34 



thought it was an extremely well-done piece dealing with the popula- 

 tion and the problems of the cities; the regional planners, thinking 

 years ago about mass transit, industrial struggling, and other prob- 

 lems facing every major city in America. This has certainly been true 

 here in the Capital City. 



Two generations ago they proposed a network of mass transporta- 

 tion. What happened is the whole thing sort of broke down some- 

 where along the line owing to the piecemeal makeup of an expensive 

 highway system, overloaded with struggling commuters. It couldn't 

 pay its way. The more it declined the more they raised the rates. Wliat 

 happened is this, for example, in one specific area nearby : 



"On a hot August weekend this year, in 1969, Jones Beach" — ^you 

 have been there and you are familiar with the area — "had to close 

 down for a full hour because 60,000 cars tried to get into the parking 

 lot with a capacity of 24,000." 



How do you do it unless you stack them one on top of each other ? 

 INIany, two-thirds of them, were minicars, or Volkswagens. 



Secretary Hickel. Maybe we need a pill for the automobile. 



Mr. Blatnik. The cars moved onto the Robert INIoses State Park 

 and so jammed the 6,000-car lot there as to force a 2-hour shutdown. 

 Overcrowding of the recreation spots is due not only to more people 

 with more cars, and to pollution of waters by the dumping of gar- 

 bage — what I am getting at now is this lopsided growth of the popula- 

 tion. It is predictable, quite accurately, that the population growth 

 will continue to be lopsided in certain areas. 



How are you going to manage it ? No matter how good your inten- 

 tions are ; no matter how good your support may be, and certainly if 

 you are to leave it to the States, each in its own way, individually the 

 States could never build an integrated highway system. It had to be 

 done in a joint effort. It had to be done with the Federal Government 

 and the States and municipalities and private industry working to- 

 gether. 



Secretary Hickel. I agree with you; I totally agree. It is just how 

 strong a bill can we get. I have not argued with what you say. And in 

 our own house, in our own discussions, I mentioned that : are we going 

 strong enough ? Then we also have a start selling from the local area 

 on up. We have to take or attain politically what is attainable. I think 

 this is lust a bare start. I don't even say it is a good start, but it is a 

 start. We have to start someplace. And when you talk about a national 

 land-use policy. I made them change the word from planning to policy, 

 because people inherently have a fear of Federal encroachment upon 

 individual rights, and there is nothing wrong with that feeling. 



"What we have to do is sell the idea in the best interest. We must have 

 some national approach to these very pressing problems. 



I would welcome any suggestions that are attainable that would 

 achieve those ends. 



Mr. Blatnik. Obviously, as you conclude — again, with no criticism 

 intended, I am trying to underline the importance. It is going to take 

 the combined effort and combined judo:ment of everybody in the Con- 

 gress and the administration and at the Federal level, and leaders on 

 the State level and on the metropolitan level, just to determine what 

 must be done. 



We pretty well know what is happening. 



