0 the case of marinas; they may be moderately 0 restrictive, as in the case of Fish Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage 0 Processing Plants; or they may offer few Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage to no restrictions, as in the case of 0 Single Family Detached Housing. Proximity to Fishing Community 0 After the 1 :250,000 maps were completed, Flooding 0 further study was done at a more detailed Access to 6-foot Channel scale (1:24,000). All factors considered desirable were studied at this scale. Embayments 0 - K000- Desirable factors for each use are shown Light Currents as circles in Table 6. Examples of 1:24,000 scale maps are shown in Figures 4 Minor Tides 0 through 8. (A detailed description of the Development Potential Method is found in the Appendix.) TABLE 6. FACTORS USED IN CASE STUDIES Necessary 0 ClesiraWe Cas Single Family Detached Housing Fish Processing Plants Marinas 4 s FIGURE 3. MAPS OF NECESSARY FACTORS USED IN CASE STUDIES NOTE: THESE MAPS WER OR@G%AhL A 2 0, AY D AT A SCALE OF I: NM PR FOR PURPOSES OF PUBLICATION 166/Coastal Development Potential Study The Development Potential Analysis Step 4. Assign Cost to Factor Distribution. Method was applied to the site-types detin- The Case Studies eated using the 1:24,000 maps. The Devel- Each factor was divided Into data cate- opment Potential Method, as diagrammed in gories (for example, the factor Access to Each of the three case studies present- Figure 2, can be described as a series of Roads was divided Into four data categories-- ed here contains a written discussion of the steps. Each of the steps is presented In 0-1/2 mile, 1/2-1 1/2 miles, 1/2-3 miles and 31/2 miles steps taken in Development Potential Analysis more detail in the case studies. A general The factor maps were drafted according to data (see Figure 2), including any assumptions description follows. categories, and costs were assigned to each made as the method was applied. data category. The cost reductions assoc- iated with interdependent factors (for Each of the land uses considered in the example, road and sewer construction, that case study is portrayed in several fashions. Summary of Development occur at the same time) were not considered There are sample data tables, histograms Potential Analysis Method in the case studies. (bar graphs) and maps to demonstrate devel- opment potential rankings. Step 1. Define Use. Step 5. Overlay Maps and Sum Factor Costs. The sample date tables show how Defici- For this study, land uses were As each factor map was overlaid, new ency Costs and Bonus Values Influence the grouped Into seven major categories: boundaries were drafted. After all the Baseline Cast and therefore determine housing, commerce, industry, utilities, overlays were completed, the map delineated Development Potential Columns marked with many site-types of varying sizes and shapes. an (X) indicate the date category that infrastructure, harvest and recreation. Each site-type showed a combination of fac- corresponds to the site-type in question. Each of these is defined and described in tors in terms of data categories, The costs detail In Chapter 2. The list of 182 uses associated with all data categories in a The histograms give the range of devel- presented here can be updated or supple- site-type were summed to determine the opment costs for the land use, the distri- mented as needed. development cost. bution of site-types by development cost, the baseline cost [indicated by an asterisk Step 2. Establish Relevant Development Step 6. Rank Development Potential. (*)] and development Potential Ranks of Potential Factors for Each Use. Once the development costs were deter- high, medium and low. With each land use description in mined for each site-type, the development Chapter 2 is a list of Development Potential costs could be compared and ranked on a A Development Potential Rap was drafted Factors. Factors may be added or omitted relative scale as having high, medium or for each of the three land uses to show the as use definitions are updated or changed. low development potential. The decisions on spatial distribution of high, medium, and low where to establish the cutoffs for high, development potentials in the case study (shaded Step 3. Define Factor Distribution. medium and law were arbitrary; however, by areas). The unshaded areas include developed arranging development costs vs number of and publically owned land, water, and areas Each factor used in the analysis was, sites on a histogram, general trends in cost with no development potential for the land use mapped at the 1:250,0O0 scale where possi- being considered. being considered. ble. The factors used in the case studies could be noted. These should help in siting were mapped at 1:24,000, as mentioned above, decisions. five examples of the factor maps used in the A more detailed description of the case studies are shown in figures 4 through Development Potential, Analysis Method is 8. These maps were chosen to represent the found in the Appendix. The method in the different types of factors used in the Appendix is intended for use once site-types analysis. are known. Figure 4 Access to Local Road 0 "2 ilk ;2- h 132- - 3 3+ MILES RT-F/2@1 Coastal FACTOR INFORMATION SHEET: 2 Lower Cape May County Rogers & Gokk 188/Coastal Development Potential Study Figure 5 Proximity to Community Service Center 1 % 3+ MILES .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I'M U Coastal FACTOR INFORMAnON SHEET: 10 [L@ I Lower Cape May County RDgers & Figure 6 Soil Load Bearing Capacity HIGH MED I UM LOW RTST coastal FACTOR INFORMAIION SFEET: 27 1 L Lower Cape May County Rogers & GoIcle 190/Coastal Development Potential Study Figure 7 Access to Pubhc Sewerage 0 ]2' A 12- P-25 3+ MILES Coastal F719L FACTOR INFORMAnON SHEET: 34 Lower Cape May County Rogers & Figure 8 Access to 6-Foot Channel and Embayments 0 P2 4L @2- 2+ MILES Coastal Dev FACTOR INFORMAnON SHMT: 6148 Lower Cape May County Rogers & Goden 192/Coastal Development Potential Study Marina Case Study OVERLAY MAPS AND SUM FACTOR COSTS The Development Potential Map for Marinas shows how development potential for At this stage each site-type was given Marinas is distributed across the study a number. The numbers for each site-type area. are listed in the left-hand column of the data table. A total of eighty-three site- types was delineated. The development cos ts The photograph below is of one of the for each site-type were then determined. high development potential site-types for These development costs are shown in the marinas by the Development Potential Analy- DEFINITION OF USE right-hand column of the data table. sis Method. For the purposes of this case study, a marina can be either privately or publicly RANK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL owned and can provide facilities to either the public or a private clientele. The The development potential for all sites marina would provide boat launching and was determined by comparing the number of storage facilities, boating supplies, and sites for each total cost in a histogram. service for boat operation and maintenance. Two sites had no deficiency costs, and It would have parking facilities for cars twenty-five other sites fell within a 53% and trailers and would have 100 slips. increase in development cost. These sites Approximately five acres of land is re- were considered to have high development quired and the baseline unit cost for potential. Twenty-nine sites were within facilities would amount to $750,000. an 80% increase in cost so these were con- DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FACTORS sidered to have a medium development poten- tial rank. Twenty-seven sites were shown to have greater than an 80% increase in Undeveloped Land cost, so they were considered to have a low Access to Local Roads Access to 6-foot Channel development potential. The cutoffs are arbitrary but do represent a relative 0Access to Public Sewerage ranking of sites. 0Access to Public Water Supply Proximity to River and Bay Shore Frontage Embayments oMinor Tides FACTOR DISTRIBUTION r Maps were drafted for each factor except Minor Tides. For Minor Tides there was insufficient data available to allow discrimination between water bodies. ASSIGN COSTS TO FACTOR DISTRIBUTION SO, Kni- The costs for each factor data cate R4 i,* m: gory are shown across the top of the axis of the accompanying data table. 019F90' 8 8 4 - 9 Figure 9 Development Potential: Marinas HIGH L 1@z MED I UM xi@,Fo` di@ LOW X -- - -------- ------- -- ---------------- A T 0 c A rj N T I c Coastal Lower Cape May County Pogm & Gold 194/Coastal Development Potential Study FIGURE 9. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL: MARINAS 15 HIGH MEDIUM LOW ------------------ LU Ch- >- 10 F- U- 0 5 Ix Uj z 0 4: C@ COST (MILLIONS OF DOLLARS) 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 PERCENT CHANGE FROM BASELINE COST Baseline cost Case Studies/195 TABLE 7. MARINA CASE STUDY DATA BASELINE COST: $750,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 100 SliPs, 5 Acres SITE UNDEV. EMBAY- SHORE ACCESS To ACCESS To 6 FT. ACCESS TO PUB. ACCESS TO PUB. M TOTAL IE- N U ;NOR MBER LAND MENT FRONTAGE LOCAL ROADS CHANNEL SEWERAGE WATER SUPPLY DES JVELOPMEMT COST C3 - @3 -3 S -- .@3 3 3 E 0 --0 E 0 0 0-- 0 0 r E 0 E C@ C@ C@ E E C@ C@ I Ct*E E C@ Ec@ I Ct 0 + C; C; C=@ c' 0 0 a cl @Ll 0 E E - - C) 0 '- 0 @ - 0 0 - 0 + + m 7 C@ 7 E + X x x I x I'D 00, H 2 x x x x I'T9000 M x x x x 990,000 H x x x x 870,000 H r x x x x 370,000 H x x x 1.070 000 11 7 x x x x 750,000 H I x x x x 150,000 li 9 1 x I I x IX I X I I 1 1750,000 H 10 x x x x 750,000 H 11 x x I -- x --- x 950,000 H x x x - x 750,000 4 x x x x 950,000 H 14 x x x 750,000 H Is x x x x H 16 x x x 950,000 H 17 x x X --- x 950,000 H 18 1 x I I x Ix I I x I 1 1750,000 H 19 x x x I x 750,000 H 20 x x x I x 1 1'350. 000 H 21 x x x x 1.070,000 M 22 x x x x '.70 @ 000 H 23 X- X x X 750,000 H 24 x x x x 950,000 H 25 x x x x 350,000 H 26 x x x 1 .100,000 m 27 1 1 x I x X x 1'100,000 m 23 x x x 1 750,000 H 2c) x x x I1 .100,000m 30 x x 1950,000 H x x x x x 31 x x H 12 x x @w H 13 x x H 196/Coastal Development Potential Study Detached Housing ASSIGN COSTS TO FACTOR DISTRIBUTION RANK DEVELOPIIE14T POTENTIAL Case Study The costs given on th .e factor Cost The Single Family Detached Housing sheet for Detached Housing (in Chapter 2) histogram compares the number of site-types were employed. These costs are also shown for each total development cost. For this on the top of the axis of the Detached use the baseline cost Plus 25% Was used to Housing Data Table. Costs are not given determine the high development potential for Flooding because of the site-specific ranking and the baseline unit cost plus 50% nature of such costs. was used to establish the low development DEFINITION OF USE potential ranking. Therefore 104 site-types Although there is a considerable range OVERLAY MAPS AND SUM FACTOR COSTS were considered to have a high development potential because development costs were in the cost associated with Single Family less than $250,000. Site-types with devel- Detached Housing, we assumed a Baseline Unit When all factor maps had been overlaid, opment costs between $250,000 and $300,000 Cost of $50,000 for the case study. This a total of 561 site-types were delineated. were considered to have a medium development cost is based on a two-story house with a Deficiency Costs and Bonus Values were full basement and an area of 2,000 square summed separately. Because the factor Soils potential, and those with development costs of more than $300,000 (baseline cost plus feet. The development contains four units; Suitable for On-Site Disposal Systems and 50%) were given a low development potential therefore, the Baseline Development Cost is the Proximity to Public Sewerage factor are ranking. These rankings are displayed in $200,000. linked (a developer may choose either one), Figure 10. the system that cost the least was chosen. For example, if Public Sewerage was within DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FACTORS a half mile of a given site-type, it was assumed that any housing built on that site- *Undeveloped Land type would hook up to the public sewerage *Access to Local Road system. But if a given site-type was more *Access to Electric Power Distribution than one-half mile from public sewerage it Line was assumed that an on-site disposal system *Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center would be used. *Proximity to Regional Service Center *Proximity to Community Service Center The development costs for Single Family *Proximity to Public Transportation Detached Housing ranged from $6,750 to *Slope $598,000. The vastness of the range is *Soil Drainage attributed to the high Bonus Value given to *Access to Public Water Supply Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage. *Potable Water Supply *Access to Public Sewerage *Soils Suitable for On-Site Disposal System *Proximity to Ocean Beach Frontage *Proximity to River or Bay Shore Frontage *On-Site @menities *Character of Surrounding Area *Visual Amenities *Flooding FACTOR DISTRIBUTION All factors for this land use were mapped with the exceptions of Access to Electric Power Distribution Line and Potable Water Supply. Figure 10 Development Potential: Detached Housing HIGH 141W W-", MEDIUM LOW ------------------------ --- ------- - ------- ----- T N T C 0 Lower Cape May County Pbgsrs & Gok1B1 198/Coastal Development Potential Study FIGURE lo. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL: DETACHED HOUSING 6o HIGH MEDIUM LOW -..dLAN., --dd 50 4o w Uj 30 Uj 20 z 10 0 EL- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - COST (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS) -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 PERCENT CHANGE FROM BASELINE COST Baseline cost Case Studies/199 TABLE 8. DETACHED HOUSING CASE STUDY DATA BASELINE COST: $200,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 4 Units, I Acre iz DIFICIEKV a r-7, 1.11 j- '2i- 4 7 7 k I I - - - - - - - - - - - u.- - - - - - - - - - 17 #17= 200/Coastal Development Potential Study Fish Processing Plant costs for this factor were.established dur-' ing this study. Costs are not given for Case Study Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center or Commercial Fishing Dock because costs assoc- iated with these factors are more accurately regarded as operating expenses. Of the factors that were assigned costs, all were Deficiency Costs except Access to Railroad, DEFINITION OF USE which was considered a Bonus Value. The fish processing plant studied here was assumed to have a baseline unit cost of OVERLAY MAPS AND SUM FACTOR COSTS $3,000,000. The plant would have two pro- All cost riaps were overlaid to define duction lines and would be capable of site-types. Three hundred and eighty-one processing 12 million pounds of fish per site types were identified. The Deficiency year. The $3,000,000 includes equipment for fish waste disposal. With parking Costs and Bonus Values were then filled in on facilities for employees, the plant would the data tables. It was then possible to add Deficiency Costs to the Baseline Unit occupy 4 acres of land. Cost and subtract the Bonus Values from the subtotal. The resulting figure is the DEV ELOPMENT POTENTIAL FACTORS Development Potential Cost for each site- type. Development Potential Costs for the Undeveloped Land Fish Processing Plant ranged from $2,400,000 * Access to Collector Road to $4,000,000. * Access to Electric Power Distribution Line * Proximity to Commercial Fishing Dock RANK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL * Proximity to Metropolitan Service Center * Slope A histogram was constructed to compare * Soil Load Bearing Capacity the number of site-types for each total * Access to Public Water Supply cost. Relative Developmental Potentials * Access to Public Sewerage could then be established. Ninety-eight * Flooding site-types had a Development Potential Cost between $2,400,000 and $2,700,000. These sites were considered to have a high devel- FACTOR DISTRIBUTION opment potential. One hundred five sites had costs between $2,700,000 and $3,300,000: All development potential factors for these site-types were considered to have a this use were mapped with the exception of medium development potential. Those sites Access to Electric Power Distribution Line. with development potential cost of more than Figures 6 and 7 are reductions of two of $3,300,000 were given a low development the factor maps used to determine site- potential ranking. For this use, the Base- types for a Fish Processing Plant. line Cost plus or minus 10% was assumed to represent medium development potential. These cutoffs are arbitrary: they only ASSIGN COST TO FACTOR DISTRIBUTION present a relative ranking of site-types. The costs for each factor data category are shown across the top of the axis of the data tables for Fish Processing Plants. Costs are not given for Flooding because no Figure 11 Development Potential: Fish Processing Plants iR T. HIGH MEDIUM LOW --- ---- - ------- --- ----- - ----------- -------- ---- ------------ ----- ------ ----- - ---------- --- IV T C 0 14 + + /2 CoastW Lower Cape MaY COUntY ftm & Gokb 202/Coastal Development Potential Study FIGURE 11. DEVELOPMENT POTE11TIAL: FISH PROCESSING PLANTS HIGH MEDIUM LOW ---------- 4o 9 30 Uj LU = 20 U) U- 0 w LU z 10 0 rjlL-T- C! C! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - COST (MILLIONS OF DOLLARS) -20 -10 0 10 20 30 PERCENT CHANGE FROM BASELINE COST Baseline cost Case Studies/203 TABLE 9. FISH PROCESSING PLANT CASE STUDY DATA BASELINE COST: $3,000,000 DEVELOPMENT SIZE: 1 Plant, 4 Acres i ty S'Pply Se .... 9. i Met,. Cant Land C trib,tion Line ing P.blic Wat., in,, Pr .I Col or Road tric P-1 Di- F1 ding A, 11, 1 'Atc- to E 1 -1 .... .. P.bl I c [email protected] -i- Jett Sj" lap.. IAL TOTAL BONU DEVELOPMENT DEVEL- DOEFI 7: VALUE COST OPMENT I E COST E P TEN- 4. JL.2 2 t - - - . -1 -- - E - TIAL E C a IENCY Is x x x x x x 1- nnn x A.. n.. DDO H '6 x x x x x x $215.000 x A.. nnn --nnn 11 x x x x x $215,000 x I kI Ann - q, A,,_nnn 18 x x x x Si66.000 I x I 1@ Ann - -000 11 x X x x x S166.000 I x I I IX S6an-On, q6 Ono x X x $166@000 x I I I I ix -n nnn S2 566 On 41 x x I x x - - - $166,000 x I I I IX gAnn Ona ki cAA nn 42 x x x - - - x x x $215.000 x I I I Ix t6@O- 061;- -41 x x x - x x x $231,000 x I I x tAnn nnn .All- 44 x x x $215,000 x I I Ann nnn A,, nnn I 4; x x x x $219.000 x 11nn nnn 1- nnn x x "@fn x x $205.000 x 11 - n 4 x x x x I x x $170.000 x x nn, 1, - - 48 x x I x I x x $170.000 x X AAn' 'DO t2 83, nnn I . I x x I x $170,000 x tA.n DOO &' RJO nnn x x x I x I I x $170,000 x 11- n- t, A3O Ann x x x x I x x I x 270.000 x I-,- SAn. ,, S2 730-000 52 x x x I x x x $170.000 x t1m nn. 830.000 ;1 x x x x x x Ix $1.70,000 x x 'Ann s4 x _L_ - - - -A- - - - X it x Ix $155,000 X___ I I x x -n-n- ss x x x X x x x $155.000 X x - "Al- nDO ;6 x I Ix X x I I x X S 20.000 x I x nnn _4L_qaa_am_ X X $580,000 x x I x n. 1, Rn mn I x x x x x $68o.ooo x I x x q- nnn ___Sj.3a0_QCC__ x x x $690,000 x x 11CO'n- 51 3D_DO0_ x x $430,000 x @J- Onn 14@ x x x x x x x x ........ "0 0 x X x $170,000 x x x @60 20'0 0 QOQ 00. DO 00 000 '.0.0 000@3@ .0.0 X_ x 00 2 8 0 000 M I I x x $430 000 x x _X_ 00 00 1 0 ODD L 00 X x $513'000 1 .0 x 21 000 L 0 00 000 nnn 69 X x $645.000 4- X x $303 $3 204/Coastal Development Potential Study i . 041 . r, -1 i I@- I 'I,- t I. -'I II IV , - !;:@ --I f . ll@ t Appendix Development Potential Analysis Method I I I 206/Coastal Development Potential Study space is provided on these forms for a comparison of up to 15 locations. For pur- poses of clarity, it is recommended that the user not attempt to compare more than 15 loca- tions at any one time. Because of the nature of the analysis, however, the user may compare any number of locations in the following way. The Development Potential Analysis Method Suppose the user is interested in compar- is described here in detail as a step-by-step ing 45 potential locations for a given use. process for a potential user. Figure 2 out- He or she should divide the 45 locations into lines the six major steps involved in the 3 groups of 15 each. The forms provided may method. The method is designed for use with then be used to determine the best location one or several sites or for regional or state- in each of the three groups of 15. Finally, wide planning. The technique described here the forms may be used to determine which of is useful when considering one location among those three locations is the best overall. its potential alternatives. A computer pro- gram will also be available that can handle The forms presented here have been multiple site calculations. This computer filled in with information collected during program can be obtained from the Division the Detached Housing Case Study performed of Coastal Resources and can be run either in Lower Cape May County. Completed forms in batch or interactive mode. were provided rather than blank ones to make the method more readily understandable. Each factor identified during the origi- nal use surveys was considered. Most factors Material and labor costs in recent years were mapped. However, some factors were too have been on an upward trend. Material and site-specific to be accurately mapped at a labor indexes such as LSI and Dodge showed regional scale. Each factor which can be a rise of 0.8% per month for 1978. Current- reasonably mapped and which has data avail- ly there exists a seller's market in con- able was mapped on transparent mapping mate- struction. Increases of 10 to 11% are rial at a scale of 1:250,000 (one inch equals expected for 1979, unless tight money and four miles). This data was mapped in a rising interest rates bring a halt to the format suitable for mechanical digitization. booming construction industry (Saylor 1979). When the data base is computerized the com- parison of multiple locations, which could To keep the cost data in this report be done as part of a planning study, will be current, the user should evaluate and much less laborious than the existing manual correct these data for inflation on at least method. an annual basis. information on how to make these corrections can be found in the The following six forms are provided to LSI or Dodge Current Construction Cost assist the user in performing manual calcula- manuals or in other comparable publications. tions to assess the development potential of various locations for a given use. These forms contain simple procedures for computing the deficiency costs and bonus values in de- termining total development costs associated with each of a number of potential locations. In addition, a procedure is provided to com- pare the locations both relative to each other and to a standard (baseline) cost for the type of use considered. Appendix/207- STEP I FORM 1. DEFINE USE Step I - Define Use 1. WHAT USE 15 BEING CONSIDERED y (SEE USE LIST) Form I is provided as both a master sheet 2. BASELINE UNIT COST (AS A NEGATIVE NUMBER) -416)000 for the assessment process and as a refer- ence guide for the steps to follow. Parts 3. WHAT IS THE TOTAL ACREAGE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT I through 5 are straightforward. Part 6 4. HOW MANY U14ITS ARE THERE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT (comments) is provided for the user's con- venience. 5. COMMENTS: 208/Coastal Development Potential Study STEP 2 FORM 2. ESTABLISH RELEVANT DEVELOPMENT ENTER BELOW THE RELEVANT DEVELOPMENENT POTENTIAL FACTORS (SEE USE DESCRIPTION). CHECK THE APPROPRIATE COST STRUCTURURE BOX FOR EACH FACTOR. Step 2 - Establish Relevant Factors ( COST STRUCTURE) PER PER UNIT OF INTER- FACTOR DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPENDENT Form 2 is provided to give the user a DEFICIENCY ACCESS TO reference of the factors in the steps to LOCAL ROAD follow. All factors needed in the use under SLOPE study should be included in Form 2. It CHARACTER OF should be noted that, in the case of linked SURF AREA factors, only one of them should be entered SOIL on Form 2. For example, either "soil suit- DRAINAGE able for on-site disposal" or "access to ON SITE SEWAGE public sewer" should be entered, but not DISPOSAL both. It should be noted that bonus factors PUBLIC WATER and deficiency factors are to be entered SUPPLY separately on this form. ACCESS TO Per Development factors are those which POWERLINE have a given cost for the development as a whole and do not depend on the number of units of development. An example of a Per Development factor is an access road. BONUS PROXIMITY TO Per Unit of Development factors are METRO those which have a cost which increases PROXIMITY TO with the size of the development (i.e., the REGIONAL cost of the factor is given per unit of PROXIMITY TO development). An example of this type of COMMMERCIAL factor is soil drainage. PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC TRANS A Set of Interdependent factors is a ON-SITE number of factors which, when taken together, AMENITIES represent a savings over what each factor VISUAL would cost seperately. An example of this AMENITIES would be constructing a road and sanitary PROXIMITY TO sewer pipeline together. Since clearing ORPAN would only have to be done once, there would PROXIMITY TO FACTORS be a substantial savings in doing the two RIVER together. C V FACTORS FACTORS Appendix/209 STEP 3 FORK3. DESCRIBE FACTOR DISTRIBUTION 1. SELECT RELEVANT FACTOR MAPS 2. DETERMINE RELEVANT FACTOR DATA CATEGORIES FROM OBSERVING FACTOR MAPS. 3. OVERLAY MAPS AND NAME OR NUMBER EACH SITE TYPE. 4. ENTER TOTAL NUMBER OF SITE TYPES S,(Q Step 3 Describe Factor Distribution Form 3 is provided for the user's con- NOTES: venience to assist in determining the proper data categories for each of the factors. This involves looking at the factor maps and determining the data categories useful for the locations being considered. The section labelled "notes" is provided to detail any assumptions related to the data base. 210/Coastal Developinent Potential Study STEP 4 FORM 4.(a) ESTABLISH FACTOR COSTS (PER DEVELOPMENT FACTORS) I . WHAT IS THE S I TE TYPE NAME OR NUMBER S let 7 2. FOR EACH FACTOR WITH A ONE-TIME COST PER DEVELOPMENT (C FACTORS), FILL IN THE BOXES BELOW: Step 4 - Describe Factor Distribution Forms 4(A), 4(B) and 4(C) are provided ELEMENT TOTAL* to determine the cost, by factor type (des- RELEVANT FACTOR NO. OF UNITS COST ** COST OF cribed in Step 2), of all factors in each FACTOR DATA CATEGORY OF THE FACTOR PER U1411 FACTOR site being considered. If element costs for I@EFICIENCY any given factor are to be added to the analysis, the difference between the cost included as part of the baseline cost and the actual cost should be entered in one of these forms as a factor depending on the type of that factor. For example, if brush and shrub is assumed as the data category for clearing and the actual location is densely wooded, the difference in cost between the two should be entered in Form 4(A). For. 4(A) Per Development Factors This for- is to be completed for each loca- 3. SUM TOTAL COSTS FOR EACH DEFICIENCY FACTOR TO GET tion to be considered. For each Per Develop- A 0 ment factor listed on For. 2, fill in the TOTAL COST OF DEFICIENCY PER DEVELOPMENT F CT RS name of the factor and the relevant data BONUS category for the location in question. The cost associated with this data category should be entered in the total cost column. Finall@ the user should sum the total cost column to Cet the cost of all Per Development factors fc this location. In the factor lists, Per Devel- cpmert Factors are denoted by the letter "C". FOR ELEMENT COSTS, MULTIPLY THE NUMBER OF FACTOR UNITS TIMES THE ELEMENT COST PER FACTOR UNIT TO ARRIVE AT 1HE TOIAL COST OF THF FACTOR. 4. SUM TOTAL COSTS FOR EACH DCNUS FACTCR TO GET THE TOTAL VALUE OF BONUS PER DEVELOPNENT FACTORS. THESE COLUMNS ARE USED ONLY FOR ELEMENT COSTS. STEP 4 Appendix/21i FORM 4 (b) ESTABLISH FACTOR COSTS (PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT FACTOR) I . WHAT I S THE S I TE TYPE NAME OR NUMBER 17a 7 2. FOR EACH FACTOR DEPENDENT ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS OF DEVELOPMENT (V FACTORS), FILL 1.11 THE BOXES BEL014: NUMBER OF UNITS OF COST TOTAL THE FACTOR PER COST PER .Form 4(8) Per Unit of Development Factors RELEVANT FACTOR PER UNIT OF UNIT OF1 UNI T OF FACTOR DATA CATEGORY DEVELOPMENT FACTOR DEVELOPMENT This form is very similar to Form 4(A), DEFICIENCY S/Ope -3 described above. Form 4(B) should also be 0 _10-7 filled in for each location to be considered. C-=,m/e For each Per Unit of Development factor .. ;@ 'ey 0 listed on Form 2, fill in the name and cost svwe@ of the factor as in Form 4(A), except that the costs are now for one unit of develop- ment rather than for the development as a 3. SUM DEFICIENCY TOTAL COSTS TO GET THE TOTAL r whole. Aga i n sum the tota I cos ts of the OF DEFICIENCY PER DEVELOPMENT FACTORS. factors to get the cost of all factors per E unit of development. Finally, multiply 4. ENTER UNITS OF DEVELOPMENT (FORM 1). this by the number of units of development to get the total cost of Per Unit of Devel- 5. MULTIPLY 3 X 4 TO GET THE TOTAL COST OF DEFICIENCY PER opment factors for this location. The user should note that for purposes of UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT FACTORS. F_ clarity, the deficiency costs and bonus values have been separated on this form. BONUS 11, In the factor lists, Per Unit of Develop- C> - 15,0 0 ment Factors are denoted by the letter 'IV,, It should be noted that bonus factors and deficiency factors are to be entered separ- S'D ately on this form. FOR ELEMENT COSTS, MULTIPLY THE NUMBER OF FACTOR UNITS OF THE FACTOR PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT TIMES THE ELEMENT COST PER UNIT OF THE FACTOR TO ARRIVE AT THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT. 6. SUM BONUS TOTAL COSTS TO GET THE TOTAL VALUE PER UNIT OF BONUS PER DEVELOP- DEVELOPMENT FACTORS 7. ENTER THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER DEVELOPMENT (FORM 1) 8. MULTIPLY (6) TIMES (7) TO GET THE TOTAL VALUE OF BONUS PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT ly FACTORS THESE COLUMNS ARE USED ONLY FOR ELEMENT COSTS. 212/Coastal Development Potential Study STEP 4 FORM 4 (b) ESTABLISH FACTOR COSTS (PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT FACTOR) I . WHAT I S THE S I TE TYPE NAME OR NUMBER 3de 7 (Cot,,A- 2. FOR EACH FACTOR DEPENDENT ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS OF DEVELOPMENT (V FACTORS), FILL III THE BOXES BELOW: NUMBER OF UNITS OF COST TOTAL THEJACTOR PER COST PER RELEVANT FACTOR PER UNIT OF UNIT OF UNIT OF FACTOR DATA CATEGORY DEVELOPMENT FACTOR DEVELOPMENT DEFICIENCY 3. SUM DEFICIENCY TOTAL COSTS TO GET THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT OF DEFICIENCY PER DEVELOPMENT FACTORS. 4. ENTER UNITS OF DEVELOPMENT (FORM 1). 5. MULTIPLY 3 x 4 TO GET THE TOTAL COST OF DEFICIENCY PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT FACTORS. 277 BONUS 6tier, 0 rasi., 3000 Y2 S'06 FOR ELEMENT COSTS, MULTIPLY THE NUMBER OF FACTOR UNITS OF THE FACTOR PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT TIMES THE ELEMENT COST PER UNI OF THE FACTOR TO ARRIVE AT THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT. 6. SUM BONUS TOTAL COSTS TO GET THE TOTAL VALUE PER UNIT OF BONUS PER DEVELOP- DEVELOPMENT FACTORS 7. ENTER THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER DEVELOPMENT (FORM 1) 8. MULTIPLY (6) TIMES (7) TO GET THE TOTAL VALUE OF BONUS PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT Z-7boo FACTORS THESE COLUMNS ARE USED ONLY FOR ELEMENT COSTS. Appendix/213 STEP 4 FORM 4 (c) ESTABLISH FACTOR COSTS (INTERDEPENDENT FACTORS) I. WHAT IS THE SITE TYPE NAME OR NUMBER 31'@e 2. LIST INTER-DEPENDENT FACTORS /VC1 -2 f- Form 4(C) interdependent Factors This form should be filled in for each location to be considered, and for 3. ENTER RELEVANT DATA CATEGORY each set of interdependent factors for 4. ENTER NUMBER OF FACTOR UNITS OF THE FACTORS a given location. (FOR EACH UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT, IF A PER-UNIT The data category and cost figures OF DEVELOPMENT LIST OF FACTORS) refer to the set of factors as a whole. 5. ENTER COMBINED ELEMENT COST PER FACTOR UNIT The cost can be either per unit of devel- opment, or for the development as a whole, OF THE FACTORS in which case a "I" should be entered as 6. MULTIPLY 4 X 5, to GET TOTAL COST PER UNIT the number of units of development. It should be noted that bonus factors and defi- OF DEVELOPMENT ciency factors are to be entered separately on this form. 7. ENTER NUMBER OF UNITS OF DEVELOPMENT FROM FORM 1 (ENTER I IF A PER-DEVELOPMENT LIST OF FACTORS) 8. MULTIPLY 6 X 7 TO GET TOTAL COST PER DEVELOPMENT 214/Coastal Development Potential Study STEP 5 FORM 5 (a) SUMMARIZE FACTOR COSTS (DEFICIENCY)* 1. WHAT IS SITE TYPE NAME OR NUMBER Kiic @Z 2. ENTER DEFICIENCY COST OF PER DEVELOPMENT Step 5 - Summarize Factor Costs FACTORS (LINE (3), FORM 4(a)) Form 5 is used to determine 3. ENTER DEFICIENCY COST OF PER-UNIT OF the total cost of each location under DEVELOPMENT FACTORS (LINE (5), FORM 4(b)) study. This form should be filled in for each location to be considered. 4. ENTER TOTAL COST OF EACH SET OF In Part 4, space is provided for up to five sets of interdependent factors. INTERDEPENDENT FACTORS (FORM 4(c)) a. If less are used, simply leave the re- b. maining spaces blank. The rest of the form is straightforward. Note that Form 5 C. is separated into two parts, Form 5(a) and d. For. 5(b). Form 5(a) is for bonus factors, and Form 5(b) is for deficiency facto's. e. 5. SUM 2, 3, 4 TO GET TOTAL DEFICIENCY COSTS FOR THIS SITE 6. ENTER BASELINE COST (STEP 1) F _?___ 7. DIVIDE 5 BY 6 TO GET THE PERCENTAGE OVER BASELINE COST STEP 5 FORM 5 (b) SUMMARIZE FACTOR COSTS (BONUS) 1. WHAT IS SITE TYPE NAME OR NUMBER SITE 7 2. ENTER BONUS VALUE OF PER DEVELOPMENT FACTORS (LINE (4),FORM 4(a)) 0 3. ENTER BONUS VALUE OF PER-UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT FACTORS (LINE (B), FORM 4(b)) 27000 4. SUM 2, 3 TO GET TOTAL BONUS VALUE FOR THIS SITE 27000 5. ENTER BASELINE COST (STEP 1) -200000 6. DIVIDE 4 BY 5 TO GET THE PERCENTAGE OVER BASELINE COST -.135 216/Coastal Development Potential Study STEP 6 FORM 6. RANK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF SITES CHECK 1: DEFICIENCY- BONUS / BOTH_ PART 1. ASSIGN PERCENTAGE CUTOFFS BETWEEN HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW 1. ENTER MED./HIGH CUTOFF % z S-Cpa Step 6 - Rank Development Potential 2. ENTER MED./LOW CUTOFF % This form is used to compare the locations both to each other and to the baseline cost. In Part 1, Med./High PART 2. FILL IN BOXES BELOW, IN ORDER FROM LEAST COST TO GREATEST COST. Cutoff % represents the cutoff between loca@ CHECK HIGH, MEDIUM, OR LOW BOXES ACCORDING TO THE DOLLAR CUT- tions of high development potential and OFFS ABOVE: locations of medium development potential. For example, if locations of high develop- Site Name Percentage over High Medium Low ment potential are considered to be those (Number) Baseline Cost* in which the cost is less than 25% above the 1. baseline cost, 1.25 should be entered. Similarly, Med,/Low cutoff % represents the 2. cutoff between locations of medium and low 3. development potential. Part 2 is straight- forward and requires no further explanation. 4. The determination of high, medium and low 5. development potential is a judgment which 6. can be guided by the use of a histogram. The relative distribution of location by 7. cost shown in a histogram similar to that 8. shown below may be helpful in showing sharp differences in costs between locations. 9. 10. H. @ 2. 3- 14. 15. IF ANALYZING DEFICIENCY COSTS, ENTER THE PERCENTAGE FROM (7) ON FORM 5 (a). IF ANALYZING BONUS VALUES, ENTER THE PERCENTAGE FROM (6) ON FORM 5 (b). IF ANALYZING BOTH TOGETHER, ENTER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE5E TWO. Appendix/217 STEP STEP 6 FORM 6. RANK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF SITES FORM 6. RANK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF SITES CHECK 1: DEFICIENCY- BONUS_ BOTH V"" CHECK 1: DEFICIENCY_Z BONUS_ BOTH_ PART 1. ASSIGN PERCENTAGE CUTOFFS BETWEEN HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW PART 1. ASSIGN PERCENTAGE CUTOFFS BETWEEN HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW 1. ENTER MED./HIGH CUTOFF % 25-9. 1. ENTER MED./HIGH CUTOFF % 2 59. 2. ENTER MED./LOW CUTOFF % 9-0 71, 2. ENTER MED./LOW CUTOFF % PART 2. FILL IN BOXES BELOW, IN ORDER FROM LEAST COST TO GREATEST COST. PART 2. FILL IN BOXES BELOW, IN ORDER FROM LEAST COST TO GREATEST COST. CHECK HIGH, MEDIUM, OR LOW BOXES ACCORDING TO THE DOLLAR CUT- CHECK H I GH, MED I UM, OR LOW BOXES ACCORD I NG TO THE DOLLAR CUT- OFFS ABOVE: OFFS ABOVE: Site Name Percentage Over High Medium Low Site Name Percentage Over High Medium Low (Number) Baseline Cost* (Number) Baseline Cost* 1. 5; @e -7 0. 3 -7 *76 1 -7 2. 2. 3. 3. 4. 4. 5. 5. 6. 6. 7. 7. 8. 8. 9. 9. 10. 10. 1). 11. 12. 1 1 12. 13. 1 13. 14. 14. 15. 15. IF ANALYZING DEFICIENCY COSTS, ENTER THE PERCENTAGE FROM (7) ON IF ANALYZING DEFICIENCY COSTS, ENTER THE PERCENTAGE FROM (7) ON FORM 5 (a). FORM 5 (a). IF ANALYZING BONUS VALUES, ENTER THE PERCENTAGE FROM (6) ON IF ANALYZING BONUS VALUES, ENTER THE PERCENTAGE FROM (6) ON FORM 5 (b). FORM 5 (b). I IF ANALYZING BOTH TOGETHER, ENTER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO. IF ANALYZING BOTH TOGETHER, ENTER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO. I Glossary/219 Glossary BEACH FRONTAGE: location on the sand or DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FACTORS : elements or pebble-covered shore of a body of water. characteristics of the built or natural environment that are required for s uccessful BONUS VALUE: amount derived from site fac- development of a land use, or that are tor data category. Bonus value increases desirable and enhance the attractiveness of the value of the land use. a location for development. CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA: nature and DREDGING: removal of soils (mineral de- ACCESS: ability to enter and leave a quality of places in close proximity to a posits) from under water, using the water place. site. as a means of transportation for the soils. ACCESS FACTORS: elements of a site's loca- CLAM: acronym for Coastal Location Accep- DRY MINING: extraction of mineral and rock tion with respect to infrastructure re- tabil ity Method, a planning tool developed deposits where deposits are above the water quired by any given land use, Access fac- for New Jersey's Coastal Zone management table. tors have in common the fact that they program. This Development Potential Study represent a direct outlay by the developer. is one component of CLAM. EMBAYMENT: water protected from extremes ACRE-FOOT: quantity of water required to CLAY: fine-grained, natural, earthy mater- of wind and wave action. cover I acre to a depth of I foot. An ial composed primarily of hydrous aluminum ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION LINES: distri- acre-foot is equivalent to 43,560 cubic silicates. bution network of power lines carrying feet or 326,000 gallons. COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM: sewerage system electric service up to 34,500 volts. ADVANCED SEWAGE TREATMENT: waste water that carries sanitary sewage and storm ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION GRID: network treatment beyond the secondary or biologi- water. of power lines carrying electric service of cal stage; removal of nutrients (phosphorus, at least 69 kilovolts (KV). nitrogen), residual biochemical oxygen DATA CATEGORY: one of the mutually exclu- demand and suspended solids. sive divisions of data within a data factor. FACTOR COST SHEET: table presenting the For example, the data factor Access to deficiency cost or bonus value of each data AMENITY FACTORS: elements of a site's Railroads has 4 data categories: 0-1, category for every development potential location, or contiguous elements, that 1-3, 3-5, and 5+ miles. factor important to a particular land use. enhance the site's value for a particular use. Amenity factors reflect the dollar DATA FACTOR: see Development potential FACTOR MAP: map that displays each data value that the developer would be willing factor. category of a development potential factor. to pay for the presence of the given amenity. DEEP FOUNDATION SUITABILITY: ability of FORCE MAIN: pipe that conveys sewage under AREA: More than one location from which a geologic materials to support building pressure against the flow of gravity. site or a site-type can be chosen for a foundations. particular land use. GARBAGE: animal and vegetable waste result- DEFICIENCY COST: amount derived from site ing from the handling, preparation, cooking BASELINE DEVELOPMENT COST: constant that factor data that represents additional ex- and serving of food. represents the cost of constructing a base- pense to the developer. line development on a baseline site type. GRAVEL: fragments of rock worn by the action DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL: capability of an of wind and/or water, that are larger and BASELINE DEVELOPMENT SIZE: the number of area to be developed for a specific use. coarser than sand. Fragments range in size units characteristically built together as In this study, development potential refers from 2 millimeters (.079 inch) to 80 milli- a single development. to cost considerations, as opposed to envi- meters (3 inches). ronmental and socio-economic factors. BASELINE SITE TYPE: site-type with no GROUNDWATER: volume of subsurface water bonus values and no deficiency costs. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ANALYSIS: process that occupies the zone of saturation. The whereby various locations for a specific retention and movement of groundwater are BASELINE UNIT COST: baseline cost of con- land use in a given area are ranked by governed by the laws of saturated flow, structing each unit in a baseline develop- total cost of development. ment. 220/Coastal Development Potential Study INCINERATOR: combustion apparatus in which PROXIMITY FACTORS: development potential SEWERAGE: the system of sewers and phY5i- solid, semi-solid, or gaseous combustible factors whose distance from development of cal facilities employed to transport, wastes are ignited and burned to carbon a given land use is important, i.e., a treat, and discharge sewage. dioxide, water vapor, and other gases, and developer would be willing to pay more to from which the solid residues contain be near them. SITE FACTORS: intrinsic physical character- little or no combustible material. istics of a location, primarily soil and PUBLIC OPEN SPACE: government-owned un- subsoil conditions. INTERDEPENDENT FACTORS: group of factors developed land and recreation areas. whose associated total cost is less than SITE: land area confined by property lines. the sum of its individual factor costs due RECREATION AREAS: locations such as parks to cost savings accruing during integrated and playgrounds which provide opportunities SITE-TYPE: land area whose boundaries are construction. for sport, play, or relaxation. defined by a particular combination of data categories from specified development poten- LOCATION: a site or a site-type. RESOURCE RECOVERY: reclamation of waste tial factor maps. materials. MAJOR HIGHWAY INTERSECTION: intersection SOIL LOAD BEARING CAPACITY: ability of of an arterial and one or more collector ROAD, ARTERIAL: major road serving trip surficial soils to bear building loads. roads; intersection of two or more arterial lengths and travel densities characteristic roads; or interchange of a limited access of interstate, statewide, or intercounty SOLID WASTE: useless, unused or discarded road. travel-, frequently multi-lane. materials, including solids, liquids, and MARINE ACCESS: ability to travel by boat ROAD, COLLECTOR: intermediate road linking gases. or ship between a location and open water the local road system to the arterial road TRIP ORIGIN$ AND DESTINATIONS: starting unimpeded by fixed bridges. system, serving trips of moderate len gth, and ending points of journeys on a trans- MGD: million gallons per day. MGD is at moderate speeds. portation facility such as a road or rail- usually used to indicate the treatment ROAD, LOCAL: road primarily providing road. capacity of a waste water or a municipal access to adjacent land, serving trips of TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST: baseline develop- drinking water treatment plant. short length, at low speeds. ment cost plus any bonus values and/or MINERAL SANDS: mineral and rock fragments SAND: individual rock or mineral fragments deficiency costs. derived from pre-existing rocks. in soils having diameters ranging from .05 UNDEVELOPED LAND: land on which there are to 2.0 millimeters. Most sand grains con- no structures, or land that can be readily MINOR TIDES: tides of 5 feet or less. sist of quartz, but they may have any redeveloped. mineral composition. MODAL SPLIT: distribution of traffic UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT: smallest element di- volume according to mode of transportation. SANITARY LANDFILL: method of waste dis- visible from a land use, e.g., one dwelling posal in which refuse is deposited by plan unit, a marina, a factory. ON-SITE AMENITIES: conditions or features on a specified portion of open land, com- on a site that give pleasure or are con- pacted and then covered by a'layer of earth WATER TABLE: in unconfined groundwater ducive to material comfort or convenience, or other suitable covering material. bodies, upper surface of a zone of satura- e.g., water, vegetation, rolling topography. tion. SECONDARY SEWAGE TREATMENT: waste water OVERBURDEN: material overlying a deposit treatment beyond primary treatment provid- WET MINING: extraction of mineral and rock of useful geologic materials. ing at least 85% removal of biochemica I deposits that lie below the water table. oxygen demand and total suspended solids. The most common method is the activated sludge process. References/221 Urban Systems Research & Engineering, Inc. References McKenzie, S., K. Hess and R. Kull. 1977. The Growth Shapers: The Land Use Impacts Land and Water Use Classification for Use 1976. in the New Jersey Coastal Zone Planning of Infrastructure Investments. Washington, Method. Office of Coastal Zone Management, DC: Council on Environmental Quality. Gmeral NJDEP. New Jersey Coastal Area Facility Review Art (CAFRA). Chapter 185 , Laws of 1973. Chiara, Joseph D.E. and L. Koppleman. N.J.S.A. 13 19-1 et seq. HousiM 1975. Urban Planning and Design Criteria. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. New Jersey Office of Historic Preservation 1978. State and National Registers of Historic Places. Trenton: New Jersey Class, Robert Allan and Robert E. Department of Environmental Protection. Allen, Muriel. 1968. New Communities: Koehler (ads.) 1976. Current Techniques Division of Parks and Forestry. Challenge for Today. Washington, DC: in Architectural Practice. Washington, American Institute of Planners D.C.: The American Institute of Architects. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1975. Natural Resource Gascoyne, Paul. 1979. Director of Residentiai Construction Publishing Co. 1979. Inventory; A Guide to the Process. Albany; Consumer Services, Jersey Central Power Building Cost File 1979. New York: NYSDED. Light Company, Morristown, New Jersey. Van Nostrond-Reinhold Co. Personal communication. Office of Coastal Zone Management. 1978 Cunningham, John T. 1978. This is A Method of Coastal Resource Management: A Huntoon, M.C. 1971. P.U.D.: A Better Way for New Jersey. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Pilot Study of Lower Cape May County. Trenton: the Suburbs. Washington, DC: Urban Land University Press, Department of Environmental Protection. Institute. Institute of Rational Design. 1973. Goodman, William and Eric Freud (eds.), Ol'sson, C., 1965. Distance and Human Manual: Design and Control of Land Develop- 1968. Principles and Practices of Urban Interaction. Bibliography Series, No. 2. ment in Suburban Communities. New York. Planning, Washington, D.C.i International Philadelphia: Regional Science Institute. City Managers Association'. Land Design/Research, Inc. 1976. Cost Effective Site Planning: Single Family Rand McNally. 1972. Standard Reference Development, Washington, D.C.: National Isard, Walter. 1965. Location and Space- Map and Guide of New Jersey. New York: Association of Home Builders. Economy. Cambridge. MA: The MIT Press. Rand McNally and Company. McKeever, J.R. 1974. Apartment Development: A Strategy for Successful Decision Making. Robert Snow Means Co. 1978. Building Washington, . DC: Urban Land Institute. Laird, Raymond T., et al. 1979. Quantitative Construction Cost Data 1978. Duxburg, Land-Capability Analysis. Geological Survey. MA: Robert Snow Means Co. Professional Paper 945. Washington, D.C.: Real Estate Research Corporation. 1974. U.S. Government Printing Office. Rogers and Golden. 1978. Maryland Major The Costs of Sprawl: Environmental and Facilities Study; Regional Screening and Economic Costs of Alternative Residential Conflict Resolution. Philadelphia: Rogers Development Patterns at the Urban Fringe. McGraw-Hill Information Systems C pany. Washington, DC: CEQ, HUD, EPA. 1977. 1977 Dodge Guide to Publicom r and Golden. . Wo ks and Heavy Construction Costs. New York: Saylor, Lee. 1979. Current Construc@tion McGraw-Hill. Tourbier, J., R.W. Pierson, S. McKenzie, et Costs. Walnut Creek, CA: Lee Saylor, Inc. al. 1976. The Coastal Zone of Delaware: A Method for the Allocation of Land and McGraw-Hill Information Systems Company. Water Uses. Philadelphia: University of Urban Land Institute. 1978. Residential 1978. 1979 Dodge Guide Construction Pennsylvania, the Center for Ecological Development Handbook (Community Builders Systems Costs. New York; McGraw-Hill. Research in Planning and Design. Handbook Series). Washington, DC 222/Coastal Development Potential Study Witherspoon, R.E., et al. 1976. Mixed-Use Peters, C.H. 1978. Pre-opening marketing Greenberg, Michael R., et al, 1979. Developments: New Ways of Land Use. analysis for hotels. Cornell Hotel and A Primer on Industrial Environmental Washington, DC: Gladstone Associates for Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 19(l), Impact. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers Univer- Urban Land Institute May 1978: 15-22. 5 i ty. The Center for Urban Policy Research. Trifari, Richard. 1979. Director, Hotel Harper, Dave. 1979. New Jersey Department Association of New Jersey. Tenafly, New of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Jersey. Personal Communication. Geoloov. Personal Communication, Hess, Kenneth. 1977. Upland Mineral Commerce And Service Urban Land Institute. 1975. Industrial Resources and the Coast; A Staff Working Deve I opmen t Handbook CCommun I ty Bu 11 ders Paper. Trenton, NJI New Jersey Department Handbook Series). Washington, DC of Environmental Protection. Division of Marine Services, Office of Coastal Zone Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1977. Urban Land Institute. 1977. Shopping Center Management. "Parking Demand at the Regionals." Urban Development Handbook (Community Builders Land, 36 (5), May 1977: 3-11. Handbook Series). Washington, DC Industrial L cation,Service, EDA. 1978. Vineland, Broidgeton and MIlIvIlle, NJ. Bell, Curtis C. 1975. Shopping Center Devel- Witherspoon, R.E., at al. 1976. Mixed-Use opment Guide. Washington, DC: National Developments: New Za_ys of Land Use. Association of Home Builders Washington, DC: Gladstone Associates for Urban Land Institute. New Jersey Bureau of operation Statistics and Reports, DIvIslon of FlannIng and Bessire, Howard D. 1970. The Practice of Yareen, Leonard C. 1960. Plant Location. Research. 1979. Computer search. Industrial Development. El Paso: Hill Revised edition. New York: American Research Urban Land Institute. 1975. Industrial Printing Company. Council. Development Handbook (Community Builders Ho.ward, Dick, ad. 1972. Guide to industrial Young, Toni. 1979. Leventhal-Horwath. Handbook Series). Washington, DC Development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Personal Prentice-Hall. communication. U.S. Bureau of the Budget. 1972. Standard Industrial Classification Manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing office. International Council of Shopping Centers. 1965. Enclosed Mall Shopping Centers. Vidustrial U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic New York. Development Administration. 1973. Industrial Location Determinants 1971-1975. Lapidus, Alan. 1979. Architect, New York, Bauer, Anthony M. 1965. Simultaneous Washington, DC New York. Personal Communication. Excavation and Rehabilitation of Sand and Gravel Sites. Silver Spring, MD: National Sand and Gravel Association. United States Department of the Interior. Lion, Edgar. 1976. Shopping Centers: 1977. Mineral Yearbook, volume 111, Area RepQrts; Domestic, Washington, D.C.: Planning, Development and Administration. Conway, H.M. and L.L. Linton. 1976. U.S. Government Printing office. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Industrial Facilities Planning. Atlanta, Ga.: Conway Publication Inc. Mills, Kim. 1979. American Hotel and Motel- Delaware State Planning Office. 1974. Association, New York, New York. Personal Local Impact and Requirements of Manufac- communication. . turing Industries. Dover, Delaware. References/223 Whiteneck, L.L., John S. Wilson, et a]. National Academy of Sciences. 1975. Mineral Infrastrixture 1973. Port Planning Design and Construction Resources and the Environment: Resource Recov- Washington, D.C.: The American Association ery from Municipal Solid Waste. Washington, of Port Authorities. DC: National Research Council. National Association of Home Builders. 1974. American Society of Civil Engineers. 1971. Land Development Manual. Washington, DC. Airports: Key to Air Transportation System. New York. Utilities National Center for Resource Recovery. 1974. Santitary Landfill: A State-of-the-Art Antoniou, Jim. 1971. Environmental Manage- Study. Lexington,'MA: Lexington Books. ment: Planning for Traffic. New York: American Public Works Association. 1961. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Municipal Refuse Disposal. Public Adminis- Research and Education Association. 1978. tration Service. Modern Pollution Control Technology. New York. Birgeles, Joseph. 1979. Supervising Transportation Planner, Port Authority of Collucci, Carmen. 1979. Director of Ross, R.D. 1968. Industrial Waste Disposal. New York and New Jersey, New York, New York. Engineering, New Jersey Public Broadcasting Van Nostrand Reinhold. Personal communication. Authority, Trenton. Person Communication. "Solid Waste: Asset or Liability?" 1979. New Jersey Department of Transportation. Dames & Moore. 1978. Analysis of Operations Consulting Engineer, March. 1972. A Master Plan for Transportation. and Maintenance Costs for Municipal Wastewater Trenton. Treatment Systems. US Environmental Protection "Solid Waste Treatment and Disposal." 1979. Agency. Chemical Engineering, 86 (3), January 29. New Jersey Department of Transportation. 1977. Dames & M core. 1978. Construction Costs for New Jersey State Airport System Plan: 1975 M I Shapiro and Peter Summary Report. Trenton. unicipal Wastewater Treatment Plants: 1973- Tabors, Richard, Michae 1977. US Environmental Protection Agency. Rogers. 1976. Land Use and the Pipe. Paquette, Radnor J., et al. 1972. Transpor- Lexington, MAI Lextrigton Books. tation Engineering: PT-an-ning and Design. Dames and Moore. 1978. Power Plant Site Thomas, L.J. An Introduction to Mining: New York: Ronald Press. Selection Study for Delmarva Power and Exploration, Feasibility, Extraction, Rock Robinson, John. 1971. Highways and Our Light Company, Cranford, NJ@ Mechanics. Environment. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Goodland, Robert, ed. 1973. Power Lines Tourbier, J. and R. W. Pierson, Jr., eds. Company. and the Envi ronment. -Mi I lbrook, NY: Cary 1976. BiologicaO Control of Water Pollution. Arboretum. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania U.S. Department of Transportation. 1971. Klem, Nick. 1979. Atlantic City Electr Ic Press. National Transportation Planning Manua I Company. Personal Communication. Weiss, Samuel. 1974. Sanitary Landfill 1970-1990. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Technology. Noyes Data Corporation. Miller, Stanton S. 1973. Solid Wastes - 11. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal American Chemical Society. Highway Administration. 1974. Highway Functional Classification: Concepts, Criteria Mortens, James H. 1956. Industrial Sands of Harvest and Procedures. Transmittal 155, Volume 20, New Jersey. Rutgers University, Bureau of Appendix 12. Washington, DC: U.S. Govern- Mineral Research. ment Printing Office. Bonsall, Susan. 1977. The Fishing 'Industry Greenberg, Michael R. and Robert M. Hardau. in New Jersey. Coastal Notes No. R-4. 1976. Water Supply Planning: A Case Study Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies, Weiner, Paul and Edward J. Deak. 1972. and Systems Analysis. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University. New Brunswick, N.J. Environmental Factors in Transportation Rutgers University, The Center for Urban in cooperation with NJDEP Office of Coastal Planning. Lexington, MA: Health Books. Policy Research. Zone Management. Trenton, New Jersey. 224/Coastal Development Potential Study Brown, Bernard G. 1�79. Governor's Office O'Brien, Thomas. 1979. Department of Environ-_ Washer, Richard.. 1979. Senior County of Policy and Planning, Trenton, New Jersey. mental Protection, Division of Fish, Game and Agricultural Agent, Burlington County, Personal communication. Shellfisheri.es, Trenton, New Jersey. Personal * Mount Holly, New Jersey. Personal communication. communication. Ferguson, R.H. and C.E. Mayer. 1974. Timber Resources of New Jersey. USDA Forest Service Perry, John E. 1979. Regional Forester, Resource Bulletin NE-34. Burlington and Ocean Counties, New Jersey Bureau'of Forestry, Lanoka Harbor, New Jersey. FIigley, W.M. 1976. Fisherman Access In Personal communication. Recreation New Jersey's Marine Environment. N.J.D.E.P. Pyle, L. B. 1979. New Jersey Department of Bureau of Fisheries. Nacote Creek Res. Environmental Protection, Bureau of Fisheries, Stat. Trenton, New Jersey. Personal communication. Bell, J. and Hazel F_ Clark. 1978. What Glaser, Sidney. 1978. Tenth Report of Samulis, Ray. 1979. County Agricult .ural to Do in New Jersey- Chappaqua, NY; Data from FA-I Farms for 1978 Tax Year: Agent, Burlington County. Mount Holly, What to Do County Publications, Inc. Farmland Assessment Act of 1964. Trenton, New Jersey. Personal communication. NJ: Division of Taxation. Bullard, W.E. 1974. Water Related Land Use Planning Guidelines. Bethesda, MD: Smith, Norman. 1979. County Agricultural Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Kantor, Richard A. 1977. Ocean Resources: Agent. Cumberland County, Bridgeton, New Basin. Living, A Staff Working Paper. NJDEP. Jersey. Personal communication. Office of Coastal Zone Management. Trenton, Cape May County Planning Board. N.d. New Jersey. The State Farmland Evaluation Advisory Campground Study. Cape May Court House. Committee. 1978. The Fifteenth Report Kantor, Richard A. 1977. Estuarine and Qf the $tote Farmland Evaluation Advisory Wetland Resources: Staff working paper. Comm I t tee. Trenton, NJ: Division of Chubb, Michael and Eric Bauman. 1976. The NJDEP. Office of Coastal Zone Management. Taxation. Local Property and.Public RIVERS Method: A Piolet Study of River Trenton, New Jersey. Recreation Potential Assessment. Utility Branch. :Michigan State University Kirkham, Wende 11. 1979. Soil Conservation Stretch, Dr. Allan. 1979. Plant Pathologist, Service, Somerset, New Jersey. Personal USDA, Cook College, Rutgers University, New Dattner, Richard. 1969. Design for Play. communication. Brunswick, New Jersey. Personal communication. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Koch, Dr. A. Robert. 1979. Department of Thatch, Daymon W. and Sharon D. Foss. 1976. D.ucsik, Dennis W. 1974. Shoreline for the Agricultural Economics, Cook College. New Jersey Agricultural Transportation Study. Public: A Handbook of Social, Economic and Rutgers University. New Brunswick, New New Brunswick: Rutgers. Legal Considerations. Cambridge: MIT Press. Jersey. Personal communication. Mahn, Fred. 1979. District Conservationist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Con- Jones, R.L. and G.L. Rando. 1974. Golf USDA Soil Conservation Service, Mount Holly, servation Service. 1971. Soil Survey of Burlington County, New Jersey. Washington, Course Development. Technical Bulletin 70. New Jersey. Personal communication. DC Washington, DC: Urban Land institute. Lilton, Burton, and,Robert Tetlaw. 1974. Marucci, Philip. 1979. New Jersey Agricul- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Water and the Landscape. Port Washington, tural Experiment Station, Rutgers University, Conservation Service. 1978. National Soils NY: Water information Center. New Brunswick, New Jersey. Personal Handbook Notice 31. Washington, DC communication. Waldman, Mike. 1979. Department of Environ- New )ersey Department of Environmental New Jersey Bureau of Forestry. N.d. New mental Protection, Division of Fish, Game and Protection, Green Acres Program. 1977. Jersey's Forest Resources--Present and Future Shelifisheries, Trenton, New Jersey. Personal Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Trenton. communication. Plan. Trenton. New Jersey Department of Environmental References/226 Protection, Office of Environmental Review. 1973. Outdoor Recreation in New Jersey: New Jersey Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Rec4ation Plan. Trenton. Mew Jersey Department of Labor and industry. 1978. A L ist ln?oof New Jersey Campsites. Trentonj DiVIS n of Travel and Tourism. New Jersey Division of Travel and Tourism. 1978. Boat Basins in Me* Jersey. Trenton. New Jersey,Division of Travel and Tourism. 1978. A L sting of New Jersey Campsites. Trenton. Rand McNally and Company. 1978. Mobile Travel Guide: Middle Atlantic States. Chicago: Rand McNally Travel Research Center, Urban Research and Development Corporation. 1977. An Approach to Identifying and Evaluating Natural Recreation Resources. Washington, DC: Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. U.S. Departments of the Army, Navy and Air Force. 1975. Planning and Design of Outdoor Sports Faci;lties. Washington, DC: U.S. Government rint;ng Office. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. 1977. National Urban Recreation Study: Philadelphia, Wilmington, Trenton. Denver: National Park Service. United States Golf Association. 1969. Golf Committee Manual and USGA Golf Handicap System. U.S. Golf Association, New York. Whitaker, Ben and Kenneth Browne. 1973. Parks for People. New York: Schocken. Coastal Development Potential Study/227 Credits COVER DESIGN: Sandy Dechert DeChiara and Koppelman, 1975 108 PHOTOGRAPHS: Joanne Jackson (Rogers & Golden) Ira B. Lykes, National Park Service, USDI in DeChiara 20, 24, 4o, 124, 192, 204 and Koppelman, 1975 John Rogers (Rogers & Golden) 114 22, 26, 28, 32, 38, 92, 100 Park and Recreation Structures, Part 111, Overnight John Monroe (Jack McCormick & Associates) and Organized Camp Facilities, Albert H. Good, 30, 36, 42, 44, 58, 62, 64, 66, 68, 70, 76, 78, USDI-NPS, 1938 8o, 82, 86, 88, 94, 96, 98, 102, 112, 114, iiiS, 116 118, 120 Frederick Law Olmsted, 1891 New Jersey Department of Transportation 118 72 Roy Mann Associates, Long island Sound Study Princeton Nurseries (1974) 124 90 Urban Land Institute, Environmental Comment 108, 122 Golf Magazine, September 1979 110 SITE PLANS: G. Hossein-Oliai, Rogers & Golden 20 Land Design Research, Inc., 1976 22, 24, 26 Mobile Home Manufacturers Assoc., Land Development Division 30 Carl Massara and Associates, 1974 32 Urban Land Institute, 1977 36, 42 Land Subdivision Regulations, Housing and Home Finance Agency, Washington, D.C. 38 Guidelines for New Systems of Urban Transportation, Vol. 1, Urban Needs and Potentials, Barton Aschman Assoc., Inc., 1968 4o Policy of Arterial Highways in Urban Areas, American Association of State Highway Officials, Washington, D.C., ig6o 64 American Association of Port Authorities, Port Planning Design and Construction, 1973 68, 70, 102 Small Airports, Federal Aviation Agency 72 Drainage of Agricultural Land, Soil Conservation Service, USDA Water Information Center, Inc. Port Washington, N.Y., 1976 86 i I I I I I I )i 3 6668 00002 7625 @ 1,