Southern highlands mountain resources management plan: volume 1 [June 1974]

i Southern Highlands
Mountain Resources
Management Plan
Volume 1
Received
DEC 1 1979
DOCUMENTS USA LIBRARIES
Georgia Department of Natural Resources North Carolina Department of Administration South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation,
& Tourism
June. 1974

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2013
http://archive.org/details/southernhighland01geor

SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS MOUNTAIN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Volume I
Prepared For
States of: Georgia
North Carolina South Carolina
This publication was prepared as part of the Tri-State Southern Highlands Study. The Study is conducted jointly by the States of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia with partial funding by the U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and the Appalachian Regional Commission.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources North Carolina Department of Administration South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism
June, 1974

CHAPTER
I
II
III IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCT ION The Planning Area Planning Objectives Planning Coordination
STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS Physical Characteristics Land Use Features Environmental Factors Resource Management Areas Socio-Economic Population Economic Base Income Education Labor Force and Employment Development Rural Transportat ion
REGIONAL EVALUATION Issues Beneficial Use of Resources Responsiveness of Public Roles The Emerging Interstate Policy Structure for Resources Management
TRI-STATE SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS PLAN The Market Area and Its Demand Analysis Objectives Size of the Industry Basic Concept and Methodology Sources of Data Results of Analysis Implications for Development Priorities Plan Alternatives Guidelines for Development of Optimum Plans The Optimum Plan

PAGE
1 2 2 8
9 9 9 13 14
17 18 18 20 20 22 22 23 24
27 27 28 34
38
46 46 47 47 48 49 49 50 51
52
53

CHAPTER IV
(Cont'd.)
V

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)
Environmental Protective Areas Developmental Elements Regional Gateways Scenic Roads System Scenic Trails Recreation Development Corridor Recreation Developments-Target Center Tourist Service Center Planned Recreation Communities Compatibility With Land Classification System
MANAGEMENT PLAN Interstate Compact Interstate Advisory Council State Level Organization Regional Organization Plan of Action Federal Lands Planning and Management State-Level Measures Regional and Local Measures Conclusion

PAGE
55 55 62 64 65 65 70 71 73
73
77 77 78 78 79 79 80 80 82 83

Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
In January 1972, the States of North Carolina, Georgia, and South Carolina, in cooperation with the U. S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and the Appalachian Regional Commission, engaged in a joint planning effort to define a multi-state regional plan for guiding the development and conservation of recreation resources in their portions of the Southern Highlands Region. The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings, recommendations and proposals pertaining to this multi-state regional plan.
By engaging in this joint planning effort, the three states intend to construct an overall framework for coordinating their respective policies in the management of the unique mountain resources base which they share in the Southern Highlands. This interstate undertaking, specifically, entails the development of uniform standards for resources, inventory, and analysis; compatible methodologies for the formulation of individual state plan elements and a coordinated basis for pursuing individual state plan elements and a coordinated basis for pursuing individual state actions for implementation.
To assure that results of this joint planning effort will be assimilated into the policy making process of each state, a Tri-State Council of policy-level representatives (members appointed by the Governor of each respective state) was formed to render general study direction, review of work elements and approval of plans and policy recommendations. The fact that the Tri-State Council is the direct clientele of this planning effort is of fundamental importance to how the plan and policy proposals would ultimately affect the development and protection of each state's vital mountain resources.
The thrust of this planning effort recognizes the reality that the most serious problem affecting the outdoor recreation opportunities throughout the nation is the continuing despoliation and exploitation of vital natural resources by uncontrolled developments. The effects of this problem include environmental degradation and depletion of irreplaceable natural areas , not to mention the potential strain on public expenditures and general well being. In recent years, it has become clear that such a problem cannot be adequately resolved with the traditional land use control authorities and measures exercised bv most local governments. New authorities and regulations, therefore, must be

made available by the states to better enable the local governments in exercising their trusteeship for the resources in their jurisdictions
This joint planning effort further recognizes that the geographical distribution of natural resources in Southern Highlands is not constrained by the political boundaries of the states. The mountain regions of North Carolina, Georgia, and South Carolina, for example, are in fact resting on the same resource base. The effects stemming from the misuse or mismanagement of resources in any state will inevitably spread into the others.
Thus, in cognizance of the critical needs of new mechanisms for guiding the development and protection of a multi-state resources base, plan and policy proposals of this joint planning effort are made to assist the members of the Tri-State Council to effectively influence and facilitate the development of specific legislative and regulatory programs in each individual state. By the same token, these proposals are meant only to serve as an overall frame of reference, but not detailed elements, of any local development plan.
THE PLANNING AREA
Although the Southern Highland Region is thought to include all of the Appalachian mountain core south of the Mason-Dixon Line, there appeals to be no consensus as to where the exact boundaries of the Region are (Figure 1). However, a more narrow and perhaps more agreeable delineation for the region will probably include the areas covered and influenced by the Great Smok Mountains. At any rate, it is within this general geographical context that the States of North Carolina, Georgia, and South Carolina undertook to determine the appropriate configuration of the planning area.
The Southern Highlands Region, as defined by the current study, is a multi-county area which includes eleven counties in western North Carolina, four counties in northwestern South Carolina, and twelve counties in northern Georgia. The total study area covers a land area of 11,030 square miles and contained 909,532 people in 1970 (Figure 2).
PLANNING OBJECTIVES
The joint planning effort for Southern Highlands came at a time of increasing nationwide concern with the impact of man's activities upon the natural systems. Such a concern has led to the active consideration by the Congress and various states of policies that will give development priorities onlv to those uses

This project undertaken through joint agreement by Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina with
the cooperation and assistance of the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.

inois

Indiana

Ohio

Kentucky

West
Virginia

New York

Pennsylvania .Maryland

New
Jersey,

Virginia

Tennessee

STUD arIa

North Carolina
South Carolina

Mississippi

Alabama

Georgia

Florida
C?
*0
SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS
REGIONAL LOCATION

TOO

200

MILES

Highlands Region As
Defined By ARC

o

Figure 1

rinoW,.: to

This project undertaken through joint agreement by Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina with
the cooperation and assistance of the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.

North
Carolina

V ANDERSON

SoUtH

\

/ Carolina

\

SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA LOCATION

Figure 2

,
which are compatible with the productive functioning of the natural systems. Each state has long recognized that the necessary economic and urban developments generate competing demands on the use of natural resources and such demands must be met in accordance with the needs for protecting these resources for the future generations.
The general thrust and longer range goal of the three states is to develop a regional plan for the management of the natural and man-made systems in the Southern Highlands Region.
This initial project is to result in a sketch plan and program for the orderly development and management of the natural and man-made recreation resources of the Southern Highlands region urban development, and scenic roads and trails. The principal features of this phase include: inventories, analysis, and recommendations relating to the recreational areas , transport routes construction activities, growth patterns, and resource conservation The product consists of a main report and summary dealing with the entire Southern Highlands Region. Additional technical information studies and detailed analysis are included in supplemental state's reports.
As each state had a different thrust throughout the study, the following statements give an indication of these objectives:
Georgia's thrust has been oriented toward the use of natural resource factors as a prime determinant of land use. As the study progressed it became evident that the natural characteristics in the land largely determine its suitability for development or its constraint for conservation or open space management. These characteristics are found in natural development and conservation patterns in the region which should be carefully considered in planning the regional transportation system.
Land use is greatly influenced by areas. Therefore, the design of a transportation system has major implications for regional development. It was found that a redefined role of the existing potentially scenic roads provided an opportunity to shape regional growth according to natural resource factors. The time is now right to establish a state scenic roads policy and program which directs the expenditure of funds for essential stabilization and maintenance to retain the integrity of existing roads and make selected corridor investments to maintain the quality, beauty and to shape desirable growth patterns. Examples of present developmental problems include urban sprawl beyond the planned town jurisdictions and the trend toward second home speculations at potential scenic river crossings.

:

.;

;

The study was conducted in a framework of state development policy, including the Georgia Planned Growth Act, the proposed Vital Areas Act and the State Planning Act and its amendments
Within this framework, the study produced the following results
1. A general inventory and analysis of the regional land patterns, reflecting their natural capabilities and constraints as follows:
(a) Areas best suited for open space management and protection because of vulnerability to erosion or property damage; and areas most desirable for public conservation for natural, recreation, historic or other irreplaceable environmental quality values
(b) Areas best suited for development based on location suitability of slope, soils, existing public and private investments, existing roads, and related public facilities;
(c) Scenic roads and trails which fit the region's overall patterns of areas best suited for open space management and areas best suited for development.
2. A Land Use Capability Matrix and series of maps which serve as a general inventory and analysis indicating the natural determinates and serving as a guide for land uses in the region; 3. Land use, policy recommendations which can serve as a guide for policy enactment; 4. Identification, general analysis and recommendations for areas best suited for growth, where further detailed planning should commence immediately as a joint team effort between local, public, state and federal, and the private sector; 5. Identification, general analysis and recommendations for areas of public conservation and recreation protection priorities such as; scenic rivers; unique natural and wilderness areas, historic and archaeological areas 6. Identification, general assessment, alternatives and recommendations for scenic roads and trails. Priorities, and an estimate of costs of capital improvements and maintenance were outlined for agency programming and financing purposes; 7. The study was used as a basic guide for the system of scenic roads in the region for the 1974 National Study and Recommendations for Scenic Roads; emphasis

,
was given to an environmental approach to regional development and conservation mainly through the existing system of potential scenic roads; 8. Recommendations are made for continuing interstate planning and management through an interstate compact, or similar arrangement, to continue planning and implementation of the study findings and recommendations;
and,
9. Creation of a scenic land trust fund is recommended to implement priority recreation/conservation priorities of interstate regional importance.
North Carolina, for its part, has long recognized that the necessary economic and urban developments generate competing demands on the use of natural resources and such demands must be met in accordance with the needs for protecting these resources for the future generations. Thus, coinciding with the timing of the planning effort for Southern Highlands North Carolina has been engaged in the midst of several concurrent planning efforts designed to establish comprehensive state policies and programs for managing the State's land and natural resources. These concurrent efforts have thus far culminated in the consideration by the North Carolina General Assembly of three legislative proposals aiming at creating:
A state Land Policy Council to develop comprehensive state policies with respect to the protection of the environment and the conservation of the basic land resources; - A Coastal Resources Commission to develop specific programs and implementation mechanisms for managing the coastal natural resources systems; and A Mountain Resources Commission to develop specific programs and implementation mechanisms for managing the mountain natural resources systems.
In view of the above, North Carolina's planning activities relating to its portion of the Southern Highlands have been programmed to support the development of overall land and natural resources management policies for the State. While focusing on the development and protection of recreation resources, studies and analyses were made within the context of Southern Highlands' broad natural, commercial, economic, and recreation utilization.
Specifically, results of the Southern Highlands' planning effort will aid materially in the preparation of state
,5

guidelines for the mountain area as required by the legislative proposal relating to the creation of the Mountain Resources Commission. (*-' These guidelines would be prepared by the Department of Administration and the Department of Natural and Economic Resources for the Commission to set forth "objectives, policies, and standards to guide public and private use of lands and waters within the Mountain Area Management System" for meeting the following goals: (2)
" (1) To provide a management system capable of preserving and managing the natural ecological conditions of the mountains, including its streams, watersheds, slopes, and forests, so as to safeguard and perpetuate the natural productivity of the region, and its biological, economic and aesthetic values;
(2) To insure that the development or preservation of the land and water resources of the mountain area proceeds in a manner consistent with the capability of the land and water for development, use, or preservation based on ecological considerations;
(3) To insure the orderly and balanced use and preservation of our mountain resources , including its forests and minerals, on behalf of the people of North Carolina and the Nation;
(4) To establish policies, guidelines, and standards
for:
(i) Protection, preservation, and conservation of natural resources including but not limited to watersheds, scenic vistas, forests, and fish and wildlife;
(ii) The economic development of the mountain area, including but not limited to construction, location, and design of industries, commercial establishments, housing developments, use and management of mineral and forest resources and other development;
(iii) Recreation and tourist facilities and parklands ;
(iv) Transportation and circulation patterns for the mountain area including major thoroughfares, transportation routes, and other public utilities and facilities;
(v) Preservation and enhancement of the historic, cultural, and scientific aspects of the mountain area;
(vi) Protection of the present common law and statutory public rights in the lands and waters of the mountain area;

(vii) Any other considerations deemed necessary or appropriate to effectuate the policy of this act."
Whether or when the proposed legislation on mountain resources management would be enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly, of course, is beyond the scope of the Southern Highlands planning effort to predict. Undoubtedly, the format, timing, and other essential details of the State mountain area management guidelines would undergo considerable refinements before they are enacted into law. Thus, while work activities and products resulting from the Southern Highlands' planning effort will help to accomplish the objectives of the proposed Mountain Area Management legislation, the task of installing a viable mountain area management system would clearly demand substantially more intensive and thorough efforts which cannot be supplanted by the Southern Highlands' planning effort.
South Carolina's portion of the Southern Highlands area represents one of the State's most valuable natural resource areas. This beautiful mountainous area with prime forest lands, large water impoundments and a rich historical background is an asset which must be protected and preserved for the use and enjoyment of future generations. Therefore, with this directive, South Carolina's major effort in this study was to connect the regions most outstanding complimentary resources by a system of scenic roads and trails. Through this system, drivers and hikers have maximum exposure to the scenic and recreational resources of the region, while ensuring that the unique features and natural beauty of the Southern Highlands of South Carolina is preserved.
The importance of this natural area is compounded by the fact that it lies in the heart of an emerging population center. This factor makes it mandatory that immediate steps be taken to protect this natural area from urban encroachments. Its protection is an essential step toward providing a recreation resource for the urbanities of the future. This protection can only be assured through the employment of proper controls for which the State must take the responsibi-
lity.
Consequently, because access is a principal element in the increasing awareness and enjoyment of the natural and man-made resources, South Carolina felt that this access

should be tailored to the region. It will assist in reducing the impact on this unique and fragil environment. This can be accomplished through a balanced framework of access facilities to the scenic area. Their value can be protected, and the populace of the region as well as the entire State will benefit from an increased economic base.
In addition to the primary effort, the Development of a Scenic Roads and Trails System - South Carolina felt that this plan must complement its State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. With this as its aim, the South Carolina part of the Southern Highlands Plan establishes corridors connecting existing and proposed recreation areas as well as the natural attributions of the area.
In summary, the significance of the planning objective for Southern Highlands lies in the fact it should be functionally an intergral element of the comprehensive state policy planning structure for land and natural resources management. As such, the studies, recommendations and proposals stemming from the Southern Highlands planning effort are interdependent, interwoven and inter-related with the objectives of all other land and natural resources management planning efforts, including in particular, the development of the proposed North Carolina Mountain Area Management Plan and the proposed Georgia Vital Areas Act and the proposed South Carolina Critical Areas Act.
PLANNING COORDINATION
In addition to the coordination with state, regional and local agencies, the study team used various federal agencies for information and recommendations. These agencies included: U. S. Corps of Engineers; U. S. Forestry Service; U. S. Soil Conservation Service; Tennessee Valley Authority; and others. We appreciate the assistance of each of these agencies that was provided us during the study.
8

Chapter II
STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
As one flies over the Tri-State Southern Highlands area, his eyes cast upon the beautiful Smoky and Blue Ridge Mountain Ranges, forests, rivers, agricultural land and urban development. Consequently, this area is one of contrasting land uses with varying degrees of compatability . A discussion of the area's life support system is presented in Appendix A.
It is evident from this view that sporadic development permeates the area. This type of development, if allowed to continue, will spoil the area's attributes for future generations to enjoy. It will also cost the local governments, through capital outlays, enormous sums to correct past mistakes. In addition to these conditions, the area for the most part, is economically depressed.
This chapter reviews the characteristics and factors of the study area. The factors included are:
A. Physical Characteristics B. Socio-Economic C. Development
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Over the years, private development activities in the Southern Highlands have become increasingly intensified. Inevitably, an active development market has always its share of unscrupulous operators and the Southern Highlands is of no exception. In order to preserve the remaining attributes and yet to permit the area its choice of development this section reviews the area's physical characteristics in view of their capability for conservation, preservation, and development.
The physical characteristics which are discussed include:
1. Land use features 2. Environmental factors 3. Resource management areas
Land Use Features
In the main, the use of land is dictated by the topography, soils and floodplains (Figure 3) . This is particularly true in the Tri-State Southern Highlands area. The study area varies

from 500 feet elevation to over 6,100 feet, the lower elevations being in the piedmont areas of Georgia and South Carolina and the higher elevations in the Smoky Mountains area of North Carolina.

Topography and Slopes - Of the 11,086 square mile study area, North Carolina has 4,899 square miles--about 80% of which is
-- mountains and 20% intermountain valleys. South Carolina shares
2,687 square miles about 20% mountains and 80% Piedmont. Georgia has 3,444 square miles--about 45% mountains, 15% intermountain valleys, 40% Piedmont and Conasauga Valley.

The elevations range as follows

North Carolina: South Carolina: Georgia:

6,000 feet to 1,500 feet in the valleys; 3,900 feet to 500 feet in the piedmont; 5,000 feet to 950 feet in the Conasauga Valley.

The regional topographic patterns and slopes are a major determinant of the suitability for land development conservation and management in the region. Historical developments, including transportation, have generally followed the less constrained areas. Where roads have crossed the mountains, they were generally developed through the lower passes between the peaks to connect the states and intermountain valleys.

The slope maps developed for the study delineate the physio-

graphic and topographic characteristics. The slopes are shown

in percents of slopes as follows:

to 8%; 9 through 15%; 16

through 24%; 2 5% and above.

The mountain highlands of the region are characterized by massive rugged topography with slopes generally exceeding 25% with smaller portions 16 to 25%. The intermountain valleys and piedmont are characterized by slopes to 8% and 16 to 25% range.

Soils - The soils of the Southern Highlands are either residual (form in place) or alluvial (transported and deposited). Residual soils have resulted from the disintegration of the local rock materials and they occur as a blanket on the mountain slopes directly over parent rock. Composition and properties vary with the nature of the parent material, the degree of alteration, and the rate of erosion. The soils are moderately to highly erodible on the steep slopes, requiring that a good vegetative cover be maintained

Alluvial soils occur where they were deposited by flowing water in valley bottoms, in stream channels, and on topographic terraces; in addition, these types of soils are also found in

10

'<;.
Wifir

&#

#$&$ r

(0
3*> 5 :
(0

3. 2

2j

RE a. 2

(/)

o -5 c .y w

< a 5 s3 "

</>

TC3

II

(0 St

rt
i
:&
"....,
?/&~^v

Is
c 5 i a c5
8''
mmii

the piedmont plateau area of the Southern Highlands. Although most of the alluvial soils originated as residual soils on mountain slopes, natural transportive actions have caused these soils to have different compositions.
Many of the soils in the Southern Highlands, notably those in steep slope areas, have severe limitations with respect to urban development. This distinction is made primarily on the basis of limitations of the soil for supporting residential development with the use of septic tanks, although the degree of slope was also a consideration. Further, it was assumed that soil requirements for light industry and roads and streets are similar to those for residential development and that soil requirements are higher for septic tanks than for sewer systems. By this process it can be determined that there is a very limited supply of land suitable for urban development in the mountainous areas of the Region. However, most of the areas that are not suited to urban development are capable of supporting forest and forest-related uses, as well as other types of recreation and open spece functions.
The only areas within the mountainous areas that have any sizable land base for urban development are the river valleys. However, limitations of flooding and high water tables exist in some parts of these river valleys. The piedmont plateau found in the southeastern and southwestern sections of the study area contain extensive amounts of land with soils suitable for urban development. The piedmont, like the intermountain valleys, has urban development limitations along rivers and within flood plains
Drainage and Flood - This Region has some of the nation's highest rainfall ranging from 50-70 inches annually in the piedmont to 70-100 inches annually on the crest of the mountains. The mountain region is basically a head-water area with many small springs and streams. The drainage is dendritic, or treeshaped, with the tree trunks in the piedmont area and the branches in the mountain areas. The high elevations, steep slopes, and high rainfall combine to form cold, pure, fast flowing streams. These in turn combine to form larger, warmer, and slower streams and rivers as the topography levels out toward the piedmont.
The region contains the head-waters of six river systems-the Santee-Cooper , Savannah, Chattahochee-Appalachicola , Coosa, Tennessee, and Little Tennessee. The first two systems flow into the Atlantic Ocean, the next two flow directly into the Gulf of Mexico and the final two flow into the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River.
11

The Region's streams valleys can be described as youthful to early maturity. The more mature valleys have fairly broad floors and relative wide flood plains. The more youthful valleys are more "V" shaped with steep slopes and little or no floodplains. Identification of floodplains have generally been made from the existance of alluvial soils adjacent to a stream. Only in the larger downstream rivers have floodplains been mapped by surveys based on historical records. Due to the region's dendritic (tree-shaped) drainage system, floodplains are relatively narrow and are interspursed throughout the Region. Flooding that occurs in this area is generally of the flash flood variety, due to the small drainage areas and steep topography. When flooding occurs, the entirety of the narrow valley bottoms can be expected to be inundated regardless of the magnitude of the flood. Conversely, the more severe floods do not necessarily result in a proportionately larger area of inundation. A safe conclusion would then be that development on the floodplains of any stream in the area is subject to extensive damages resulting from even minor flooding
Although many of the larger rural floods occur in the winter months when farming is not active, these floods may still cause heavy rural damage. While crop damage is generally negligable during this season, extensive damage can occur to highways, bridges, fences, cropland, and farm buildings located in the flood plains. Often, the greatest damage caused by winter floods in the agricultural areas is the scouring of topsoil and the disposition of debris on the land.
Summer storms and floods are rarely as extensive as those occurring in the winter months, but they cause considerable damage over small areas. Locally intense storms over small drainage areas produce floods which rise rapidly, sweeping away buildings, bridges, fences, crops and topsoil. These floods, often occurring at night as the results of thunderstorms, are more likely to cause loss of life than the more slowly rising winter floods.
On most of the streams in the Southern Highlands, a majority of the floods occur in winter and spring. However, in many cases the highest known floods have occurred in the summer or fall months
In the Tennessee River Valley, the Tennessee Valley Authority has prepared flood control studies for most of the urban areas. For the rest of the Region, however, there are few studies of flood prone areas. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Soil Conservation Service (USDA) and the U. S. Geological Survey (USDI) are conducting studies on portions of the study area.
12

Environmental Factors
The natural resources of the Tri-State Southern Highlands area make it an attractive place for naturalists, environmentalists, conservationists, and tourists to gather and enjoy (Figure 4) . However, if an effort is not made to preserve these resources, they will not be enjoyed by future generations. These resources include:
1. Unique, Natural and Wilderness Areas; 2. Scenic and Wild Rivers; and 3. Historical and Archeological Sites.
Natural and Wilderness Areas - The Region overall functions as an interdependent whole in its systems of land, water and air; but special features and natural communities contain irreplaceable values which need to be conserved. Historically, the Great Smoky Mountains National Park is identified as the nation's most significant Eastern wilderness park. This large area, because of its great national interest and popularity is over its optimum carrying capacity especially during the summer season.
Other large and smaller areas in the Southern Highlands have been identified for special management and protection of their unique and outstanding natural features. Unique areas of geological, hydrological , botanical significance or combinations of these having regional values for scenic, recreational, educational, scientific, ecological, and fish and wildlife purposes are identified on Figure 4. The most significant interstate natural areas are the Blue Valley-Overflow Creek Area, and the Standing IndianHightower Bald-Upper Tallulah River Area. These natural areas are further defined and delineated in Appendix B.
Each state has their natural areas of major importance to the State and to the Tri-State Region when considered from the comprehensive regional conservation, development, transportation, and management view.
Scenic and Wild Rivers - The Region's cool, wet climate; steep topography; and lush vegetation give rise to many scenic rivers. These rivers are characterized by generally steep gradients, rock, gravel and sand bottoms, and fast moving, cold, clear water. These rivers are generally located in forested rural areas. Most of the scenic rivers are well suited for trout fishing, canoeing and kayaking, and all are vital high quality water supply arteries.
The Chattooga River is the most exemplary Wild and Scenic River in the tri-state area. This river has been described as
13

the most outstanding free-flowing Whitewater stream in the Southeast. As a result, the Chattooga River has been designated a Wild and Scenic River by Public Law 93-279. In 50 miles, the river drops from 4,800 feet to 891 feet or 49 feet per mile. The river offers a broad variety of experiences including fishing for trout and red-eye bass, superb Whitewater kayaking, and the viewing of mountain scenery including gorges, forests, occasional pastures as well as rich and varied plant communities.
Many other rivers or sections of rivers in the tri-state area have wild and scenic river characteristics. While these rivers do not equal the quality of the Chattooga, they still offer a wild and scenic river experience. Some of these rivers include the Chattahoochee, Coosawattee/Cartecay , Chestatee, Etowah River/Amicalola Creek, Conasauga, Hiawassee, Nottely and Toccoa Rivers
Historical and Archeological Sites - A complete inventory of all historical and archeological points of interest were made for the Southern Highlands. These have been listed and included in Appendix B of this report.
The points of regional significance identified for inclusion in the Southern Highlands Study are those sites which are included in the National Register of Historical Places. These sites have been characterized as a roll call of properties significant in American history, archeology and culture of the Southern Highlands.
Much of the history and culture of the Southern Highlands can be traced to the Cherokee Indian. The Southern Highlands Area was known to the Cherokee as "The Great Blue Hills of God". The heritage of this native people is still abundantly evident in the names found throughout the region (Keowee, Oconee, Chattooga, Hiawassee, Tuckasegee, etc.)
Those sites recognized in the National Register and identified as regionally significant to the Southern Highlands Region are shown in Figure 4. Primary archeological sites have not been identified for purposes of preservation.
Resource Management Areas
Among the outstanding resources of the Tri-State Southern Highlands are its natural resources (Figure 5). This wealth has been the fundamental basis of the area's recreation development and will continue to be.
At one time the wildlife of the area was abundant and as varied as its plant life. However, through exploitation by
14

hunters, non-selected timber cutting, and the general non-control development; these resources have been diminished. To protect the natural habitat, national and state refugees have been established and recreational facilities planned and/or constructed.
Wildlife Management Areas - The three states have twenty-six wildlife management areas in the Region with a combined total of 1,319,699 acres. These areas are operated by the state fish and wildlife agencies of the respective states.
These areas provide much of the best hunting and fishing opportunities in the Region. The states have for several years made expenditures to improve fish and wildlife habitats and provide appropriate stocking and management of these resources. While best known for big game and small game hunts and trout fishing, these areas also provide opportunities for sightseeing, hiking, photography, nature study, and limited camping.
North Carolina has seven wildlife management areas consisting of 712,249 acres managed cooperatively with the U. S. Forest Service. Georgia has twelve wildlife and public hunting areas consisting of 346,000 acres. About 240,000 acres are on national forest lands and the rest are on private cooperative and Corps of Engineers lands. South Carolina has seven wildlife management areas consisting of approximately 261,450 acres.
Forests - Of the 7,059,200 acres in the Tri-State Southern Highlands approximately 1,476,140 acres are under Forest Service jurisdiction.
In North Carolina two national forests--the Nantahala and a portion of the Pisgah--are located within the studv area. These two areas combine to form a total of 69 8,440 acres of managed woodlands. Of special interest is the Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest. This 3,800 acres of forest, located within the Nantahala National Forest, is one of the few remaining tracts of virgin timber in the country.
South Carolina has only one national forest in its portion of the Southern Highlands. Sumter National Forest, contains 77,700 acres. In addition, Clemson University maintains a tract of 1,450 acres devoted largely to forestry, although a relatively small portion is under cultivation for experimental purposes. Crescent Land Company, a private timber management firm, also has over 26,000 acres of forested land in the study area.
Georgia, like South Carolina, has one national forest located in the study area. The Chattahoochee National Forest
15

.

covers most of Georgia's steeply sloped mountain area. Of the 1,500,000 acres within the proclamation boundary of the forest, 739,308 acres are owned by the U. S. Forest Service, of which 685,718 acres are located within the study area.

Recreation Facilities - The regions recreational facilities are generally oriented to the natural environment, which is the primary attractor to the region. In some instances, there is an overlap between a facility and a resource. For example, the Smoky Mountains National Park is a natural resource, but contains and is operated as a facility. Likewise, a reservoir is both a facility and a resource. On the other hand, eating, drinking, lodging and amusement establishments are facilities. Major resource/facilities include:

MAJOR RESERVOIRS Corp of Duke Georgia TVA Engineers Power Power ALCOA

Georgia

3*

South Carolina

1

North Carolina

Southern Highlands

7

4

*include one under construction.

State Parks

National Parks

National Forests

Georgia

7

South Carolina

4

North Carolina

0*

Southern Highlands

11

*2 are proposed.

Overall, the region contains a large number of recreation facilities, including those oriented to tourists, youth groups, hunters, fishermen and campers. These facilities are both publicly and privately owned. In many instances the facilities are in need of upgrading and modernization. Especially in the tourist oriented areas, there is a great need for better planned areas, especially with regard to transportation and aesthetics

Many of the public resource/facilities are not currently achieving their recreation potential due to competing demands from other of their multi-purpose uses. For example, few of the TVA lakes are used extensively for recreation due to varying

16

water levels covered by power generation. National Forest lands are often in demand both for timber production and outdoor recreation.
Snow skiing is a new factor in the Southern Highlands area. The area now contains four ski resorts. While skiing helps offset the seasonality problems inherent with tourism in the area, natural factors such as climate make snow skiing a marginal business. Some of the resorts have attempted to achieve a balance between summer-golf and winter-ski themes.
Second Home Developments - Second home development can pose problems either from a poor design or an inappropriate location, or both. Problems primarily related to design include:
a. Erosion and siltation problems, especially with respect to road design and construction.
b. Degradation of water quality and supply due to siltation, urban types of precipitation runoff, and septic tank failure.
Problems primarily related to location include:
a. Pre-emption of fragile, unique and limited resources from other uses such as primitive recreation, educational and scientific study.
b. Increased public costs due to the need for an extensive and scattered system of roads, water and sewer facilities, police and fire protection, solid waste disposal, and to some extent, schools.
c. Destruction of prime fish and wildlife habitat. d. Property and personal hazards such as flooding and
land slips.
Major resort and second-home developments have long been attracted to the region's lakes and certain of the mountain areas. Older resort areas include Highlands-Cashiers (N.C.), and ClaytonLake Rabun (Ga.). Newer and larger-scale developments have recently been developed in these areas plus the Lake Hartwell (Ga.S.C.) area, Maggie Valley (N.C.), and Mount Oglethorpe (Ga.) areas.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
This review is not intended to be an exhaustive compolation of base data on the various aspects of the socio-economic factors making up the area. Rather, it is a brief summary of the salient factors as they influence the conservation and development of the area.
17

Generally, the area can be characterized as one of poverty, low educational attainment, sparce development and low employment opportunities. However, in the past decade, the area has begun to be exploited by second-home and recreation oriented developments, which has given rise to many and varied problems.
The study area which consist of twenty-seven counties, has a land area of 11,030 square miles and a 1970 population of approximately 909,532 (Table 1). A review of Table 1 indicates that; Georgia with its twelve counties has 14% of the population and 31% of the land area, North Carolina with eleven counties has 30% of the population and 44% of the land area, and South Carolina with four counties has 49% of the population and 25% of this land area.
The factors that have influenced the area include characteristics of the land, population characteristics, economic base, income, education, and labor force and employment trends. The limited development potential inherent in the land, together with the out migration of the younger workers and the better educated largely account for the poverty and general character of the area.
Population
Between 1960 and 1970, the Tri-State area had a population increase of approximately 11% or 91,775 persons. This increase by state is as follows: Georgia, 9% or 11,053 persons; North Carolina, 10% or 30,000 persons; and South Carolina, 11% or 51,444 persons. This increase has been primarily in the urbanizing areas of all three states
The young and middle age groups decreased, whereas the older group of the population increased. The moderate outmigration of the younger and middle age persons coupled with the lack of outmigration of the older age group and the inmigration of the retirees, with better nutrition and improving medical care are primarily responsible for this trend. One of the unpleasant results of this trend, is that the more intelligent,, better educated and working age persons are a loss to the area at a time when they could be assisting the area to develop from within rather than from without.
Economic Base
Up until the last two decades, the economic base of the Tri-State Southern Highlands area has been agriculture. At that time, the upper piedmont areas of Georgia and South Carolina and the Asheville, North Carolina area had an industrial base of predominately textiles and related products.
18

Table 1 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS Tri-State Southern Highlands
1970

AREA

POPULATION

Number

Percent

LAND AREA

Square Miles

Percent

Tri-State Area

909,532

100

11,030

100

Georgia Rabun Habersham Stephens Towns Union White Fannin Lumpkin Dawson Gilmer Pickens Murray

125,000
8 ,327 20 691
r
20 ,331
'
4 ,565 6,,811 7 ,742 13 ,357 8 ,728 3 ,639 8;,956 9,,620 12 ,986

13.8
.9
2.2 2.2
.5 .7 .8
1.4
.9 .4 .9
1.0 1.4

3,444 368 282 173 166 309 243 394 292 211 439 225 342

31.2 3.3 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.8 2.2 3.5 2.6 1.9 3.9 2.0 3.1

North Carolina Cherokee Clay Graham Haywood Jackson Macon Swain Buncombe Henderson Madison Transylvania

338,,600 16,,330 5,,180 6,,562 41,,710 21; 593 15, 788 7 ,861
145,,056 42,,804 16, 005 19, 713

37.2 1.7
.5 .7
4.5 2.3 1.7
.8
15.9 4.7 1.7 2.1

4,899 452 209 292 551 491 513 524 657 378 450 382

44.4 4.1 1.9 2.6 5.0 4.4 4.6 4.8 6.0 3.4 4.1 3.5

South Carolina Anderson Greenville Gconee Pickens

445,,932 105,,474 240 ,774
40,,728 58, 956

49.0 11.5 26.4
4.4 6.4

2,687 749 792 654 492

24.4 6.8 7.2 5.9 4.5

SOURCE U. S. Census of Population, 1970.

19

During the last twenty years the shift from an agrarian economy to a more industrialized one has been noticeable. This is particularly true when reviewing the employment characteristics Manufacturing employment within the area increased approximately 5% in North Carolina, 6% in Georgia, and 7% in South Carolina during the last decade. Non-manufacturing has had the greater increase during the same time frame. Non-manufacturing employment increased within the study area by approximately 10% during the same time frame. Non-manufacturing employment consists primarily of service industry.
Income
Income trends is one of the guages of an economy's health, and therefore an indicator of prosperity of the area's residents. Income determines the type of housing, food and shelter that the residents can provide for their families. Income in the Tri-State Southern Highlands area is primarily from manufacturing, commercial trade and tourism.
One of the problems facing the area is that of income distribution. This is a very important factor in terms of community growth and development, as those with high incomes generally have a smaller inclination to consume than those with low or medium incomes. Those with higher incomes do not spend less, rather they generally spend a smaller percentage of their disposable income in the area. Thus, those with high incomes have a substantial portion tied up in interest outside the area while those with low and moderate incomes tend to return most of it into the local economy.
The low income families do little with their spendable income but purchase necessities. The medium income are the ones who have the profound effect upon the economy by investing working and spending in the local economy.
In 1969, approximately 35,431 of the families had an annual income of less than $3,000; approximately 74,590 had between $3,000 and $7,000; another 84,223 had between $7,000 and $12,000; and 47,115 had above $12,000 (Table 2). This indicates that the overall study area had a fairly strong middle income group. However, the middle income group is still not strong enough to overcome the low income group in assisting the economic viability of the area.
Education
The median school year completed in the Tri-State Southern Highlands is similar to the median school year completed in each
20

oiin'j'tNr^^^inmHcoHfnnfovo
inC0C0rHCM00r--O'3, 00C0r0CO(Ti'3'rH

*3<

O (T> (Ti <Ti r^ CO "31 <T> CM H H N(NH iH iH rH iH CM rH i-H

CM

co co 00 CD cm cri
r- r</>co-

o rO O rH \>
00 CD
o -co-
co

r>

CM

<Ti

CO

CM

in

CM
CO-

oCTi

CT>

CO
r-q
< D Q
ft!
cu

Q H

H H
CM Pi

D CD

C

rH

M

CU

rd

x:

+j

o
CO

cu
+J
rd 4->
CO
I
-H
O
En
W s c u
H

ONt^nHoo^nvoioori

in

co

c^

*tf

r-^

OrHr--rsiroir)iH(NrocoooooocNCN'>*

kD LO CO CO rH CO

O 00 CO m o co
vo co ^r

CmM

CM CO

H r--

co

^i,

inco

r-^<yi<yicr 1

a>oococo

rH

CM

^^H

CO 00

o co r-

CM

in

CO- rH

in </> rH

CO-

rH

</>

NMnCN^OONfNMnOOO^kCMO
fMLOrHcnLnrHr^ocM'^rocoincoiHir)
OOOOOOrHiHCOCOCOOOiHOCOCOCM

CD "**
o r- ^ rH

CO CM CO
^ rH CTi o co in

r>
or>

Oo
CO

iH co co co r* r- oor-r-r-cocTicocDrH

co r> co in co CM CO

to- rH

rH {/> rH

</>-

CO

to-

rH

</>

CO

COrHVD(TiCOOrHr-CD'd, CMCOCOCOCDCT\
CMr^COCMCOCO^OCO^tyi^COCOr-CO
COCMCOCOCDCTi'tfOOOVOrHrHCOr^CM

rH CD cm r- in cm

CO rH CD
m cd in
O^ CO

in
or

Oo o

CO ^T CMCMCMCMCOCMCOCMCMCOCNiH
CO

^

^ Mh

*b

^



co rCO-CO-

^iH in in to-</>

CM
</>

m
CM

rH

^a

r

0) 4->

H<Ti

rH

ftk

0)

co

}-)

p

a

CO

3

c

CTi CT\ CT\ 0\
cfi G\ <j\ a^
o\&\<ys<j^c?\cr\<y\G^cj\c\G\(j\o\ cu 0\0\(J\0^(Ti<TiO\0\<J\ * * * * >-l C^CTiCTiCTi<Ti<TiC^CT\0>>rHr}<^l<cri

cuorHCMco^incor-cocT\to-</>to-co-

ho-co-co-co-</>-co--co-</>-co-</>

u

rH

1

1

1

1

g o o o o o H rH |

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

CO-

oooooooooooooo ffl ^oooooooooooooo Cu

TS to
C rH

rd rd

3

e

CO ra

o QJ 0) -H

H o e H >

c

-H

H u H rrj

c

e
H

e a

ma

c

rd

En

id

e

0)
u

o

o



Mc

CO

,

rd

c

D

-p

H -H

04 -p



rd

rd

w

u rH u

H

H

3

-- iO i

rd

u

D

rH CrHCMCO^Tincor^OOC^rHrHrHCMin
< D </></></></>'C/>tO-tO-tO-</></></></}-</></)-

22< a) a; rH

cu
g 2i

Cm

&

o
CO

2]

state. The Southern Highlands median school year completed is 10.2 whereas, the median for each state is 10.8 for Georgia; 10.6 for North Carolina? and 10.5 for South Carolina.
The per pupil expenditure in 1969 in the Southern Highlands was $500. This compares to the per pupil expenditure for each state which was $529 for Georgia, $564 for North Carolina and $407 for South Carolina.
These indicators suggest that the public school education in the Tri-State Southern Highlands Study Area is similar to the educational systems to the individual state.
Labor Force And Employment
In 1970 the Civilian Labor Force in the Tri-State Southern Highlands area consisted of 386,740 persons (Table 3). Of these 369,790 persons were employed and 16,950 were unemployed. The 6.2% unemployment rate varied considerably from that of each state. A high unemployment rate is an indicator of a down economy within the area. Perhaps the Southern Highland economy is experiencing growth pains, through the National trend of high unemployment had an influence upon the area.

Table 3 LABOR FORCE, EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT
Tri-State Southern Highlands Area 1970

AREA

CIVILIAN WORK FORCE EMPLOYMENT UNEMPLOYMENT

Georgia

42,680

40,030

2,650

North Carolina

133,510

127,260

6,520

South Carolina

210,550

202,500

8,050

Study Area

386,740

369,790

16,950

RATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT
6.2 7.3 3.8 4.4

DEVELOPMENT
The most significant areas of urban development in the Southern Highlands Region have occurred in and around the cities of Asheville and Hendersonville , North Carolina and Greenville, South Carolina. The urban population of the counties in which these three cities are located comprise approximately 99% of the total urban population of the study area. Smaller concentration
22

w
\\
'<

'Afi
Mv
x
* . Y
\< i v \.

! C.
^,

I

I

^

. iflii
i ll
2

iPlij

of urban development exist in and around smaller communities throughout the region (Figure 6)
C6unties which have realized some urbanized growth in the region over the past decade include:
North Carolina: Buncombe County, Henderson County South Carolina: Greenville County, Oconee County, Pickens
County Georgia: Lumkin County, Murry County, Stephens County,
Rabun County , Habersham County
With the exception of Greenville County in South Carolina and Henderson County in North Carolina this increase has been relatively small on a percentage basis.
In addition to the urban development that has occurred in and around the incorporated towns, several additional areas have experienced urban development. The most notable of these areas include: (1) Maggie, a resort community located in the western part of Haywood County, North Carolina; (2) Cherokee, the center of the Cherokee Indian Reservation in Swain County, North Carolina; and (3) Cullowhee, the location of Western Carolina University, a few miles south of Sylva, North Carolina.
Rural
The Highlands region is experiencing a reversal of a national trend. Whereas rural areas are declining nationally, there is inmigration into the rural areas of the Tri-State region. Thus, the rural areas can be considered as a developing area. This development, which can be categorized as economic and residential, is described as follows:
Ec--onomic - The Region's rural economy is based on the product ive cap~acity of the land in terms of mining, agriculture and timber production. Except for the Dahlonega, Georgia gold rush in the 1830's, the only significant mining has been for construction materials especially stone and gravel. While this has significant impact on a local level, the regional impact of mining is quite small.
Agriculture is primarily comprised of row crops, orchards, and pasture. Traditionally, agricultural production was consumed internally rather than used for external trade. Recent trends have shown a decline in agricultural production in the Region as the Region's residents have increasingly filled industrial and commercial jobs. Increasingly non-agricultural acreage has been primarily composed of pasture land and timberland, as the region has trended from rural farm to rural non-farm.
23

Residential - The increase in the Region's rural population has taken several forms. First, there has been an increase in the traditional rural pattern of isolated housing along countyroads. Second, there has been an important increase in the areas adjacent to the towns in the Region. Under census definition these areas are considered rural, but in actuality, the settlement patterns approach urban densities.

A fourth type of rural residential development is largescale second-home communities. While the Region has long attracted second-homes, the magnitude of the more recent developments is much greater. Over time, many of these second home communities will probably evolve into primary home communities, especially those within commuting distance to urban areas such as Atlanta, Asheville, and Greenville. At this time it is too early to determine the exact long range impact of these developments, especially in view of the current energy shortages.
Transportation

Existing transportation facilities in the Southern Highlands Study Area consist primarily of an extensive network of highways (Figure 6). Supplemental transportation is provided by several railroads lines and one major airport facility (Figure 6). There presently exists no navigable river network within the Region capable of supporting ship or barge traffic.

Highways - The major portion of the study area lies generally within a circle of interstate highways connecting major cities in and near the region. These routes include:

1-75
1-85 1-26
1-40

(Atlanta, Georgia - Chattanooga, Tennessee - Knoxville, Tennessee) (Atlanta, Georgia - Greenville, South Carolina). (Greenville, South Carolina - Asheville, North Carolina) (Asheville, North Carolina - Knoxville, Tennessee).

All except 1-75 traverse a portion of the study area.

Major U. S. and state highways serve as the main arteries into and through the Southern Highlands Study Area. These facilities form an extensive network of roadways within the Region.

Complimenting the major highway facilities are the secondary state routes and local road facilities which provide access to the land. These routes comprise the majority of the total roadway mileaae.

24

There presently exist only three designated scenic highways
-- in the Southern Highlands Study Area one in each of the three
states. The Blue Ridge Parkway in North Carolina is the only federally designated scenic road in the Region. The State of Georgia has designated Georgia Route 348 as the Richard Russel Scenic Highway. In South Carolina, State Route 11 has been designated as a scenic highway.
Total roadway mileage within the Southern Highlands Study Area is approximately 15,900 miles. Of this total approximately 15% forms the primary highway system (interstate routes, U. S. routes, and primary state routes). The remaining 85% of the total mileage includes secondary roads and streets both paved and unpaved.
Railroads - The Southern Highlands is served by several major railroad lines. The Southern Railway owns and maintains the majority of track mileage in the Region. Other major railroads serving the area include the Atlantic Coastline in South Carolina, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad in Georgia and North Carolina.
The Southern Railways' rail-line facility between Washington, D. C. and Atlanta, Georgia passes through the southern portion of the study area. Southern Railway also utilizes mainline routes from Asheville to Atlanta, Georgia; Knoxville, Tennessee; and Charlotte, North Carolina.
The Louisville and Nashville Railroads' two lines through the Region provide service from Atlanta, Georgia to Murphy, North Carolina and Tennessee. The Atlantic Coastline Railroad provides railroad service to Anderson, Greenville, Seneca and Walhalla in South Carolina. Several short spur lines and local railroad companies operate short sections of mileage throughout the study area.
The decline of railroad passenger volumes over the past two decades has caused the major railroads to either reduce or eliminate passenger service on most major lines. At present, passenger service is available only on the Southern Railways mainline between Washington, D. C. and Atlanta, Georgia.
Airports - Only one airport in the study area is served by major air-carriers Piedmont, Eastern and United provide service
25

to Asheville, North Carolina. Piedmont, Southern and Eastern Airlines also provide service to the Greenville-Spartanburg regional airport located just outside the study area in South Carolina.
The Atlanta Airport, having one of the highest volumes of aircraft landings in the United States, is located approximately 70 miles from the southern edge of the study area. This facility is served by most major air carriers providing service to the eastern United States.
Most municipalities or counties in the study area have at least one airport facility which is used by general aviation aircraft. In addition several private airstrips have been constructed near major recreation or private home developments in the Region.
Summary - The Southern Highlands Region's transportation system is dominated by an extensive highway network providing access to almost all portions of the study area. Several mainline railroads also pass through the Region, however, passenger service is limited to only one of these lines. Commercial air carrier service is available to the Region via Asheville Airport located in the study area and the Atlanta and Greenville-Spartanburg Airports just outside the Region.
26

'
CHAPTER III
REGIONAL EVALUATION
"The mountain area in recent years has been subjected to increasing pressures which are the result of the often conflicting needs of a society expanding in industrial development, in population, and in the recreation aspirations of its citizens. Unless these pressures are controlled by coordinated management systems, the very features of the mountain area which make it economically, aesthetically and ecologically rich will be destroyed. The General Assembly, therefore, finds that an immediate and pressing need exists to establish a comprehensive plan for the protection, preservation, orderly development, and management of the mountain area of North Carolina. " '3
This statement contained in the proposed North Carolina Mountain Area Management Act of 1973 underlies the basic challenge to which the Southern Highlands planning effort must respond. Similar concern has been expressed by the Georgia legislature in the proposed Vital Areas Act of 1974 and that state's SCORP of 1972 as well as the South Carolina Land Management Act of 1974 and its SCORP of 1970.
ISSUES
The region's recreation development potential, in fact? has been commonly recognized and there have been an abundance of recreation studies and plans by both public and private concerns during the past several decades. Virtually, all of these studies and plans, however, were done in such context that, in aggregate, probably helped to create rather than resolve the conflicting needs of the society. Thus, the validity of the tri-state joint planning effort must be measured by its relevancy to the provision of an overall framework for resolving both interstate and intrastate conflicts on the development and protection of Southern Highlands' resources base (Figure 7).
27

The Opportunities and Constraints map was compiled by an overlay process, using the factors of slope soils and flood plains. The areas which show on Figure 7 as non-shaded, and which should not be developed are those areas containing one or more of the following:
a. Slopes exceeding 16%. b. Soils with severe limitations for septic tanks. c. Floodplains as determined by alluvial soils or
historical data. d. Prime Agricultural land (SCS Class I, II and III).
In general, there are two overall issues which must be addressed by the Southern Highlands resources management planning efforts which are:
1. Beneficial Use of Resources 2. Responsiveness of Public Roles.
Beneficial Use Of Resources
"The underlying reality binding together all of Appalachia is the landform, the high ridges and great valleys of the Appalachian range which gave rise to generations of isolation from the mainstream of development in the United States..." This historical fact has resulted in a unique regional culture. This culture and the land form in which it evolved, is now perceived as an attraction by thousands of non-residents visitors to the Southern Highlands Region.
In comparison with the overall average Appalachia Region, the Southern Highlands enjoys a somewhat healthier economic situation. However, with a few exceptions, the region's industrial base is still relying heavily upon the traditional labor-intense and low-wage industries that do not contribute substantially to the improvement of the region's overall economic quality-of-life. Measuring by such indicators as regional employment and per capita personal income, the Southern Highlands plan area is lagging behind that of the individual States.
In a region with the need of economic development as a top public concern, natural resources are likely to be regarded
28

'! t

s I

r... i ^'-\%

^_

r

,^-'

t%>J

-.Jf

! v.

l_-X\.

U&
&=

"
primarily as growth commodities. Such an attitude oftentimes helps to create easy public acceptance for poorly planned or unwarranted developments and, conversely pervasive public apathy for development control or guidance measures. Unless public awareness for the need of protecting the long-range economic and scenic values of the natural resources is properly established, regions such as the Southern Highlands usually become easy prey of those developers whose primary interest is to exploit the region's resources for short-term gain.
The mountainous environment of the Southern Highlands is extremely fragile in terms of its bearing capacity for development. The excessive slopes, the highly erosive soil characteristics, and the need for water, forestry, and game management make much of the region either unsuitable or undesirable for development. Due to the scarcity of flat lands, however, developments inevitably occur in the mountains, frequently entailing deep cuts into the steep slopes and causing extensive landslides, siltation and pollution problems. In the valleys, although the topographic limitation for development is not severe, most areas are prone to suffer air pollution problems because of a high rate of air inversion.
Obviously, the needs for economic growth and environmental protection must be properly balanced. The North Carolina Council on State Goals and Policies, in recognition of the trade-offs of such needs, has declared that: "it is imperative that North Carolina continue and strengthen its efforts to attract quality growth. Therefore, we encourage a coordinated attempt to attract high wage, high technology industries that do not create an adverse environmental impact."
"North Carolina should declare a State Land Use Policy that will facilitate orderly and well planned development across the State. Encouragement should be given to the productive, economical, and beneficial use of our land resources with minimum damage to the quality of the environment .
"In Georgia, a statewide 'Vital Areas Council' of selected citizen representatives was appointed by the Executive and Legislative branches of State Government. This Council held numerous public hearings throughout the State, resulting in a 'vital areas act', proposed in the 1974 General Assembly. This
29

Act stated the following:
"The Georgia General Assembly hereby finds and declares that impact of the use of land and other resources in the entire state is a matter of concern to all citizens of Georgia in light of future economic growth and dwindling economic natural resources. The General Assembly further finds and declares that there are certain areas in this state which because of the potential impact of unwise use are of vital concern to all citizens of the state. This concern transcends local political boundaries and demands that all citizens be permitted to participate in decisions affecting these areas.
"The General Assembly further finds and declares that a balanced growth policy based on consideration of the need for economic growth with the need for conservation of essential natural resources is mandatory for the health, welfare, and public interest of the state."
In South Carolina, the implementation and enforcement of a State Land Use Policy is dependent upon having both a State Planning and Land Resource Management mechanism. The need for that mechanism and process has also received a great deal of attention by the United States Congress during the past few years. Interest by the legislators at the Federal level has resulted in the introduction of no fewer than six different land use bills, either providing for or strongly encouraging land use planning programs to be instituted by the states. (4)
Upon establishing a state planning process the administrative organization should ensure, or be enabled to ensure that:
A. A planning and management process would be instituted. B. A statement of state land use goals, objectives and
policies should be officially adopted. C. Implementation methods for the following activities
should be instituted: 1. Exercise of control over the use of critical areas; 2. Control of the use of land in areas which are or
may be impacted by major developments and facilities; 3. Ensure that local regulations don't restrict or
exclude development of public facilities or utilities of regional benefit;
30

4. Control large scale developments that are of greater than local significance in environmental impact
5. Control of the location of sources of air, water, noise or other pollution related to state land use management
6. Ensure that all state and local agency programs are not inconsistant with the state land use policy and program;
7. Periodic revision and update of the land use program and process to meet changing conditions and priorities;
8. Consolidation of the Coastal Zone Management Program under the state land use organization and program.
D. Methods of enforcement and implementation should depend on and encourage the employment of the police power and other land use controls by local governments whenever possible.
E. Authority or legislation should be enacted that would give the organization the power to prevent or control development in critical areas, or actions that would have an adverse affect on those areas.
F. An appeals mechanism should be developed for granting relief or bringing about a resolution of conflicts over state or local government decisions or actions relevant to the development of or pursuant to the state land use program.
G. Authority should be granted to enable the state land use planning organization to enter into planning and management studies with neighboring states in cases where a particular issue or land use concern is of an interstate nature.
H. Any local government or state agency submitting or using federal funds, the use of which will have significant land use implications in an area subject to the state land use program, should be required to submit a summary of the program, its plans and an environmental impact statement to the state land use organization.
I. Federal programs and activities on non-federal lands that significantly affect land use and the environment should conform to the state land use programs and policies
31

Clearly, whether a development constitutes the beneficial use of resources should be the most crucial consideration in assessing the trade-offs between economic growth and environmental protection needs. In Southern Highlands, the issue of beneficial use of resources is perhaps most evident in the recreation/tourism development sector.
For example, the annual influx of millions of tourists has stimulated the development of numerous sightseeing/amusement establishments in the vicinities of such regional recreation magnets as the Great Smokey Mountains National Park, the four national forests, Hartwell Reservoir, and the Cherokee Indian Reservation. These developments are usually located along the roadside and many are not harmonious with the aesthetic and scenic characteristics of the environment. More importantly, they have also inflicted considerable damages on the environment.
Most recreation/tourism businesses developed in scattered locations away from an established town or community do not seem to generate a significant impact to the regional economy. They provide mostly seasonal and low-wage employment and their "non-services purchase" is usually done outside of the region. In short, their contribution to the growth of the regional economic base is marginal at best.
The proliferation of countless tourism service establishments in the Southern Highlands may lead some to believe that they will help the region to capture a substantial portion of the travel dollars brought by the great influx of tourists. Studies have shown that tourists spend most of their travel monies in places with high-quality facilities to accommodate an extended stay. Obviously, a substantial portion of the tourists come into the mountains only to see but not to stay. Those who stay do not seem to spend a great deal of their money, indicating a lack of sufficient high-quality on the part of tourism service industry.
The scenic grandeur of Southern Highlands has also given rise to a flourishing second-home development market in the region. Even mountains in the most isolated corners of the region are frequently dotted by clusters of "recreation or retirement communities", both real and speculative. While some of these are well planned, many are not. At any rate, the develop-
32

ment of second-home communities in remote or scenic areas constitute invariably a large scale intrusion by man into a fragile environment with potentially grave consequences. Unless such developments are coordinated and guided by effective public measures, which is not now the case in Southern Highlands, the public utilization of certain vital natural resources may be permanently lost.
In Southern Highlands, most local governments do not have a sufficient tax base and may therefore consider the development of second-home communities in their jurisdiction a welcome addition to the source of tax revenues. However, studies have shown that developments of this nature will have fiscal impact on the local government in several ways, not all of which can be considered as a blessing. "First of all, recreation and resort complexes will generally be situated away from already established centers of population. If fire and police protection, and water and sewer services are to be provided for these developments, there will be a direct increase in the operating costs of local governments, particularly counties, in order to provide additional police patrols and firefighting capability. There will in addition be increased capital costs through outlays for fire stations and water and sewer lines and plants. If purchasers of resort lots become permanent as opposed to second-home residents, there will in addition be demand for schools and possibly parks and recreation facilities.
"Other effects are less direct. Prime examples are inflation in construction costs and increases in the value/price of land. Inflation in construction costs in the absence of Federal controls is likely to be a trend for the foreseeable future. This generally applies to the Nation as a whole. The net result is increased construction costs for all construction, including local governmental ly provided public facilities. With respect to land values/prices, the situation is much the same. Resort land has a high value/price and this increase in value/ price does not stop at the property line of the resort complex. Adjoining land increases in value in proportion to its distance from the resort area. The exact parameters of this distance decay function would be difficult to assess but for most resorts, all land within the county in which the resort complex is located appreciates in a value to a lower or higher degree.
33

The result of apprection of land values/prices is increased cost of land purchased by local governments for public facilities such as schools, water and sewage treatment plants, and the like.
Admittedly, increases in land values/prices can also increase the revenue generated by local governments by increasing the tax base. However, it is not certain whether this increase would offset nonland increases in capital and operating costs. If the tax base does not increase rapidly enough then the local governments are forced to either increase tax mileage or forego some public services. Whether the mileage is increased or the tax base is increased, the effect on the taxpayer is likely to
-- be the same higher taxes. In this case, current residents of
counties and to a lesser extent municipalities are partially subsidizing the costs of the resort development because all taxes will increase to one degree or another for all taxpayers."' 5 )
Thus, to date, it appears that developers of the recreation/ tourism industry are free to build in the Southern Highlands without having to comply with quality-control requirements. In view of the high toll that uncontrolled and poorly-planned developments may have on the environment, and the fact that developments of this nature have only questionable impact on the growth of the economy, effective means must be made available to guide developments in accordance with reasonable criteria for determining the most beneficial use of resources.
Responsiveness Of Public Roles
Currently, a profusion of public agencies at every governmental level own and operate recreation services in the Southern Highlands. In addition, various quasi-public bodies and institutions are also functioning in the region. Although their activities affect the same resources base, their policies and program objectives are often not coordinated with one another. Many, in fact, have simply no programs or directions with which to coordinate.
The Federal Government, principally through the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service and the Tennessee Valley Authority is the largest single owner of land and natural resources in the Southern Highlands. As such, plans and programs
34

:
of these Federal agencies exert perhaps the greatest influence on the overall disposition of the region's resources. All of these agencies have in fact, been carrying out extensive planning activities with considerable positive impact on the effec' tiveness of their programs. Yet, the Public Land Law Review Commission in its report to the President and the Congress, stated that
"The Congress has not established a clear set of goals for the management and use of public lands. The Congress has also failed in many cases to provide a positive mandate to the agencies to engage in land use planning or to provide guidance concerning the matters which they should consider in determining whether or not to dispose of or retain Federal lands and in deciding on uses of lands that remain in Federal ownership.
"Further, we found a lack of coordination among Federal public land management agencies at the regional and local levels, between the Federal agencies and other units of government, and between Federal agencies and the owners of adjacent private lands. We discovered problems caused by the lack of coordination between public land agencies in nearly every aspect of public land policy that we reviewed.
"Finally, we are concerned by the fact that the relative roles of Congress and the executive branch have not been clearly defined in determining land uses. The essence of land use planning is found in the classification or zoning of lands for particular uses. Congress has, in many cases, set aside large areas of public lands for parks or for other purposes. But the administering agencies also determine or limit land uses through withdrawals and land classifications. We believe that the roles of both Congress and the administrative agencies must be more clearly defined so that the limits of the discretionary powers are understood by the administrators and the public. "(6)
35

The States of South Carolina, Georgia, and North Carolina as the basic sovereign entities over the land and natural resources of the Southern Highlands region are currently providing only limited services and leadership regarding the use of such resources.
"North Carolina presently has no state policy for guiding new communities and large scale planned developments. In the absence of such a position, the current state role could be described as one of reaction and permissiveness. Private developers need only satisfy local regulations, which are by no means uniformly effective in protecting statewide interests, in order to go ahead with their projects. The present policy vacuum has been made evident by the boom in recreation and second -home projects in the mountains. While these projects consume valuable land resources, state policy plays no role in their planning nor does the state even maintain a systematic record of their characteristics and growth. Some local and regional public agencies maintain an oversight and coordination role, but the chief decision factor is the private real estate market. "(7)
The North Carolina Council on State Goals and Policies has articulated a common concern of all three states:
"The State of North Carolina in very large part has entrusted the responsibility to its local governments. This has been done through local planning enabling laws. The legislation in no way requires that local government prepare, adopt and administer subdivision regulations, zoning, floodway protection regulations, sedimentation control ordinances, environmental impact statement procedures, or other development regulations. Local units are empowered to do so if they wish. The picture presented is a cloudy one, at best, for several reasons. First, the quality of many local ordinances is such that their existence and application have little effect upon develop-
36

.

(

ment. Second, although ordinances have been adopted in a number of localities, they often are set aside, regarded lightly, or administered haphazardly due to economic pressures and the influence of special interests. And third, the directions in which communities normally grow are into unincorporated suburban areas. In many cases, the enforcement of land-use guidance codes in these growth areas is either handled by the counties or it is nonexistent. " 8 >
The State of South Carolina does not have a policy on growth and development at this time. However, the following policy criteria are proposed: (9)
(1) An attempt to ascertain the capability of the land for development which will make the best use of the State's resources while minimizing waste or destruction of irreplaceable values.
(2) Land areas of natural, historic, cultural or ecological value which possess a high natural resource value or are limited by physical characteristics may require, in the State's interest the restriction of the range of development possibilities open to the landowner.
(3) Development activities and settlement patterns must be guided to protect against wasteful use of natural resources and an inadequate provision of public services and facilities.
(4) Public water and sewer facilities should be located so as to shape development in a manner consistent with State policy.
(5) Large scale commercial development should be planned and controlled so as to limit sprawl, improve design, reduce conflict with other uses and eliminate traffic hazards
(6) The development and expansion of public utility facilities and services should occur within existing highway or public utility rights-of-way corridors, to the extent possible, in order to reduce the physical and visual impact on the landscape from transportation and utility systems and achieve greater efficiency in the expenditure of public funds.
(7) Development which is responsible for unique or large
37

amounts of wastes should be planned only if it can be demonstrated that methods are available to assimilate satisfactorily such wastes or that the public can feasibly finance the disposal method.
Judging from the current status of the public roles in Southern Highlands, it is clear that the Southern Highland planning effort must strive to lay a foundation for a collective public trusteeship capable of enunciating and implementing public goals on a multi-state regional basis.
THE EMERGING INTERSTATE POLICY STRUCTURE FOR RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
The tri-state planning effort for Southern Highlands has made clear that the three states share the same mountain resources base. The socio-economic characteristics of the region are similar in all three states. Significantly, the three states are also confronted with similar development demands and problems in the region. However, the extent of available governmental policies, programs, and institutions in each state is far from similar to the others. Unless the three states can define a common ground for policy coordination, the efforts of any single state in managing its resources in the region will be frustrated by the conflicts and inconsistencies with the others.
Consequently, the Tri-State Council has recommended that the three states jointly enunciate that:
(1) The highlands region's resources base be so managed as to achieve a rational balance between its development and conservation.
(2) A continuing interstate working arrangement be maintained to coordinate the development and conservation of resources in the highlands region.
(3) Coordinated state guidance systems with uniform criteria for such terms as "key developments" and "critical environmental areas" be made available to help develop the region's resources as a growth industry.
(4) A system of interstate environmental protective areas be established to promote the conservation of vital natural resources in the highlands region.
38

(5) An interstate "Natural/Scenic Land Trust" be established to facilitate the proper acquisition of privately-owned lands designated for conservation and public development.
(6) Local and regional governmental units be properly empowered and assisted to exercise their vital roles in guiding coordinated developments.
(7) A workable Federal-state resources planning and management partnership be defined and implemented.
(8) The private recreation development sector be encouraged to coordinate and self-regulate the quality of its developments
(9) The development of scenic roads and trails be properly guided and innovative means be employed to balance the needs of providing recreation access and protecting the region's fragile scenic resources.
Specifically, the Tri-State Council has adopted the following statements of recommended policies with objectives to be accomplished through current and future joint planning efforts:
I. Overall Policies
A. The States of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina recognize their fraternal bond as the trustee of the Southern Highlands region's significant and unique resources and declare that these resources must be managed with the utmost prudence to achieve a rational balance between their development and conservation.
Objectives ;
1. Define the region's significant and unique resources (natural, economic and human)
2. Establish criteria for determining the balance between development and conservation.
*3. Outline means, procedures, and responsibilities for achieving and maintaining such a balance.
B. The States of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina further recognizes the needs for a permanent and working organization to coordinate the
39

.
development and conservation of resources in the Southern Highlands and seek to encourage establishment of such an organization.
Objectives :
1. Define issues requiring interstate and federalstate resolutions.
2. Outline the purposes and general context of an appropriate legal mechanism such as an interstate compact.
II. Management Policies
A. Conservation Policies
1. The States recognize that strong and workable legal measures are needed to afford effective protection of certain vital resources in the Southern Highlands and will seek to designate a coordinated system of Natural Protective Areas within which appropriate conservation measures may be implemented by law.
Objectives :
a. Establish criteria for natural protective areas (wild rivers,, wilderness, etc.)
b. Determine current deficiencies in Federal and State laws for the designation and implementation of such areas.
c. Outline means needed to eradicate the deficiencies as determined in (b)
The States further recognize that sufficient public funding resources must be available to properly compensate those private owners of areas designated for conservation and will seek to facilitate the acquisition and preservation of such privately owned areas.
40

.
Objectives :
a. Establish conceptual and structural context of the "Regional Natural/Scenic Land Trust".
*b. Establish criteria for lands or areas eligible or suitable for inclusion into the Trust.
*c. Outline means for implementing the Trust.
B. Historical Elements
1. The States of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina further recognize the need to consider historic sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant to history, architecture, archeology, and culture in planning for the wise use of the Southern Highlands Region.
Objectives :
*a. Seek to identify the above "man-made elements" (National Register, State Historic Plan, special studies, SCORP, etc.)
**b. Develop criteria to help determine man-made elements' worthiness within context of overall Southern Highlands Plan (this is to be done with assistance of respective state agencies responsible for "historic preservation" programs as well as SLO)
**c. Analyze identified man-made elements using criteria to determine worthiness for preservation within context of overall plans for the region and sub-region.
**d. Consider specific man-made elements for high priority treatment and recommend appropriate actions. (By responsibility, possible source of financial and technical assistance, etc.)
C. Development Policies
1. The States adopt the guiding principle of developing the recreation resources in the Southern Highlands as a regional growth in-
41

dustry and will establish a common development priority guidance system designed to be responsive to national market demand.
Objectives
*a. Define the means to improve and ensure the marketability of recreation resources in the Southern Highlands.
*b. Develop criteria for determining development priorities,
c. Outline components and operational procedures of the development priority guidance system (encompassing planning and regulatory measures)
The States recognize the vital role of their respective local governmental units and regional agencies in guiding development and will seek to implement coordinated measures to empower and enable local and regional agencies in the Southern Highlands to take concerted actions for exercising their proper roles.
Objectives ;
*a. Define the roles of local and regional governmental agencies in guiding recreation resources development.
*b. Determine the current deficiencies on the part of local and regional agencies in exercising their roles as defined in (a)
*c. Outline Measures needed to eradicate the deficiencies as determined in (b)
The States consider recreation resources development in the Southern Highlands to be inseparable from the respective statewide overall development processes and will coordinate the timing and scope of their respective statewide investment /development programs to assure the proper germination of needed recreational developments in the Southern Highlands.
42

Objectives :
*a. Define the necessary prerequisites and/or supportive state roles for developing selected recreation resources areas in the Southern Highlands.
**b. Determine the constraints on the part >f state agencies in exercising their roles as defined in item (a)
**c. Outline means for coordinating recreational development in the Southern Highlands with the overall statewide investment/development processes or practices of the three states
The States recognize the limitations of the public sector in fostering orderly development in the Southern Highlands and will call upon the private recreation/tourism industry to form a voluntary development council or coalition to coordinate and self-regulate the quality of its developments.
Objectives
**a. Define the roles of the private industry in ensuring qualitative developments in the Southern Highlands.
**b. Outline means for encouraging the private sector to take necessary voluntary actions for exercising the roles as defined in (a).
The States recognize both the stakt and the responsibility of the Federal Government in developing the recreation resources in the Southern Highlands and will seek to establish a functionable working state-federal partnership through which the various agencies of the Federal Government may act in concert with the three states.
43

...
Objectives ;
**a. Define the roles of the Federal Government in developing the recreation resources in the Southern Highlands.
**b. Define specific actions needed on the part of various federal agencies in connection with the development of various recreation terminal complexes, recreation corridors and the like.
**c. Describe the deficiencies on the part of the Federal Government in exercising the roles and undertaking the actions as defined in (a) and (b)
**d. Outline the conceptual and structural context of a working state-federal partnership for the development of recreation resources in the Southern Highlands.
6. The States deem such developments such as large-scale second-home communities, major impoundments, theme parks, and others as having interstate impacts on the pattern and trend of land use and public expenditures and will seek to establish uniform guidelines to cope with the issues and problems stemming from such developments
Objectives :
*a. Define the impacts and implications of such phenomena on the development of recreation resources in the Southern Highlands.
**b. Define the criteria for uniform development guidelines for the phenomena mentioned above,
**c. Outline means to implement such uniform guidelines
7. The States consider it vital to develop a system of scenic highways and trails in the Southern Highlands and will seek to coordinate their legislative and administrative efforts, both mutually and with that of the Federal
44

Government and private groups, to facilitate the systematic development of these highways and trails.
Objectives
*a. Determine needs for a scenic highway and trails system in the Southern Highlands.
*b. Establish criteria for scenic highway and trail system development.
*c. Outline means to coordinate the system development with the phasing of major highway and transportation facilities, and all other relevant development activities in the Southern Highlands.
8. The States consider the provision of a multimodal transportation system that provides adequate external and internal accessibility to be of vital importance to the general wellbeing of the region and will seek to employ all available means, including innovative technologies and concepts, to examine the transportation opportunities of both the people of Southern Highlands and their visitors
Objectives ;
**a. Outline the criteria for adequate accessibility, both internal and external.
**b. Evaluate alternative transportation modes based upon the criteria.
**c. Outline measures needed for improvement.
45

CHAPTER IV
TRI-STATE SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS PLAN
"The Appalachian Highlands, running from New York State down to northern Georgia, is a sparsely populated section of the region whose economic potential is closely allied to its natural beauty. Numerous studies have documented the fact that the demand for recreation facilities in America is growing, particularly in areas close to the eastern megalopolis. Due to the Highlands' proximity to the eastern metropolitan centers and its natural attractions in the way of unspoiled nature, mountains and lakes, this rugged area, whose terrain precludes much industrial development, is thus a logical target for the development of recreation as an industry." (10)
These words, written in connection with the Appalachian Highlands as a whole, hold equally true for the study area. The primary market area for the Appalachian Highlands has been defined by the Appalachian Regional Commission to include all of the eastern United States east of Lake Michigan, the IllinoisIndiana border and the Mississippi River, except Louisiana and south Florida. While the relatively limited scope of the Southern Highlands planning effort preclude an in-depth definition of the interstate recreation market area for the Southern Highlands, visitation data relating to major recreation attractions in the region indicate that visitors to the region are drawn from metropolitan areas in all South-eastern States and several Midwestern States as well.
THE MARKET AREA AND ITS DEMAND
Studies by the Appalachian Regional Commission indicate that the total recreation demand generated within the primary market area for the Appalachian Highlands amounted to 1.25 billion activity-days in 1970 and will increase by 44% to 1.8 billion in 1985. Because of competitive factors, however, only a small fraction of this market demand is being actually met
46

.
by recreation attractions in Appalachian Highlands. Nevertheless, with attractions existing as of 1970, an estimated 42 million visitor -days of the market share were captured by fourteen selected "rec-reation terminal complexes" in Appalachian Highlands, generating an estimated $477 million in visitor expenditures. With certain improvements to the attractiveness of recreation facilities, the 1970 market share of the fourteen complexes in Appalachian Highlands can be nearly doubled by 1985 to 81 million visitor -days , or $921 million in visitory expenditures
The market demand trend for the Appalachian Highlands as a whole, of course, can only be regarded as a general indication of the market potential of the Southern Highlands. Without the benefit of a thorough interstate market analysis, the Tri-State Council concluded that it was appropriate at this planning effort to make regional application of the results of North Carolina's analysis of the economic impact of the tourism/recreation industry in its portion of the Southern Highlands.
Analysis Objectives
The central issue to be determined is the economic consequences of various types of tourism-recreation-second-home development alternatives upon the twenty-seven county Southern Highlands Region. In accordance with such a definition of the issue, the following four objectives have been established for the analysis:
(1) To determine the pattern and trend of the recreation investment /development market in the Southern Highlands;
(2) To estimate the magnitudes and distribution of the direct economic effects of various types of recreation enterprise development in the Southern Highlands;
(3) To recommend recreation development priorities on the basis of the above estimates;
(4) To assess the feasibility of developing recreation corridors, recreation terminal complexes, and tourist service centers in the Southern Highlands.
Size Of The Industry
The "industry" which services the tourism-recreation-second
47

..
home development market in the Southern Highlands Region has been defined as those firms which make up the following business groups: 1) hotels and motels, 2) campgrounds, 3) eating and drinking places, 4) recreation and/or amusement places, 5) service stations, 6) firms which have important interests in secondhome developments, and 7) other. The compiled universe of firms, 1,118, comprised the industry in the eleven-county North Carolina Southern Highlands Region.
Basic Concepts and Methodology
Although the analysis was based on information pertaining only to North Carolina, it was felt that the pattern and the impacts of the recreation/tourism industry in North Carolina are both indict ive and implicative of that of the entire region.
The basic premise underlying this study is found in the export base theory in that the impetus for regional economic growth stems from sales made by the region to buyers located outside the region. Such sales bring in "outside money" to support markets for and jobs in local enterprises. These sales include both tangible goods, such as agricultural and industrial products, and intangibles, such as recreation services sold to tourists. Although export base theory has been thoroughly critiqued and must be used with a degree of caution, it has found relatively wide acceptance as a planning tool, and the basic premise is to be found in almost all regional economic projections
Following export base theory, it is assumed that the autonomous factor giving rise to economic growth in the eleven-county North Carolina Southern Highlands Region is external sales, i.e. , sales to buyers outside the region. Each dollar of external sales generates more than one dollar of income in the region if that dollar, or some portion of it, is spent locally to purchase supplies and/or labor. If the worker spends a part of his paycheck locally and/or if export firms buy some of their supplies locally, then local merchants also realize income from the original dollar of external sales. Thus, a dollar of external sales may turn over several times before it gradually "leaks" out of the region through purchases made from external suppliers
48

)
Sources of Data
Data used in this study have been obtained from two sources 1) published and unpublished data collected by various Federal and State agencies; and 2) a sample survey of business firms conducted in the summer of 1973 (Appendix C .
Result of Analysis
The analysis revealed that considerable growth has occured in the Recreation/Tourism industry in North Carolina's Southern Highlands over the past five to ten years. For campgrounds and recreation/amusement places, both government -operated and commercial, this growth appears to have been concentrated in the larger firms, i.e . , those firms with annual attendance figures of 5,000 or more persons. In addition, it appears that, as of 1970, the Region had a relatively greater concentration of vacation and/or second homes than both the State of North Carolina as a whole and the eight states comprising the South Atlantic Region. Some growth, too, has occurred in the number of eating and drinking places. Employment by the industry has also increased, especially in recreation/amusement places and hotels and lodging places. Annual wages of employees in the industry, however, are low in comparison with the state and the national average.
The sales to tourists, employment, payrolls, tax payments, and non-labor outlays accounted for by motels and hotels, eating and drinking places, and service stations taken together far exceed those accounted for by recreation/amusement places, campgrounds, and "other" firms in aggregate. The potential first-round or direct impacts of the industry on the economy of North Carolina's Southern Highlands in terms of employment, payrolls, tax payments, and non-labor outlays per $100 of sales to tourists and non-residents are as follows:
(1) It appears that most employment would be created in eating and drinking places.
(2) When employment and payrolls are considered in tandem, the most positive effect per $100 of sales appears to be associated with recreation/amusement places.
(3) Motels and hotels, service stations, recreation/amusements places, campgrounds, and "other" firms in
49

.

.

aggregate appears to generate relatively more tax payments than eating and drinking places and secondhome development firms in aggregate. (4) It appears that the largest impact the industry has on its local supplies is resulting from sales by service stations, campgrounds, eating and drinking places, and "other" establishments, in that order. (5) The above four types of establishments appear to exhibit the strongest trade linkages with the local economy.
Recreation/amusement places appear to have the weakest linkage with the local economy and motels and hotels appear to lie somewhere between these two extremes
Implications For Development Priorities
The recreation/tourism business is characterized by seasonal demand and susceptibility to business cycles and weather. It is quite often a hazardous undertaking, and it usually means relatively low pay scales, seasonal employment, and uncertainty regarding how much expenditure and income will accrue to local people
Given the nature of the recreation/tourism business, it is important that investment decisions be guided by sound development priority consideration. Analysis revealed that the amount of recreation expenditures is first influenced by the distribution pattern of "tourist destination" areas. There are usually a full spectrum of tourist services in these destination locations which allow for maximum economic benefit from the tourist outlay. Another type of expenditure pattern identified is related to the distribution of "way stations". Here expenditures are usually dominated by transportation outlays. The third factor is the distribution of "pass -through areas" which usually receive only minimal tourist expenditure. Results of the analysis indicated that the economic leakage from the recreation/ tourism industry to the local economic base is greatest in areas of "recreation destination" and least in "pass-through areas"
The greatest development priority, then, should perhaps be given to those "pass -through" areas to enable them to eventually
50

.
become "tourist destination" areas. For only in "tourist destination" areas will adequate return by private investment be possible.
This is made clear by the analysis finding that motels and hotels in Southern Highlands accommodate the increased volume of tourists primarily with larger-sized establishments. Obviously, the recreation/tourism business is not the only market to which this group of firms caters. Since this element of the industry is dependent upon private investment and if an adequate return on investment is to be accompanied by reciprocal growth in employment and the overall economic base, it appears that these facilities should be encouraged to locate only in areas that have a viable economic base or are capable of developing the
same.
PLAN ALTERNATIVES
In formulating plan alternatives for the Southern Highlands, the Tri-State Council began its consideration with an assessment of the concept of Recreation Terminal Complexes developed by the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) through a 1967 study on the recreation potential of the entire Appalachian Highlands.
The study identified 23 multi-county areas in the Appalachian Highlands "where a number of factors {substantial amounts of public lands, existing public and private developments, water resources and accessibility) indicated that outstanding possibilities existed for developing recreation as an industry." These areas were named "terminal recreation complexes".
Of these 23 complexes, 14 were studied in detail by ARC to determine their recreation potential and economic feasibility. Of these 14 complexes for which plans for development were prepared by ARC, two are located in the Southern Highlands (the Upper Hiwassee River Complex encompassing a seven-county area of northern Georgia and southwestern North Carolina and the Hartwell-Keowee-Toxaway Complex encompassing a six-county area in Georgia and South Carolina)
The Tri-State Council first considered to adopt the plans prepared by ARC for the Upper Hiwassee River Complex and the
51

s
Hartwell-Keowee-Toxaway Complex without any modifications or additions. This alternative was rejected because the "complexes" as defined by ARC are too broad for a meaningful application of the various resources management policies and strategies being formulated by the Council.
The Council then considered a second alternative which would entail the adoption of ARC plans for the two aforementioned complexes and in addition, the development of similar plans for three other "complexes" (Sidney Lanier-Allatoona in Georgia, Cherokee-Fontana and Asheville-Upper French Broad in North Carolina) identified but not studied in detail by ARC. This alternative, too, was rejected for the same reasons as the first alternative.
As a third alternative, the Council considered the total abandonment of ARC * s recreation terminal complex concept. Although this approach would enable the Council to exercise a great extent of flexibility in determining plan proposals, such proposals would have been formulated out of the context of ARC ' market demand analysis which underlined the rationales of the recreation terminal complex concept. Thus, this alternative was also rejected.
Finally, the Council concluded that a fourth alternative of developing plans for managing Southern Highlands' recreation resources within the general geographical and marketability context of all five ARC complexes with emphasis in policies and strategies applicable at the state-level. This final alternative was considered as best meeting the objectives of the tri-state Southern Highlands planning effort and was therefore, selected by the Tri-State Council as a basis for developing the Optimum Plan.
Guidelines for Development of Optimum Plan
In further defining this selected plan alternative, the study area's development bearing capabilities were analyzed in terms of its soil conditions, topographical features, existing water and forestry resources, and finally, areas of unique natural qualities. As a result, a "development opportunities and constraints" guide (Figure 7) was developed to indicate those areas in which intensive-use recreation development should not be permitted to occur. In addition, a "land use guidelines model" (Appendix D) was developed to assist in the analysis of
52

land characteristics in Southern Highlands. This process entailed evaluation of the following:
a) Capability of land use refers to the degree to which different land uses are capable of forming a complementary mixture, such that neither use detracts nor is altered by characteristics inherent in other uses of the landscape.
b) Natural determinants analysis includes an evaluation as to whether the land can be used for development according to slope, soil characteristics, rainfall, flood plain, water quality and unique, natural and wilderness areas. This evaluation determines the land which from a logical and evaluation standpoint, should not be disturbed from its natural state.
c) Impact refers to the effect development will have upon the natural determinants if allowed to proceed without proper guidelines and standards.
To summarize, the three states have developed the Optimum Plan within the general context of the five "recreation terminal complexes" as identified by ARC. However, the broad multicounty areas included in these "complexes" were analyzed in detail as to their development bearing capacities and unique natural and scenic qualities. In doing so, the states have also interjected into the process their common as well as respective policies and strategies for managing their recreation and other resources in the Southern Highlands.
THE OPTIMUM PLAN
The primary purpose of the Tri-State Southern Highlands Plan is to calibrate the policies adopted by the Tri-State Council with the possible future courses of actions to be taken by the States of North Carolina, Georgia, and South Carolina with regard to development and protection of recreation resources in the Southern Highlands. (Figure 8) It is recognized that actions prescribed by each of the three states will vary from the others in accordance with its own program emphasis and thrusts but the objectives of such actions will be consistent with the common policy posture as adopted by the Tri-State Council
Specifically, the Southern Highlands Optimum Plan is to achieve the following objectives:
(1) To designate environmental protective areas.
53

oo

V

S

LU

x*\ *
l-

>r^*\r~~ I

Vj

/<

\

.
O

/I
J rk / I I Hr

_^^ V ^~\J NJlV^ f S-^


N\ < jj^

r'

=D CD
U~

P\ \\

^^x>*

J \

x

\ y*s_^ ^C~^

/
f /'

lir

1

gl

--^^_J^*^r

/*

^<L$r

^--A\^ \ \
--.

^^"-----v

I

'

^st
)

^

& *tv^v L^ ^y^y

\(\< y^_^_s*i*s

j

V-4HP \^xZj y^t

\N

1

V

\^J>c

M\! ,,

-- -- *"

X

~>-/ ^A ^

x^_^~-X --~--

J Wjsr^-

jKr""*\,

^*

S-^% N

X-

;
-

L*i"

W^~^V f^ \<J^
\

' ^Xr->

-J J"^-*

**

I\

^U-^^ \

-J 1 v&,,

y'^

*i

r/\ 1

vJL^ g ^--^^^^

< St ^ ^^^fe

S*~N^^C%/

' ">l

-- A r^-

Ij 4

s

1

T/

N^

fi^JC

g^r~^j0 XN. 5 J^^i -i -X^J;

J

J

1/

/r4f

1

\

i f--/&

1/ \ ?/
7 NS

r
^^xV /_27---^~--f-^

Wfyi
^

\ttr

/ i

"i^

Ai vJ^L-

/J-J

Ns

^^kJLr*

Ns -,

\|^ 1 /^ x

\ i ST

Sr */ ^^^iTy

1

7

x V f=

V ?v

7 ^^JKyWgF^

v

-I

sL

^ oi

f\ J

( r^

o\\^^ -

< L&&

^7>ctjH,-

'Sja

^Y-^C^KTS^O ^

/ /_w;

el

f\fv vS fO s s

j\ \

\ u, i \3

*1
-

-- ^-r--- X_

1

\

' \-fr \

1

ij 4

J/

1
$*/v# """ILr

A 1
\\

X,v L

h '"V v I "-

\

--^\

>

y
%
X.

rr \ ! 1 /si
cJ^y III %

s^\ ">

0^

J?/ ^ I

'

\

/-"V 1 *

>^

\^T

-^v^/^^e-TV J~^)r\ ^\p^Jffi

u ^s*2T .



c

o

D(0 CO
C 0.

J

E 3

ill

2 >n0ptim

1&

1
3

hernHig

i
H\
ill

ill!!!!

1 I S w a

' i

1

!

1

!

1

l

1

s\
V/

iV

y%$*^ s

!

*oni~- /

^J

j

/tK

j i
!l lii S3
J
'fy-

(

!

i

~-- Li-ra/ -TM

W _af

t\ /
14/
'jy<^. - - _
\ KV

/

/

^^a /
/ \

\

alfjjj

i ^^ N

Vv **
i

^/Y^.

ihlii
tijtli

.
(2) To establish guidelines and standards for developmental elements.
(3) To prescribe measures needed for implementation.
Environmental Protective Areas
Environmental Protective Areas include the following:
(1) All natural areas defined and delineated (see Appendix
B).
(2) All areas with slopes exceeding 16%. (3) All areas within the 100 year flood plains. (4) All wilderness areas as designated by the 1964 Wilder-
ness Act and any amendments thereof; and/or any appropriate state legislation. (5) All areas within one-half mile of the banks of any wild and/or scenic rivers designated by state and/or federal legislation. (6) All areas within one-half mile of the right-of-way of any parkway or the boundaries of a national or state park. (7) All areas within any present or proposed wildlife refuge or preserve as identified by each state. (8) All areas which are or may be identified as prime agricultural lands by each state.
It is proposed that all land and natural resources within these environmental protective areas, except those to be included as a part of a planned "development element" or a planned state park, be kept free from man-made development of any kind until such time when permissable uses in these areas are designated by each State through appropriate legislation.
Developmental Elements
Developmental elements include regional gateways, scenic roads, scenic trails, recreation development corridors, recreation centers, tourist service centers and planned recreation communities
Consistency with State Development Policy and Investment Guidelines. Actions taken by any State or local public agency relating to any of the development ele-
54

.

:

merits shall be required to conform with existing and applicable state development policies and investment guidelines.
To accomplish this objective, the States have proposed as a policy that the flow of public investment funds, both federal and state, for water and sewer facilities, schools, recreation facilities, hospitals, roads, etc. will be controlled and channeled into designated growth centers and major recreation areas to support continuing expansion of jobs and population growth of these centers.
In North Carolina, former Governor Robert W. Scott in March 1972 issued the first Statewide Development Policy which among other things, designated a system of growth centers throughout the state. The objective of the policy was to develop effect tive state local decision-making mechanisms to guide public fundings for water and sewer facilities, schools, hospitals, roads, etc., into these designated growth centers in order to support their continuing expansion of jobs and population growth
This Statewide Development Policy has been incorporated into and supplemented the North Carolina Appalachian Investment
-- Plan FY 1974 by Governor James E. Holshouser, Jr. in July 1973.
Growth centers in the Southern Highlands recognized by this investment plan are the following:
Regional Centers: Waynesvilie-Canton, Asheville
Area Centers: Franklin, Sylva, Murphy, Hendersonville, Brevard
Urban Centers: Cullowhee, Andrews, Bryson City, Black Mountain, Mars Hill
Government Centers Robbinsville, Hayesville, Marshall
Employment Centers Cherokee
55

For the purposes of the Southern Highland Optimum Plan, these growth centers were analyzed as to their strategic locations relative to major man-made and natural recreation resources and their relative development bearing capacities. This analysis resulted in the selection of the following growth centers as the geographical focuses for any future recreation development activities that may stem from the Southern Highlands Optimum Plan:
Asheville Black Mountain Brevard Bryson City Cherokee Franklin Hendersonville Robbinsville Waynesvi lie-Canton
d
In terms of the Southern Highlands Optimum Plan, the growth centers in South Carolina were analyzed as to their strategic locations relative to major man-made and natural recreation resources and their development bearing capacities. This analysis resulted in the following growth centers being selected for future recreation development activities:
Anderson Greenville Clems on Pickens Easley Walhalla Seneca Salem Cleveland Starr Pendleton Pelzer
Thus, it is proposed that all development elements be encouraged through public investment, regulations, and other appropriate means to take place only as a part of the growth centers
56

and major recreation areas in South Carolina. These growth centers are, in turn, designated as "Recreation Development Target Centers .
Development Priority Measured by Economic Support to Growth Centers. An Analysis was made of North Carolina's portion of the Southern Highlands region to determine the extent of impact that the tourism/recreation industry has on the local economy. Results of the analysis indicated that, on the basis of the extent of employment and other measurable contributions to the local economic base, varied development priorities can be assigned to those growth centers.
The economic impact analysis revealed that the amount of recreation expenditures is first influenced by the distribution pattern of tourist "nodal" or " destination centers ." There are usually a full spectrum of tourist services in these nodal and destination locations which allow for maximum economic benefit from the tourist outlay. Another type of expenditure pattern identified is related to the distribution of "way stat ions " Here expenditures are usually dominated by transportation outlays. The factor influencing the recreation expenditure pattern is referred to as " pass-through areas ". These counties are characterized by virtually no tourist expenditure. That expenditure which does occur is usually confined to food and transportation. Results of the analysis indicated that the economic leakage from the tourism/recreation industry to the local economic base is greatest in areas comprised of recreation nodal and destination centers and least in pass through areas.
It was found that of the eleven counties in North Carolina's Southern Highlands region, Buncombe, Haywood and Swain Counties could be considered as recreation nodal and destination areas; Henderson, Jackson, and Macon Counties could be considered as way-station areas, and the remainder five counties could only be considered pass-through areas.
Thus, on the basis of economic impact, the "growth centers" for North Carolina are assigned a priority ranking as follows:
57

First Priority
Robinsville Brevard
Second Priority
Franklin Hendersonville
Third Priority
Waynesville-Canton Bryson City Cherokee Asheville Black Mountain
In Georgia, three separate types of development centers were identified and defined, using both attractiveness and vulnerability criteria. Attractiveness criteria included factors such as quantity and quality of access, economic and cultural base (including market area), water resources, and nearby recreation attractions. Vulnerability criteria included factors such as unstable soils, steep slopes, flood plains, wildlife habitats, rare or unique vegetation, and fragile or unique natural areas. The three types of development centers thus defined differ both in function and in scale. They include:
Regional Growth Centers - A regional growth center possesses a relatively well balanced economic base and an urban infrastructure (i.e., roads, utility, housing stock, retail shopping, educational, medical and other service facilities) of a quality scale sufficient to be relatively self sustaining. Tourism is a factor in the economy, but not the dominant factor. Consequently, location on a major tourist route is not as important as for county and village service centers.
County Service Centers - These are smaller in scale than regional growth centers but serve a variety of economic functions, In general, a county growth center will be a county seat, located at the intersection of two or more state and federal highways. County development centers are located directly on major and
58

minor tourist routes. They are located near, but not in regional recreation resources. In terms of future development, county development centers are well suited for food, lodging, and transportation related facilities.
Village Service Center - The concept of a Village Service Center was first promulgated in the planning for the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The concept called for a village adjacent to the national park whose function was to provide food, lodging, auto service and repair, amusements and sale of recreational equipment to visitors to the park. While the two regional examples, Gatlinburg and Cherokee have each become overbuilt and congested, the original concept remains valid, given proper planning and suitable design criteria. Thus, in Georgia, a village service center is defined to be a small scale urban area whose function is primarily the care and feeding of tourists. Some village service centers have been located in environmentally constrained areas.
Georgia Towns defined by the above criteria include:
Regional Growth Centers - Toccoa - This upper Piedmont Town serves the primary function of a regional manufacturing and distribution center. It serves a portion of the Lake Hartwell area, and also serves to an extent as a gateway to the mountains.
Chatsworth - This Conasauga Valley town comprises a portion of the Dalton growth area, which in turn comprises a portion of the Dalton-Chattanooga Growth area. The economic base of Chatsworth is primarily carpet manufacturing. The nearby area contains many recreational amenities such as the proposed Cohutta Wilderness Area and Fort Mountain State Park. Both are located within the Chattahoochee National Forest. Should the proposed Dalton Reservoir be constructed on the Conasauga River, the growth in the Chatsworth area will be further stimulated due to the recreation and water supply potential of the reservoir.
County Service Centers - The following towns are county seats and county centers of trade. Each is located more or less in the center of the county and has a relatively plentiful supply of land suitable for development. Each is located at the intersection of State and Federal highways, either adjacent to or near the Chattahoochee National Forest. Together, these towns
59

and the roads connecting them from a ring around the Blue Ridge Mountain County development Centers include:

Intermountain Valley:

Clayton Hiawassee (and Lake Chatuge) Blairsville (and Lake Nottely) Blue Ridge (and Lake Blue Ridge) Ellijay

Upland Piedmont:

Jasper Dawsonville Dahlonega Cleveland Clarkesville

Village Service Centers - Helen: This old logging town is located adjacent to the Chattahoochee National Forest, the Chattahoochee River, and Unicoi Recreation Experiment Station. Within the past 5 years, Helen has been renovated on an Alpine Village motif. All of these factors combined given Helen one of the greatest attractiveness potentials in the region. However, the town is severely constrained environmentally by its location in a river valley flood plain.

Mount Oglethorpe Area : The southern terminus of the Blue Ridge Mountains has attracted two of the regions largest second home/resort communities, totaling over 12,000 acres. While this area is not an incorporated town, the second home communities, when built out, will constitute a de facto "new town". It appears likely that commercial facilities will follow the second home and resort development to serve the Mount Oglethorpe area. In terms of attractiveness/vulnerability, the area is both highly attractive to recreation oriented development and highly vulnerable to most types of man made development.

Priority - First priority was given to those areas which possessed high attractiveness and low vulnerability potentials in terms of recreational development. The two regional growth centers both meet the vulnerability criteria. However, their attractiveness for recreation oriented development is not as great as some of the other areas. In addition, the two regional growth centers are presently relatively prosperous in regional

60

terms. The two village service centers were determined to have a high attractiveness potential, but also a high vulnerabilitypotential, since the sites are severely constrained both by flood plains and steep slopes.

It was determined that the county service centers best meet both the vulnerability and attractiveness criteria. The specific areas include:

Clayton Hiawassee Blairsville Ellijay Jasper

Daws onvi lie Dahlonega Cleveland Clarkesville

Regional Gateways

The economic viability of recreation developments in the Southern Highlands depends on their accessibility from the primary market areas. Therefore, it is vital that all development elements be assured of adequate linkage with the major gateways throughout the region.

For the purpose of the Southern Highlands Optimum Plan, the following transportation facilities are designated as the Southern Highlands Regional Gateways:
-- South Carolina SC 11, US 276, US 25, SR 107, SR 171,
Interstate 85.
-- Georgia Natural physiographic transportation corridors in
the landscape including:

Ga5 (links the towns of Jasper, Ellijay and Blue Ridge with Atlanta and North Carolina providing a North-South corridor through the western portion of the region.)

US 441 (links the Great Smoky Mountains with Atlanta, and with the state of Florida providing a North-South corridor through the Eastern portion of the region, via Clayton and Clarkesville)

61

Ga2/us 76 (links the intermountain valleys of Hiawassii, Blairsville and Morgant own/Blue Ridge with US 441 and Ga5, providing an East-West corridor along the North slope of the Blue Ridge.)

Ga 115/52/53

(links the towns of Clarkesville, Cleveland, Dahlonega, and Dawsonville with Ga5 and US 441, providing an East-West corridor along the south slope of the Blue Ridge.)

-- North Carolina Appalachian corridors A and K, the Blue
Ridge Parkway, Interstate Highways Routes 40 and 26 and all highways on the North Carolina Primary Highway System are designated as Southern Highlands Regional Gateways.

Development Highway Alternatives - Based on the least environmentally damaging route, (least critically erodable slope, soil rainfall route, least damaging to the headwaters, least damaging to fish/wildlife and natural recreation concerns) , Appalachian 400 would best fit the land via alternate 1 along the state route 5 corridor. Based on social/economic development, this route will serve the greater number of county seats and centers of trade. It should provide the greater influence of stability for planned growth in the most areas which have been experiencing outmigration of primary labor force in the age bracket 21 through 29.
Also, any other north-south development highway corridor would fit the land best along the U.S. 441 route from Cornelia through Clayton Georgia to the North Carolina line and Franklin, North Carolina.
The longer range alternatives to both of these development highways might be rail in view of the energy implications.
62

Blue Ridge Parkway Alternatives -
(1) A Blue Ridge Crest Route or A Rim Cut Route was considered because of adverse impacts on the scarce-natural and mountain wilderness resource. The limited resource makes up the center price of the natural attractions in the Georgia portion of the region. It is less than 3% of the state, and it has over 500 miles of black topped, potentially scenic roads serving it now.
(2) A Circle the Georgia Blue Ridge Route is considered, most desirable. It would do least environmental damage while using and enhancing existing routes. The circumferential route would connect the man-made service centers of the region while leaving the Blue Ridge Natural Corridor, Scenic Rivers and Historic Areas as readily available attractions on existing potential scenic routes.
(3) A third alternative, using existing North Carolina Route 106; and Georgia Routes 246 and 197 along the south base of the Blue Ridge is a possibility. This would not be as comprehensively adequate as the "Circle the Georgia Blue Ridge Route" considered in Alternative 2.
It is proposed that all "developmental elements" except scenic roads and trails, be encouraged to develop on an existing road which intersects with a designated regional gateway. These developmental elements should be located within close proximity of the regional gateway.
Scenic Roads System
In accordance with the standards in Appendix E, a system of scenic roads has been designated for the Southern Highlands area Figure 8*. Most of the roads in the system are existing state highways or those already under construction or planned. It is proposed, however, that any future improvement to those roads, if needed, be made in conformity with those standards.
The South Carolina Scenic Highway's plan, for the Southern Highlands Study Area, traverses the four county area inter-connect-
63

ing the mountains with Lake Hartwell. In addition, it proposes to connect the regional and the state parks with a system of secondary roads. It is estimated that this proposed system of scenic roads will cost approximately 10 million dollars (Appendix
F).
The acquisition and development program of this system within the Southern Highlands Region is shown in Table 4_. The estimated construction cost for the development of this system is $318,934,000.
Scenic Trails
In accordance with the Standards in Appendix G, a Southern Highlands Scenic Trails System has been designated as shown in Figure 8. These trails are to serve as non-motorized (i.e., bike, hiking, and horse) connectors between major natural areas and between these areas and certain "recreation terminal complexes." In addition, each state may designate specific trails for motor bikes in accordance with standards in Appendix H.
The acquisition and development program of this system within the Southern Highlands Region is shown in Table _5. The estimated construction cost for the development of this system is $4,882,600.
Recreation Development Corridors
To encourage the development of man-made recreation attractions or facilities in compact and accessible clusters, segments of certain existing state primary and secondary highways serving those recreation development target centers in the region, for the purpose of the Southern Highlands Optimum Plan, will be designated as recreation corridors in accordance with the following criteria:
a. A recreation development corridor should not extend more than three miles from the center of a town constituting or included in any "recreation development target center."
b. The minimum average traffic volume count of the highway should be 4,000 vehicles or more per day.
64

ooooooooo oooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooo

oooooo omooooooooo CO <> ro

o m in o
in CN CN CN

H

rHnOmHi(TN )iHrl(VND OCNOO(N

in
IT)
in

in co

CT>

w

IS

32

E to +j

(0

CO

(1)

to

CO

aO

id

to

&

P TJ

rH rQ

< Q) w c" -P

id

RJ

Eh

o

o

E
H

w

at!

-P
W

W CJ
Eh to
<
E-<
to
HI

Eh

a c
HH

H

rd

>i

u

+1

-H

x:

iH

-p

H

p

CJ

id

to

fc

o oo

ooo

OOo

Oo o

N
o


o

%
o

*
o

ooo o

to CN CN

o

Ih

*

*

iH iH

co

to-

</>

ooo

ooo

oo o

oo o

o oo

o o o

oooooooooooooooooooooooo

ooo

o o o o in in omoooooo

in

o
00

o
ro

ID CN CN CN

iH

o i-i

in in iH cn

H CO

CN

rH

in ON

CN

<n-

o

O

o

o

%

o

o

K

o

o



v>

o

CO

*.

VD

CD

ro

P

CO

id

>i-H

id cj

</>

uy

Asso



CD

cj a)

P

CO

rQ 13 Tj

>1

in

T3

-d

a

to

id

>i CN

id

id

id

id CJ rQ

i
u
id

-P

CO
H in H CN

c P

CU

u

C CI) CD

CD

to Pi

-P VO r*
P r~* rH >i
P

C Pi CD CD

iH

Pi r

Pi ro in r- u ^ !h H

O CO

CO CO 00

O id

>iH CN >irH iH rH T3 tj T3 Sh rH

C C u P P

P

rH H H Eh id

CD CD

CD CD CD

VI 5h

<D

-P -P CD rH

-P -P P

H tP

3 3 r-l CN P P

H o T3 to

rH to

P P u -P -P

-P -P -P

5-1 Jh CO

PP PPP

o CO -p

U

O

u O cj

CJ CD rQ

H C Pi Pi H

CD

> TD

Pi Pi


c a -P 0) CD

id





CD
CD rH

Pi Pi
CD CD CD CD

Pi Pi Pi

CD

o cj

CJ

CD CD CD CD H H -H

cP
!h to
CD

C c c c X p -P CD
3 w id id CD

to CO -c

r- C -P -P C -P -P 4J

T3

rH

id id

id id id CD CD CD rH

rH PQ

-P -p Sh to to CJ

u rH
oDDO

CJ 4J P

P -P -p

O CJ CJ H

O O to to

to to to to to to

rights-of-w

and

ith
we co
CD
"C
P >H rH P U rQ C "H H -H
5
+J
CO
o
Uw
CJ
o " rH O
"-- to

65

p

ro

U

4J

CD

CU

O O o

oo o

oo o

OO O

O O o

o oo

OOO

Ooo

ooo

o oo

ooo

OoO

OOO

Ooo

ooo

o oo

O Oo

o oo

ooo

oo o

O oo

o oo

ooo

o oo

ooo

c

0) CO

rH

CD

c rd

MH

E -P

CD

C -rH

u

o o 03 LD 0> CN

CO in

O en ro I-l

rH in CN ro rH

rH ro <* in rH CM 10 in

o O oo o o o o o o o o in CN

o o o r-

i-l

00 0>

in in CN in
r- CN ro in

in
00 rH rH r-

> +J

to CD rH

m m H **

ro ro CN CM

rH rH i-H CN CN rH

co CN iH CN o> CN r^

cu
CD CD

Cn

in

p

H

t/>

co-

T3 O

fa

H rd a,

en

-H

^ rd

H

o o o

Ooo

oo o

o oo

o o o

ooo

ooo

o o o

ooo

ooo

oo o

ooo

ooo

ooo

o oo

o oo

oo o

o oo

ooo

oo o

o oo

ooo

o oo

o oo

ooo

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o in

in

o o O o o o o o o st* cn (N <tf CN co CO (^ CN

en in CO 00 Ch

01

rH

* o o in vO 00 CN

> "tf ^t rH rH rH CN ro CN ro <* rH

<* ro in

in

CO

to en

c cd rd

CD

c CJ CD

to

C Jh rd

rd

cd rd

C CD

Hi

c tr

<: to*

cd rd

c

en rQ

rH

H

u

>1 3 en C

-p

CD -H

CD

iH ro I-l CO

H CD en

,d

rH

rH ft rd en

CO

co-

rd

H

H ,C cj
o u to Jh o P

rH
&

&. CO

o

en ..

CJ

u o CU ro

CJ

cn

13

01

+J

CO

C

rd

o
u

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

ooooooooooooooooomoooooo
OoOoO^OOvOdOoO'otofCoOCOcONOCONO^ODr^^fc'y^irk^^O'-^tcfoOiC^Toii^nOiOnvoDo

in
oin

rH rH rH

rH iH rH rH

rH

rHrHrHiniH

CN

<o-

m 4J CD CN r-

H

rH

O rH

C rH -P

-co-

en rd
O >i

00 tO rH

-p

+J CD

C T3 C -P

CD
e
Oi rH
o x:

cd rd
EE
CD -H
to X

rd

Q)
rQ

o

tn

rd

H

tn
u o
rH CO CD
o rd
o CD

en rd

rH MH

(1)

U CD

o to CJ

CD

> ffi

ft

c

rH

CD

CJ fX

C7\ -H CD

rQ

13 rd h rd

p

rd

H

>i rd

E-i

oooooo ooo ooo ooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

rC en CD Mh

-p

CJ

w rC U -P
. cn rd

o o co

E3c

o P rQ

E CD

o to

x: cd

u H (D

H

oCV7Do\^oCCmOMic^HC^k^cOONCVNOOCH'OHtOfOrc(HoN'it<N3nO^OC-^OrtC'O-JOoOvoOo^>COolOoOOoCOTOoiOolVo/OoIO^OoVOoDroHH

in rH

p

o Cn +j CO ,C H->

3 CJ Jh

to >i 4-> rd r4

O CD CU

>i to

rH 3

Jh to

Mh o

iHiHCNrHiHrHrH

rHiH

rH

Mh +j

CD

o*

O CD

p en rC

c to
H CD

CN

n

c 4-> tO

co-

m (D en -h
tn ,c Cn -P

CD CD
+j 13 rH

C O 3 CD H-J

tO

rd

tn

H -H

o

u

rd C to X

o to (D

C -P

o

H >i h rd

U +J

0) 4J T!

CD -H
4J ^

CD

-p

p r* 4-> W Oh

O MH co

H u E

rd o O Jh o +>

+J Mh CJ O T) C

c

MH

CD

CD +J 3

c T3 E

o CJ

O tO C +J

rcj
-p
>i >i >i >i o

rd E

rd Jh

3 tn

rd

oc o CJ
H
CO 4J

rd

o

tj
c

oo

o eo ft u Jh CD
Q rd
cn

>1

Hrd

H->
H

cri

rH

M

H

oo

(1)

rd

o

t,

TJ T3 t) T3 -P

+J

-p -p

CO

CO CO

CN
HI HHHI NfO^invCr-OO^OrHHHcNHcor^ltiHnHvoHrH^oHorcrli

- rd CD rd

c

rd > c c

H o

H W Jh -H CD

c T3

u Cn cd U +J rH c

Jh eo
oc O CD
O CJ

<o- rd
O CTi
rQ * rH C/)

66

Ch
m

<D

+J

to

C

ro

o

u

<tf

Eh

H

rrj
a
MH

*-l

a

>i

u

+j

H

xp:

rH H

S-i

u

ro

a

fo

o

OIrlHlOiOlOiOOiOlillllilllllll ^ k R s s S S 3 o 5 s s 3 3 g g o
o
o
LD
o

OvDinmvocor^mcocmooOcN00vDCO



s

ooo

o oo

ooo

o oo

ooo

O O O O O in O O V h m O in <t

*

vO vD CO 10 "tf cm CN

in

ro CO in KD

o r ID CM
rH iH

incovocN<vrrHr-o co >x)

co

CM

VO

r- rH CO CO CN

***

<tf
CN

in

rH

CM

CO

CN

CN

CO

cn

rH

*t

*tf

CM rH

c/>

CN f>

ooo

ooo

o oin

oo

CO

co

ooo

ooo

oo

in

VO

"sf

CO

rH
w-

ooo ooo oo o ro r-
CN
CN <5t iH

ooO ooO
o in mCO oo
O CO
rH

oo o

o oo

Ooo

oo

vo

in <3

CO

VO vD

i-l CN CO

CN

ooo

ooo ooo

ooo

o oO

*
o
in
o

o* o

V
o o

^ rH

* rH in 00

^
o
VO r^


o

in cn

.
in

^
VD

rH

H rH

O OO

O OO


mo

*
o
CO

CN CO

iH rCO

oo o

o oo

ooo

V**
o CO CO o CN VO

r^ VO CO

*

*

VO

VO

CN

rH

oOo

O oo

*v
o in o^

CO CO

*

<tf in

CN

ooo ooo ooo
VD <X> CO
o o in in co r^
CN CN 00

ooo

oo o

o in
in vo
co vo

co cr> </> iH
w-

ooo Ooo m CO rt
in

c o
H -p
fd
p
o
0}
C
rrj
E-<
M-i

P
c

0)
E

-P
u

rd .
O, to <d -h
Qc

rH
-E


U

-C
<

in co
w- u>

oo o

ooO

Hfc

%

VD

CO CT>

c^ CTi

V

o ro r-
CO rH CN
<j> uy

so

+*
c

H a)

E CO

>U
H ro
Q a,
<D
>i o
ro
S
rC U
hcn . 55

3C -P C
co rd rH
CO (U

C
tO
rH
cu

p0)

rrj
P

CO

U

I

w

!h

m

rO E-"

CQ

-p

o

p rd

<

rQ P
3

cNco^i<m^or~-co(Tio

CO

nr)HHHHHHHNtM(N(N(NCM(NMCM

+J Pi ro
P
U co

C p o 0) o

CO (U

^

o
-H

r- iw

H O CTi 4-|

67

N.C. S.C. Ga.

Table 5

SCENIC TRAILS TRI-STATE SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS AREA
Cost Estimate

MILES OF TRAIL
11 80 90 181

DEVELOPMENT COST f1 '
$ 23,100 168,000 189,000
$380,000

LAND COST^ 2 )
$ 192, 500( 3 ) 2,020,000(4) 2,250,000( 5 )
$4,462,500

TOTAL
$ 215,600 2,188,000 2,439,000
$4,842,600

(1) Development Cost - average $2100/acre. (2) Acquisition - average 25 acres per mile min. (3) $700/acre for 2 75 acres. (4) $l,000/acre for 2,000 acres. (5) $l,000/acre for 2,250 acres. SOURCE: Southern Highlands Council.

68

Any man-made recreation attraction or facility not included in a "recreation terminal complex" or a "tourist service center" should be required to locate in areas within one mile from the rights-of-way of a designated "recreation development corridor",, provided that such area is not a part of any "environmental protective area".
The acquisition and development program for the Recreation Development Target Centers in the Southern Highlands Region is shown in Table 6. These estimates include costs for preserving environmental protective areas; growth center infrast ruction funding and developmental.
Recreation-Development Target Centers
To protect both the marketability of recreation investments and the environment of Southern Highlands, the recreation/tourism industry should be encouraged to place its future developments in "Recreation Development Target Centers." The location, type and standards of these centers are expected to be designated by appropriate state and/or local agencies.
The South Carolina Private Outdoor Recreation Plan recommends the establishment and development of major destination areas within the state. These areas should contain a combination of natural and man-made features of a type, quality and diversification which are unique and strong enough to effectively penetrate the market as a terminal destination for both South Carolina residents -and out-ofstate pleasure travelers. Within the Southern Highlands study area the Hartwell-Keowee Major Destination Area is so located.
The second phase of the Private Outdoor Recreation Plan (Hartwell-Keowee Lakes Major Destination Area Study) , which is presently on the way, is an indepth study to determine required facilities within the Southern Highlands Study area and will produce an implementation plan during an 18-month period. The study is designed to investigate the recreation potential of the area and determine prospective recreation facilities by type, quantity and quality which effectively penetrate the demand as a terminal destihation point.
69

Generally, these centers will contain large areas (100 acres or more) and will emphasize major recreation activity categories ( i.e . , snow skiing, water sports, major -theme parks). Facilities to serve other activities, however, will also be included to complement the primary activity category.
The acquisition and development program costs for these centers is estimated to be approximately 840 million dollars
(Table 6) .
There will be different classes of centers, determined on the basis of intensity of use. Basically, these centers will be developed to encourage visitors to stay at least overnight and therefore, travel accommodations will be standard features of any center.
These centers should be subject to a "planned-unit-development" type of land use control. Developers, whether private or public, should be required to develop recreation facilities in accordance with a duly approved "package" which, in turn, should be in conformity with the plan for the entire center.
Tourist Service Centers
To ensure that the various Recreation Development Target Centers will be adequately supported with essential services that cannot be supplied within the complexes due to land use restrictions, it is proposed that a system of tourist service centers be designated. These centers are to be comprised of established community or neighborhood shopping centers, although some will be developed. The purpose is to enable the rational placement of tourists supply-depots in support of the Recreation Development Target Center.
The primary purpose of a center is to dispense recreation and sport equipments and supplies, auto repairs and other services, etc. Over-night accommodation facilities should be excluded so as not to compete with those developed as a part of a center.
A tourists service center can be developed in conjunction with a "recreation development center" but not a "recreation development target center". The location of a tourist service
70

o r^ 'J
<y\ cm

O o i-l
O CM CM
CM

o o CN 03

1







o o <*

in

* I-l in

o CM CO

o









O o vf

^r

sf

1-1 i-i

oo o o n ran
H CO rH
o r- r^ r-t co

in n o o <* r

o cm ro

in



^ o

r rH

ro

r> in oIcm
o i-l in in (N
in in r^lco 'tf

^ <Ti

o in in

^ r-l i-l

o

o o injin o
in cm r~[<Tj< r-i
O IrH

in cm in CM









O r-~ r~ in

CM

ro

o co r

CO

O KD r~

CO

o c^ olc* CM

CO
w


O rH CM in

|
^ rH rolCTi

o o olo

CO

rH

00 rH rH|in r-

Ph
s
fu
tM

in ro in CO

o * O tn

CO

i-H

in ro in ro





#



o O ^f

ro

ro

rH <*

O >* (N

ID

CM i-H c\i|in

PI HO
O co cm

O ro i-h

O ro cm

rH

i-l

O in cm

r-

O \D r^ CO

CM

rH

o o inlin in,

in cm

oro
|rH

O in cm

r







o >x> r^ ro

CM

i-l <tf

^ in

ml'* *

!



in in r~- J >x>

r~

i-H

|r\i -I

o t-i cn

ro

CM rH ro Kd

O <x> r

CM

r-i

O iX)
CM

o o olo en

o in <o

rH CM

r-l

rH CO >*

o CM

in r 00











in CM r~

ro

rH IX)

in iH in

o -* r-

r-l

<u

h

id (TJ

P

id id

id id

H

cC

I-l P

CC

l-H^ c c

>H
HH JH
CJ

pid ID
>

MrH rH r-H

c H^^ O

0) PrH u ^

u O cj^- rd rd
ic 0) (0

rH 0) CJ^- rl -rH

p (0

PCM r-l rH

p W c >H

P U <D

Cn 5-1

p CJ (0 c

id

u o rd X}

Id -H

m 4jw rH idro rH rH 1-1 t-\

-p c w o

o u <D +j

rH

p e c id id

a o o id rQ

<d

iH
id
P
po
id x)

6

<

P o

(0

rl 3 rC 5h Tl

H 3

E

P rl

E

O n
p p p p p rl In < H m W > 0h

<D x: x: rl -P
up

cd co
i-i

MH C x: x:

3C3

o

Pn

p

tn CO i-H CD X: x:

I-l

<D i-H

>

D i-i

CD CO
Vh

wc

<D

u

CO O o

o

0)

ID

o

ID

a CO o O z CO O

X
u
id
(X

rH
p
u i-H
id a)
u co

\ -i rl <D

id

4->

IH 0) id
Q) +1 >

T3 id iH

P <U

rH

Pn CO Cm

ts



c

0ID

rd

3

to

r-i

>1

CJ

id

c

S CO

iH

u

d) rl

D)

> id

id

H 0,

0)

rH

rl
<

0 IH

r-i

a>

H CO

>

? CJ

iH

i-H

+>

"0 rH

CJ

cE

to rl

,.

CD
T3
P
i-H
CJ
c CO i H
<D
p tn P tn
>i c

rl r-i
U -H

rH tj
c U3

CO
u P CJ
C 0)

-p CD CO

a c E -0

tn <D

c

ID

id

P

O v to

CM

id

0)

to CD rH CJ

id

E 0)

r-i I-H

V rH CD -p CD

rC

rH

(1) rl rH cn

CD rH c

> CD

c PU CO rH

3

H r?

a) rH

-H

c id id CD

MH

<D

u > TJ DC

rH a)

U rH 0)

tn rH

U

id rH tn tn rC rH

P id tn

P

rH

a rd c CD c c

-P

CO

u

c
ID rH
P id
2 IH

C O m <D HA H r

0) M-l

rH

rH

CD CO tn rH CD tn

c
id
u

C rH

H <D

P <D -P -P

rC

p id tn id a 3 0) rH 0)

X 3 "0

a rd T3

<0 CD

rH u U

P c p rH

T-i

CD rH rH id

rH a P cj co

U rH id -rH id

H T3

rd a> 0)

0)

> c ? rQ rd 2 c u ? > p rH u

c
wl

1

1

1

D
1 fc 1

ai

Q 1

1

1


w 1

1

1

1

^^

i-H
fe CO eu -"

^_^

^_

--CM

ro
-^

oi
CO

71

center must be directly accessible from a segment of the designated regional gateways system.
Planned Recreation Communities
To afford proper protection for the environment and to achieve highest possible efficiency in public investments in such services as water and sewerage systems, roads, schools, etc., it is proposed that second-home developments in the Southern Highlands be required to evolve as "Planned Recreation Communities." Standards and regulations for controlling the development of such communities are suggested in the following discussion and should be created by a common effort of the three states.
Generally, such communities should be encouraged to locate in designated "new community districts" to be created through state enabling legislations. "Special new town district enabling legislation has been passed by Arizona (1970) , Kentucky (1970) , and Tennessee (1971) . This is permissive legislation, which responds to the intitiative of a new community developer and may be independent of an approved statewide plan. It sets minimum standards for such things as size (4,000 acres is a typical minimum area) , development plan, economic feasibility, and percentage of land held by the applicants. Approved districts are given powers to tax and to provide municipal services, and in Kentucky, to condemn land for public purposes. Arguments against special districts in general: the proliferation of governmental units, the weakening of control by existing governing bodies, and the increased difficulties of coordination. However, special districts do facilitate the development of new communities by providing necessary governance powers without the necessity of early incorporation. Such districts also give the state a regulatory role in the development process, which can be used to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfare are provided for."(H)
COMPATIBILITY WITH LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The concepts for all developmental elements contained in the Southern Highlands Optimum Plan have been formulated in a manner compatible with the "Land Classification System" which is being developed by the North Carolina Office of State Planning for the implementation of proposed State Policy Act.
72

"
In the proposed Land Policy Act, the North Carolina General Assembly finds among other things, that:
"...The rapid and continued growth of the State's population, expanding urban development, industrial construction, proliferating highway systems, conflicts in patterns of land use, fragmentation and lack of common direction of governmental entities exercising land use planning powers, and the increased size and impact of private actions, have created a situation in which land use management decisions of wide public concern often are being made on the basis of expediency, tradition, short term economic considerations, and other factors which too frequently are contradictory to a sound policy for the use and management of State's land resources. . .
A coordinated State land policy must address itself to the systematic management of the growth of towns and cities. Control of the growth process must center upon the land that is in transition, that is, the land that is undergoing change from production to site-valued land. It is the failure to manage the lands in transition that has created the disastrous land use and settlement patterns of suburban and rural sprawl. Therefore, the highest priority of growth management must be the identification and control of the transition area.
The system for managing growth under the emerging State land policy has been called "land classification". This term is not to be confused with the classification of lands into minute categories of land usage, such as local zoning. It should also not be confused with systems of classifying natural and man-made features upon the land, sometimes called "land cover" or "present land use" or "land cataloguing". The classification system is used primarily for the purpose of identifying lands undergoing transition so that a number of State and local powers and policies can be targeted upon them.
For the purpose of orderly urban growth four land policy classifications are being considered.
73

(1) PRODUCTION - Lands in a rural area where population density is low and no urban services are planned. Such lands are used for forestry, agriculture or other productive use, but not for growth or development.
(2) DEVELOPING URBAN - Lands that have been selected for growth and development by local plans and approved under state policy. Such lands are those that undergo transition and rapid increases in population. Such areas require plans for a full range of urban services.
(3) URBAN - Lands that have passed through the transition phase and are fully urbanized. The population is relatively dense, and a full range of urban services are provided. Any further plans deal with redevelopment. These lands generally correspond to areas within corporate limits.
(4) CONSERVATION OR PROTECTION - Lands containing critical environmental features because of their instable or hazardous nature and/or the outstanding natural, scenic, or historic feature must be protected from conflicting intrust ion by man-made developments.
Classification for development, production and conservation will be based on natural suitability factors as discussed in the Resource Inventory Base System (RIBS). The land classification system identifies the three basic types of land as it passes through transition from productive to urban. Productive land lies in the jurisdiction of the county alone, is provided with services of a rural nature, and has a low property tax (to help maintain its status) . Developing urban lands will usually lie in the county areas outside existing municipalities; will require a plan for water, sewer, roads, parks, schools, and other services to accommodate growth; and will have appropriate taxes, assessments, and fees to pay the government's cost of developing new services (except where ameliorated by Federal subsidies and grants) . The Urban area should become incorporated into a municipality, should provide all the normal urban services, and should be taxed at a normal rate to pay for routine delivery and maintenance of services.
The land (policy) classification system can be used to direct and manage growth if four basic principles or policies are adopted and implemented by State and local governments. These are described as follows:
74

( 1 Developing urban lands must be designated by compact units of land . If urban and rural sprawl and its attendant problems are to be avoided, then lands so designated cannot sprawl. This requires that local governments examine their own goals for growth and development in the immediate future, and determine the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the growth that they desire at the settlement density desired. Then a contiguous, compact unit of land of the proper size must be chosen adjacent to the present boundary of the municipality. This unit of land then is proposed as the developing urban unit, and becomes the unit of growth for the next few years.
(2) State and local plans must be directed toward serving the developing urban land unit . When a unit of land is selected there must be promulgated a comprehensive set of plans to serve the unit. This requires that all growth elements to be accommodated in the unit must be accommodated in the various service plans. It will be the responsibility of local and regional bodies to formulate such plans. It will be the responsibility of State government to ensure that these basic guidelines are followed in their formulation. This will require review of the service plans by an appropriate State agency.
(3) State and local investments in land and facilities for development must be directed toward the developing urban units . The implementation of all the service plans listed in (2) above will require major investments by State and local governments. Street and highway rightof-way, utility easements, parkland, and school sites must be purchased. It will be necessary that government subsidy programs, such as the Appalachian Regional Commission, orient its investments and purchasing power toward these areas. Likewise, it is of critical importance that such investments not be allowed outside the designated area for this would defeat its purpose.
(4) State and local regulatory powers must be concentrated and utilized in these areas . Local governments should take advantage of the opportunity to formulate regulations that are especially designed to manage urban growth in the developing urban land unit.
75

Chapter V
MANAGEMENT PLAN
The implementation of environmental protective and developmental policies and programs in the Southern Highlands would require management organizations at the interstate, state and regional levels. The types of organizations which the Tri-State Council has reviewed include: Interstate Compact; Interstate Advisory Council; State Organization; and Regional Organization.
INTERSTATE COMPACT
In order to ensure that the resources of the Southern Highlands be developed as well as protected for the benefits of all of the people in the multi-state region, there should be a permanent interstate organization with sufficient powers to coordinate and to enforce, if necessary, laws and programs applicable throughout the region. This organization can be created through an interstate compact among North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, with ratification by the Congress and appropriate support and participation by the Federal Government.
This organization can conceivably be designated as the TriState Southern Highlands Planning and Development Commission. Its governing body should be appointed by the Governors of the three participating states and the President. Membership should include primarily private leaders and public officials from the region, and also representation from the three state and the federal agencies.
The Commission can be charged with both the authority and responsibility of assimilating all existing Federal, state and local laws and regulations pertaining to resources management into one uniform "Resources Development and Protection Code" for the entire multi-state region. It can also be given appropriate implementation powers to enforce the code whenever deemed necessary .
The existing Tri-State Council can serve as a forum for generating discussions and supports for the Commission. If sufficient interest and acceptance are in evidence, the State Legislature in each state can then be requested to pass a joint Resolution for the purpose of declaring the intent for the ultimate establishment of the Commission. Included in the Resolution would be proper authorization and support for an indepth study of all elements pertaining to the functions of the Commission.
76

At the conclusion of the study, similar legislations for an interstate Southern Highlands Compact can be introduced and enacted by each State to establish the Commission. Concurrently, actions for Congressional ratification can also be pursued.
Precedent and Reference - Precedents of interstate compacts in dealing with regional resources development and protection needs can be found, among others, in the case of the Lake Tahoe Regional Planning Compact and the Potomac Valley Conservation District Compact. The former is between the States of California and Nevada and ratified by the 91st Congress in Public Law 91-148. The latter is among the States of Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia and ratified also by the 91st Congress in December 1970 through Public Law 91-407.
The enactment of the National Environment Protection Act has established that the preservation and proper development of natural resources is a fundamental national concern. Furthermore, the 1970 Housing and Urban Development Act has declared the need of a national growth policy to bring about a balance between urban development and the environment.
Presently, pending National Land Use Policy legislations are being considered by the Congress paralleling the federally enacted Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. These legislations will help to make possible an active partnership of Federal, State and local governments in developing needed tools and measures in land and natural resources planning and management on the interstate level.
In order to further explain the purposes and functions of the "Southern Highlands Planning and Development Commission" a sample legislation has been prepared and is included in Appendix
I.
INTERSTATE ADVISORY COUNCIL
The Governors of the three states, by command executive order, shall establish an Interstate Advisory Council of their representatives. This Council shall be responsible to review plans and proposals through the A-95 Review process to assure compliance with the Tri-State Plan and shall have authority to update the Plan. Such a Council shall be absolved upon establishment of the Interstate Compact.
STATE LEVEL ORGANIZATIONS
The States will establish, by legislative act, a central body to which all state level resources management decisions and actions will be focused.
77

In operation such a central body would be empowered to do some or all of the following:
(1) Prepare, adopt and amend state guidelines, including "statements of objectives, policies, and standards to be followed in public and private use of land and water areas within the mountain area";
(2) To approve local land use plans in accordance with the guidelines and to prepare, adopt, and use plans for these counties failing to prepare such plans;
(3) Define, review and designate areas of environmental concerns;
(4) Prepare, adopt and approve implementation and enforcement programs;
(5) Issue permits for developments.
A copy of the proposed North Carolina Mountain Resources Management Act is included in Appendix J.
In a similar manner, the Georgia General Assembly would create a Vital Areas Commission with a sub-committee dealing with the Southern Highlands. This Commission could also call upon the advise of an advisory council as suggested by the North Carolina Act.
REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Each state has designated in each of the multi-county planning regions a Lead Regional Organization. Those organizations will provide the necessary leadership for effective implementation of resources management programs at the regional and local levels.
At present, Lead Regional Organizations are the primary contact for state and federal programs which are designed for operation on a regional basis. In addition, all public financed regional programs are subject to the A-95 Regional Clearinghouse review by the Lead Regional Organization. Certain public financed regional programs are subject to policy guidance of the lead organizations, and this policy guidance is being encouraged by the State where there is no law or policy to the contrary. It is expected that new regional programs should also be developed with the aid of the Lead Regional Organizations stemming from the Tri-State Southern Highland Optimum Plan.
PLAN OF ACTION
In addition to those points previously discussed implementaf
tion and protective measures needed for achieving the ultimate objectives of the Southern Highlands planning effort are as follows
78

.

.

Federal Lands Planning And Management
It is proposed that all recommendations made by the Public Land Law Review Commission to the President and the Congress be adopted by all federal agencies with land ownership or having jurisdictions or programs affecting the use. of land and other natural resources in the Southern Highlands as a framework of principles for coordinating and planning their policies and programs (see Appendix K)
In summary, these recommendations state that land use plans be prepared for public lands; that such plans be based upon the capabilities of the natural resources; and that maximum input be assumed by the local and state governments as well as the general public. It should be noted that outdoor recreation is a prime concern of the report.
State-Level Measures
Environmental Indicators - Planning for a quality environment requires that decision-makers and citizens understand the issues involved in environmental matters. Such understanding will be greatly enhanced if a comprehensive set of environmental indices are made available to assist in the assessment of the environmental quality.
Each state should develop a set of such indicators that may be used for assessing the state of the environment, for determining trends or changes on the quality of the environment, for identifying needs for new policies, and for setting operational goals against which progress in managing the environmental quality can be measured.
Further, it is proposed that appropriate legislative and executive actions be taken to require the incorporation and application of a set of environmental indicators, including those already developed and those which may be developed in the future, in any resources management policy-making by the State and local governments
Regulations for Guiding Second-Home Developments - The Georgia Planned Growth Commission found a need for further guidance for "second-home communities" and developed legislative proposals to guide quality development.
Representative Gerald T. Horton of Georgia stated that: "...9 5% of the State of Georgia is under no legal management system. There is no planning, no zoning, no subdivision regulation.... There is no law that controls or protects the various resources in these areas of the State."
79

In a like manner, the North Carolina Office of State Planning recognized this same concern and made the following recommendations :
"Legislation controlling land sales in new communities and large scale developments could be developed as a state counterpart to the federal Interstate Land Sales Act. Such legislation would ensure that the prospective consumer is fully informed about the type of property he is buying, the improvements that the developer will make and what guarantees there are that his investment will be protected. Public disclosure of the developer's financial status could discourage shady dealing. A land sales law might also protect against abuses of the practice of issuing land-purchase sales contracts rather than deeds and mortgages. Administration of the law would probably be through the state real estate licensing board, which would also make annual reports to the governor about the status of new communities and large scale development in the state.
A statewide development code might take the form of additional enabling legislation for Planned Unit Development such as that suggested by the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, or it might combine existing enabling acts (such as zoning and subdivision regulations) into one new simplified code. The American Law Institutes (ALI)
'
Model Land Development Code illustrates the second approach.
The first approach, Planned Unit Development (PUD) enabling legislation would be the simplest course of action, since it merely adds to existing development legislation. It would permit municipalities to adopt local PUD ordinances, so that planned projects could be approved with densities, lot coverages , and other features that varied from zoning requirements. The major benefit of such an ordinance would stem from its encouragement of local governments to provide for Planned Unit Developments.
Adoption of combined development code legislation following the ALI model would entail rather complete overhaul of the way in which governments plan and regulate development. Under the ALI code local governments would regulate land development through a 'development ordinance' (combining zoning and
80

subdivision regulations) and issuance of 'development permits'. Local communities that have adopted land development plans would be authorized to create specially planned areas' restricted to large scale development, in advance of specific applications from developers. Essentially the local government would be designating new community locations and controlling their development through issuing special permits. The state land planning agency would have a role only in those local areas where development has regional or state impact. Its major functions would be to prepare a state land development policy and plan to establish rules and standards for development having a state or regional impact, and to review local plans and applications for governmental assistance.
A third possibility would be for the state to design its own development code, containing general standards to be applied in all areas where there was no effective local regulation. Such a code could meet the problems of unregulated large scale developments in the mountains, for example. It might combine elements of a PUD ordinance with public health, construction, and environmental protection standards, and establish a review and approval procedure leading to issuance of a development permit. vlO)
Regional And Local Measures
Review of Environmental Impact - Each state, through the A-95 process and the National Environmental Protection Act of 1972, is required to review federally funded projects and make recommendations as to the proposals impact upon the environment. Since this review process does not extend to state and local funded projects, it is recommended that these levels of government be required to submit their publicly funded projects for review by appropriate agencies. It is not the intent of this recommendation to limit their review only to public funded projects but to any project that has an effect upon the environment. Within this purview, a large scale private funded project should be processed through the same procedure as publicly funded projects.
Flood Plains Regulations - The severe problem of flooding in the Southern Highlands Region necessitates action by local governments to plan for and regulate the use of flood plains. Appropriate overall state policies should enact, plans and ordinances to comply with the command set of state policies. State agencies should provide funding and technical assistance. If local governments do not prepare such approved ordinances, the states,
81

through the appropriate agencies, should prepare such plans for enforcement by the local government until such time as appropriate local plans and ordinances are adopted.
Private Sector - It is recognized that the private development sector is a viable factor in the economic development of the Tri-State Southern Highlands Region. It is not the intent of the aforementioned recommendations to prohibit or restrict the development of adequately planned and properly located private enterprise but rather these recommendations are proposed as guidelines for these developments. It is proposed that the private sector work closely with the respective state, regional and local agencies in the development of lands for maximum economic benefit and conservation of the valuable natural resources which serve as the stimulant for such development. CONCLUSION
These recommendations should not be considered as the total effort, or as the final product of the Southern Highlands Study. Rather, this effort should be considered as a continuing process building upon the methodology, approach, and research findings of this phase of the effort. Succeeding phases should be conducted to update the information base, coordinate- the functional plans of natural resources, transportation, local development, and to address regional issues as they evolve.
82

FOOTNOTES

(1) General Assembly of North Carolina , 1973 Session, House Bill 1374.

(2)

Ibid , pp. 3-5.

(3) General Assembly of North Carolina, 1973 Session, House Bill 1134, p. 2.

(4) Land Use Planning and Management Study, State of South Carolina, Division of Administration, 1973.

(5) Randal G. Haithcock, Statement to the Southern Highlands Council, 1973.

(6) Public Law Review Commission, One Third of the Nation's Land, 1970, Washington, D.C., pp. 1-7.

(7) David R. Godschalh, et. al., New Commission and Large Scale Development: Alternate Policies for North Carolina , 1972,
p. 113.

(8) North Carolina Council on State Goals and Policies. Second Annual Report. (1973), p. 89.

(9) Land Use Planning and Management Study, State of South Carolina, Division of Administration, 1973.

(10) Neil Walp, The Market for Recreation in the Appalachian Highlands , Appalachian Regional Commission, 1970.

(11) Goldschalh, op. cit., p. 122.

*

Unable to accomplish in this study.

** Approached in a limited manner.

I
3 ElDfl DMETD D3bfl