91 



statewide Land Use Plans, when completed, are required 

 to be submitted to the Council, which in turn is required to 

 submit the Plan for a ninety-day period of review and com- 408 (a> 

 ments to appropriate federal agencies. The Council then must 

 review the Plan and the comments received, and is required 

 to approve the plan if it conforms with policy, guidelines and 

 requirements and is compatible with the plans proposed or 

 submitted by other States, so that regional and national land 

 use considerations are accommodated. 



Explicitly, federal agencies with public works responsibili- 408(b) 

 ties or activities in areas under an approved Plan shall make 

 their activities consistent with the approved plan, "unless there 

 are overriding considerations of national policy which require 

 departures from the plan." Furthermore, federal agencies "shall 

 not approve proposed projects that are inconsistent with the 

 Plan." 



I have organized my discussion around the action features 

 of the bill. The bill itself begins with a legislative recital of 

 the ills it is designed to correct, and a definition of congres- 

 sional purpose and intent. 



A congressional finding of a national interest "in a more 

 efficient and comprehensive system of national and statewide 

 land use planning and decisionmaking," and a congressional 

 declaration "that intelligent land-use planning and manage- 

 ment provides the' single most important institutional device 

 for preserving and enhancing the environment, for ecologically 

 sound development, and for maintaining conditions capable of 

 supporting a quality life," are key provisions of the measure. 



Under the bill, Congress would make a number of findings 

 about things needing improving : 



For a variety of stated reasons, land-use management de- 

 cisions at all governmental levels are being made "on the basis 

 of expediency, tradition, [and] short term economic consider- 

 ations. 



Public and private enterprise has been required "to delay, 

 litigate, and cancel" various developments and to make de- 

 cisions on industrial and commercial activity siting in areas 

 of least public and political resistance, without regard to rele- 

 vant ecological and environmental land use considerations. 



There is a lack of consistent policy and conflict among the 

 many federal agencies involved in land use planning and man- 

 agement activities. 



Failure to plan or bad planning often results in irrepara- 

 ble damage to "commonly ovimed assets" such as estuaries, ocean 

 beaches, and other areas in public ownership. 



Inferentially, federal land use decisions have not included 

 sufficient participation by State and local governments, and 

 therefore have not accorded "with the highest and best stand- 

 ard of land-use management and the desires and aspirations 401(e) 

 of State and local government." 



The bill also calls for the federal government (whether this 

 is a responsibility of the Council isn't clear) to undertake the 

 development of a national land-use policy. The findings and pol- 401(f) 

 icy-declaring sections of the bill themselves constitute a state- 

 ment of policy, so the "national land-use policy" clearly is to 

 be some document or statement which builds upon the congres- 

 sional directives. 



It must be developed consistently with the responsibility of 

 State and local governments. There is a specific finding "that "^^^ ^'^ 

 the primary responsibility and constitutional authority for land 401(d) 

 u.se planning and management of non-federal lands rests with 

 State and local government. 



It is required to incorrwrate ecological, environmental, esthetic, 

 economic, social and other appropriate factors. 401(f) 



It should encourage the wise and balanced use of land water 401 (gXl) 

 resources. 



2 Emphasis in quoted sections of the bill is added throughout. 



