135 



areas are protected, vital developmental needs are accommodated, and 

 major developments and facilities are controlled. With this sense of 

 priorities the administration has formulated its land-use policy 

 proposal. 



An effort to broaden State authority is timely, for during the past 

 several years a number of States have undertaken promising initiatives 

 in land-use regulation. State laws designed to protect coastal wetlands 

 from draining and filling began in Massachusetts in 1963 and now 

 exist in a number of coastal States. State controls of large-scale devel- 

 opment have been established during the past 2 years in Maine and 

 Vermont. Laws to control the development of shorelands are in effect 

 in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and a part of California, and similar laws 

 are being considered by the Yf ashington legislation. Laws to establish 

 special areas of critical State or regional concern have been passed in 

 Xew Jersey and Colorado and are being considered in New York. 



Ohio recently passed a statewide building code designed to encour- 

 age industrialized housing. New York and Massachusetts have en- 

 acted legislation to assure that local regulations accommodate develop- 

 ment needed by a larger region. During the 1960's the number of 

 States with planning offices increased from 39 to 50, and this quantita- 

 tive increase has coincided with a marked improvement in the quality 

 of State planning. 



The time is ripe to ask more, and reasonably to expect more, of the 

 States. This is not to suggest that local governments should relax their 

 concern with land use, but that many land-use problems are too big 

 for local government to handle. 



These hirger problems require the concern of an agency whose re- 

 sponsibilities are statewide. For this reason H.E. 4332, proposes a se- 

 lective approach in which the States concentrate on major issues while 

 retaining for local government the responsibility for the great ma- 

 jority of local issues. 



H.R. 4332 is designed to focus State attention on selective priori- 

 ties. States would be encouraged to inventory and control their areas 

 of critical environmental concern. Such areas would include at a mini- 

 mum the coastal zones and estuaries, rare or valuable ecosystems,, 

 shorelands and flood plains of major rivers and lakes, and scenic and 

 historic areas. 



The common need in each of these areas is for protection by regu- 

 lation Avhich takes into account the vulnerability of the lands and 

 waters to destruction through insensitive siting, irregular scale, and 

 excessive development. The ultimate aim is to subject these areas to a 

 comprehensive system of regulations which transcends local jurisdic- 

 tions where the problems themselves do. 



In addition to defining areas of critical environmental concern to 

 include the coastal zone, H.R. 4332 would accord the land-use prob- 

 lems of the coastal and estuarine zone specific consideration in funding. 



I share tlie concern felt by members of this committee that the threat 

 of irreversible losses of coastal wetlands make the coastal zone a high 

 priority and, therefore, a necessary element of national land-use policy. 



It is important, however, to make it clear in Federal legislation that 

 we expect a consistent approach within a State to its land-use prob- 

 lems. Accordingly, I strongly urge the Congress to develop a unified 

 approach on land use, as contemplated in H.R. 4332, which will avoid 



65-819—76 10 



