372 CONFERENCE ON NATURAL BEAUTY 



When I say that it is changing, I would like to suggest that even 

 such questions as the necessary length of line over which we must 

 carry the high-voltage systems, are themselves functions of this pat- 

 tern of distribution, and in some cases they are functions of quite 

 irrational and quite unplanned accidents of utility company juris- 

 dictions left over from the past. 



Nobody in this country has as yet designed whole communities 

 which minimize some of the problems that we are talking about 

 here today, but certainly that is not outside our competence. 



I don't want to put forward a special perspective the benefit- 

 cost issue or public choice perspective because I think that Mr. 

 Bennett alluded to this, and I think we are fortunate that Mr. Ben- 

 nett is so sensitive to this issue. But the present pattern which we 

 have developed in our country has often given local communities 

 and local citizens very little choice in the matter of land use by utili- 

 ties, and I think this is something which local communities are now 

 beginning to attack with some kind of vigor. 



This point is made very clear in the Woodside issue which Mr. 

 Bennett spoke about, which involved some high-voltage lines. The 

 issue was not really: Shall there be any high- voltage lines or shall 

 there be any high-voltage lines above ground or underground, but 

 shall they be along a certain alignment which was especially damag- 

 ing to the view and to the scenic character of the area? 



As long as it was determined by the utilities and others that it had 

 to be along a certain alignment, then the citizens said, let us put 

 this underground. They made it very clear that in this event they 

 would be prepared to face all the consequences of doing this. 



I suggest we have hardly begun to explore the real choice situa- 

 tion, the real alternatives open to communities in these situations. 

 If a community wishes to place an especially high value on a particu- 

 lar site or a particular view, then it seems to me there are plenty 

 of mechanisms for recouping the added cost, even if they be 10 to 1. 



The Highway Act principle, which we employ in this country, 

 demonstrates very well, for example, that we could in fact take up 

 to 3 5/2 percent off the capital costs of Federal projects and highways 

 for beautification and scenic purposes. A similar principle applied 

 to the utilities would in some cases have well handled the costs that 

 were added. Not in all, but in a number of cases, such a formula 

 offers quite a bit of promise. It may be a question whether we 

 want to invoke such a formula, but certainly the possibility exists. 



