422 



would not be permitted unless it was in accord with the estuarine use 

 plan, with burden of proof on the jfiller or dredger that such altera- 

 tion would not pollute or destroy the area. 



With reference to geographic jurisdiction, it would be desirable to 

 establish a regional agency to cover the entire estuarine problem area, 

 because the individual municipalities or even counties may be too small. 

 Whichever form such an areawide agency may take — independent spe- 

 cial district, interagency cooperative committee, or multijurisdictional 

 planning unit — this governmental mechanism should have manage- 

 ment responsibility as well as study and research authority. This would 

 include regulatory power over dredging and filling, zoning and land- 

 water use authority, and perhaps even the ability to raise revenue from 

 licenses and to study management techniques. 



The regional estuarine agency should utilize the full array of man- 

 agement and planning tools described earlier, including especially the 

 power of eminent domain with just compensation, repurchase and ease- 

 ment rights for public access, and development options to preserve the 

 land. Its leases and permits should be flexible so they can be terminated 

 or revoked should their conditions be violated. Regulations should not 

 rigidly foreclose any further industrial, commercial or residential de- 

 velopment. Sufficient safeguards for public representation, such as 

 notices, hearings, and possibly an appeals board are also desirable. To 

 survive legal attack, regulations should be reasonable and should be 

 applied in a nonarbitrary, nondiscriminatory manner ; they should not 

 preclude some other public or private economic uses. Ideally these 

 regulations and plans should be viewed as guides and standards, and, 

 while restraining and controlling development, should serve as an in- 

 ducement for better design and land use. 



Such a multifunctional agency could also deal with hurricane, flood, 

 and erosion control ; waterfront access ; architectural preservation and 

 beautification ; and upstream water projects influencing the estuarine 

 zone. Its regulatory and policy powers could be subjected to the final 

 decisionmaking of a review and appeals board composed of municipal 

 officials and group representatives. In its decision on licenses and per- 

 mits, the board would be empowered to consider such factors as recrea- 

 tional and economic, esthetic, and environmental effects. It is unlikely 

 that many areas will immediately establish such a regional estuarine 

 management agency, but in all probability will first choose to under- 

 take an overall survey of their estuarine problems. Such a study, how- 

 ever, should not be an excuse for inaction. As in the case of BCDC a 

 moratorium on further filling and sales could be declared until the 

 study commission reports, and the commission could be given interim 

 permit and zoning authority, such as the power to grant dredging 

 licenses and establish bulkhead lines. 



States have an important role to play in aiding local programs. 

 Financial assistance in the form of matching grants for pollution con- 

 trol or open space bond issues can be crucial in local estuarine manage- 

 ment. In addition to funding, cooperative programs can be utilized 

 in such areas as zoning and planning. The State may choose to establish 

 an official map or enact a broad zoning law with general requirements 

 to be met by county and local government plans. Permits for dredging 

 and filling issued by municipalities could be reviewed by State natural 

 resources commissions or wetlands boards. 



