Summary of state land use controls

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Coastal Zone
information
Center

MAY 1977

COASTAL ZONE
INFORMATION CENTER
Summary of SEp 1977

STATE

L ND

CONTROLS

HD IAYMOND H. SWAN, Editor JANE I CASAZZA, Associate Editor.
170
S89
i977
PO BOX 1067, Blair Station
t

Use Pla Report
Silver Spring, MID 20910

Copies of this Report 6 are available for $15.00 to subscribers of
LAND USE PLANNINr; REPORT and $18.50 to non-subscribers. Library
of Congress card no. 4265965. Make checks payable to Business Publishers
P.O. Box 1067, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

109.2y

property of COIC Library

CONTENTS CHOI ZONE
jKFG-R?ArRGR CENTER

Introduction .... ........................................ 20:003 Montana ......................
Alabama .......... ...... -* .......*.... 20:005 Nebraska ...................... *.*.*.'.*.'.'.*.'.'.*.*.*.'.*""""@"""*".'."**"'**'* 20:021
Alaska ............ ....... 20:005 Nevada ... ............... 20:022
Arizona .......... .............................................................. 20:022
Arkansas ........ ................................................. 20:006 New Hampshire .................................................... 20.023
California ........ .... 20:006 New Jersey ........................................................... 20:023
Colorado ........"...............................T ..................... 20:007 New Mexico ......................................................... 20:024
Connecticut ....... ----***-*- ............................ 20:008 New York ............................................................ 20.:024
20:009 North Carolina ......................................
Delaware ....... ............. 20:025
Florida ............ ....... 20:011 North Dakota ...................................................... 20:026
20:011 Ohio .............
Georgia ................................................................ . ....................................................... 20:026
20:012 Oklahoma ............................................................ 20:027
Hawaii ................................... ............................ 20:012 Oregon ................................................................
Idaho ....................................................I ............... 20:013 Pennsylvania-' 20:028
Illinois ............................................. .......... 20:028
20:014 Rhode Island .......I................................................. 20:029
Indiana ................................................................ 20:014 South Carolina ...........
Iowa .......................................... 20:030
Kansas ..................................... 20:015 South Dakota ...................................................... 20:031
Kentuck ....................... 20:015 Tennessee ..........I................................................. 20:031
y ..................................... 20:016 Texas
Louisiana .......................................... . ............. 20:031
Maine ..................................... ..............I..... 20:016 Utah .................................................................... 20:032
.............................. 20:017 Vermont.
Maryland .............................................................. 20:017 .............................................................. 20:032
Massachusetts ...................................................... 20:018 Virginia ................................I..... .......................... .20:032
Michigan .............................................................. Washington .......................................................... 20:033
Minnesota ....................... 20:019 West Virginia ........................................................ 20:034
1 ..................................... 20:020 Wisconsin ....... ...................................................... 20:034
Mississippi ..............................................! ............. 20:021 Wyoming ..............................................................
Missouri., .............................................................. 20:021 20:035

OE@"rMENT OF COmM
CC A E @ V I ERU NOAA
P) CES CENTER
S'@)UTh HOBSON AVENUE
SC 2
0 15 2 4 1

Introduction 20:003

;@,INTRODUCTION .__Xhrough a series of non-cliecisions coupled with opinions which
_'Ibft many questions unanswered, the court provided little legal
Despite increasing evidence that Federal land use legislation may :guidance in a field which clesparately needs consistent concepts as a
not be adopted in the near@future, many states considered and - basis for regulation. It is not only state and local governments which
adopted numerous land use related proposals in 1976, most of would benefit from such guidance; developers, environmentalists,
which were aimed at increasing state controls over specific types of fair.housing advocates and community groups seeking to preserve
development or geographic areas of statewide concern. Some land their local status quo would probably come out ahead in the long
use commentators are now suggesting that past Federal land use bills run if the court had provided clear ground rules on a number of is-
have been overtaken by single-function state planning programs, sues, such as: administrative vs. legislative land use controls; local re-
the availability of Federal funds from other sources such as the sponsibilities in meeting regional housing needs; and,conditions un-
HUD 701 comprehensive planning program, and changing economic der which governments may withhold public services required by new
conditions which have slowed housing and other projects and re- development.
duced local development pressures. In February 1976, the Supreme Court refuse d to review an ap-
That view is far from unanimous -- no opinion ever is in the field peals court ruling which upheld a Petaluma, Calif. ordinance limiting
of land use control - and other observers have suggested that the residential development. In upholding the measure, which permits
proliferation of Federal and state single-function programs only in- 500 new residential units annually for five years, the appeals panel
creases the need for coordination which might be provided through concluded that "the concept of the public welfare is sufficiently
land use legislation advocated by Sen. Henry Jackson (D.-Wash.) and broad to uphold Petaluma's desire to preserve its small-town char-
Rep. Morris Udall (D.-Ariz.). acter, its open spaces and low density of population, and to grow
As noted at a December 1976 Conservation Foundation con- at an orderly and deliberate pace" (Construction Industry Associa-
ference on state land use policy, the relationship between planning tion of Sonoma County v. City of Petaluma, 75-923).
and subsequent regulation is coming under increased scrutiny, par- In another case, potentially more troublesome in our view, the
ticularly at the state level. In several cases, such as California's court refused to review an Eastlake, Ohio charter provision requir-
coastal zone conservation program, initial results of interim regula- ing a 55% vote in a referendum before zoning changes could be ap-
tion have provided, i mporta nt guidance in the development of more proved JCity of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, 74-1563). In that
permanent plans. However, in most states regulatory programs and case, Justice Lewis Powell's dissent noted that the procedure "appears
proposals are based on prior planning, especi ,ally at the local level. to open disquieting opportunities for local government bodies to by-
There appears to be broad trend away from comprehensive land pass normal protective procedures for resolving issues affecting in-
use programs, particularly those giving state agencies extensive dividual rights."
authority in decision-making. Instead, legislation establishing specific While the Petaluma plan, with its criteria for allocating building
substantive and procedural standards is being emphasized, generally permits, is at least somewhat rational and allows developers avenues
for the protection of certain kinds of lands or the regulation of for appeal, the Eastlake referendum procedure permits zoning
particular types of development. change applications to be rejected essentially without justification.
Related to this trend is a clear movement toward simplification More disturbingly, the applicable rulings in the 'se cases gave scant
of state regulatory programs. Wyoming, for example, has adopted consideration to the impact that the local policies might have
power plant siting legislation setting deadlines for decisions on on regional housing and development. We are not recommending
project applications. States are beginning to adopt shorter applica- that the courts establish quotas or other goals with which local gov-
tion forms requiring less paperwork, holding joint hearings by state ernments must comply; we are suggesting, however, that the courts
agencies with overlapping jurisdiction, and improving coordination @should require localities to consider such regional impacts when
among those agencies, they devise and implement their growth management strategies.
Clearly, no state has achieved a true "one-stop shopping" sys- Efforts to meet low- and moderate-income housing goals suf-
tem for controlling major projects, but some states seem to be mov- fered a setback in January as the court ruled that local land use con-
ing in that direction. States which are considering the adoption of trols may not be overturned solely because they tend to exclude
regulatory "sticks" would be well-advised to include "carrots" such minorities and other low-income groups. Intent to discriminate
as simplified regulatory procedures to gain the support, or at least must first be proved, the court said (Village of Arlington Heights
reduce the opposition, of affected real estate and industry groups. v. Metropolitan Housing and Development Corp., CA 7 517 F2d
Procedural simplification appears to offer benefits for environ- 409). The decision surprised few land use commentators, most of
mentalists also, particularly ffiose who entering the land use arena at whom expect the decision to force much land use litigation back to
the state and local level for the first time. the state courts, reversing recent trends which have seen increased
Such citize'n participation is also gaining increased emphasis, Sev- Federal legal review. In the absence of clear guidance from the
eral states, driven in part by consumer protection advocates, are con- Supreme Court, state jurists will be expected to clarify state and
sidering proposals to provide financial and technical aid to private local governments' rights and duties in curbing development.
citizens to encourage public participation in land use decision-mak- Whatever else state land use programs may have done, they have
ing procedures. In any event, requirement, for citizen participation surely begun to change the state-local relalio nsh ip in the regu Iation
similar to those in the Coastal Zone Management Act will almost . of development. Although some local officials ' no doubt feel that
certainly be included in any Federal land use planning assistance bill. their states are usurping their land use powers in fact local govern-
An informal poll of state planners indicates that the "taking issue" ment is still very much in control in most stat@. The obvious ex-
does not represent an obstacle to increased land use controls in and amples of increased state control such as California, Florida and
of itself, although the issue clearly is an important element of private Hawaii tend to obscure the fact that localities wield the bulk of
sector opposition. The taking issue is frequently a point of hot debate land use authority.
in state legislatures, and there are efforts underway in some states to It is doubtful that a substantive land use program can be adopted,
explicitly require compensation for any loss in land values, but so let alone implemented, by most states without at least some support
far legal claims for compensation have not fared well in the courts. and cooperation on the part of localities. Given the.history of land
Some observers suggest, however, that the compensation issue may use regulation in the U.S., states will be able to reserve full powers
have to be clarified if Federal legislation is to be adopted. only in cases where there is some clear statewide interest, or where
Largely because of the sharp increase in Federal, state and local the impacts of proposed projects clearly overwhelm localities' reg-
land use controls adopted during the 1970s, the body of land use ulatory capabilities.
law has expanded dramatically - and chaotically. Particularly at the States seeking to adopt broad guidelines for new local planning
state level, there are numerous conflicting concepts regarding the should plan on providing meaningful financial and technical assistance
proper role government should play in controlling private develop- to localities. Although some state planners have complained about
merit and ensuring the attainment of social goals such as adequate inadequate support, lack of funding does not seem to pose a major
low-cost housing. Within this context, 1976 saw what in our view obstacle for most state planning programs. At the local level, how-
was a disappointing performance by the U.S. Supreme Co u rt. ever, few jurisdictions are in a position to start now planning opera-

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Introduction 20:004

tions. This is a particularly difficult problem for traditionally rural
localities which are confronted for the first time with major impacts
from projects such as power plants, mines and other large-scale facilities.
Several states are considering new local planning requirements based
on state guidelines as a key element of their land use programs. As a
practical matter, states taking this course must be prepared to aid lo-
calities, particularly those which have done little or no planning in
the past. On the other side of the coin, state initiatives have clearly
spurred localities to improve their land use plans and planning capa-
bility over the last few years.
Many land use commentators expect state actions to become in-
creasingly important, particularly if enthusiasm for Federal legislation
continues to wain. As noted by some Congressional aides, national
legislation does not enjoy strong support from groups other than pro-
fessional planning organizations. In addition, government reorganiza-
tion efforts underway in President Carter's Administration could lead
to improved coordination of Federal programs impacting land use, in
effect achieving one of the goals of the Jackson-Udall bills.
Congress does not appear inclined to undertake any meaningful
review of Federal land use programs to improve coordination. Most
legislative efforts so far amount to "mid-course corrections" of ex-
isting environmental legislation with little attention being given to
unifying current laws. Pending Clean Air Act amendments may make
some sense out of the maze of air quality planning programs and re-
quirements, but Congress and the Administration will be hard-
pressed to work out compromises to continue current programs, let
alone provide real coordination.
The Carter Administration is apparently satisfied with this arrange-
ment, or.at least is not aggressively advocating any alternative ap-
proaches. Carter will probably reinforce the single-function strategy
for land use control, based on initial reports regarding his environ-
mental policies. Carter can be expected to oppose the use of Federal
funds for projects which would consume prime farmland, wetlands,
and floodplains if alternative sites are available, a policy which con-
forms with positions taken during his campaign.
Regardless of the prognosis for new Federal land use and environ-
mental proposals, most commentators agree that existing Federal
programs require increased coordination. Given the proliferation of
laws and the lack of enthusiasm for more stringent controls, environ-
mental protection advocates might do well to consolidate the gains
made since 1970 and improve the implementation of current reg-
ulatory efforts before embarking on new initiatives.
As noted by the Conservation Foundation, the "quiet revolu-
tion" in land use control identified by Fred Bosselman and David
Callies in 1971 "is not universal but it is by no means dead." States
can be expected to continue reacting to particular land use problems
with special purpose programs. But in the long run, it appears that
industry and government must reach agreement on unifying cur-
rently unrelated programs to provide more rational and efficient
regulation.
For more detailed conside7ration of Federal regulations, state laws
and citizen participation, we recommend the following publications,
most of which were published in 1976 and early 1977:
Federal Land Use Regulation, Fred P. Bosselman, Duane Feurer,
Tobin M. Richter. Practising Law Institute, 810 Seventh Ave., New
York, N.Y. 10019, (212) 765-5700; $35;
Environmental and Land Controls Legislation, Daniel R. Man-
delker. Michie Co., P.O. Box 7587, Charlottesville, Va. 22906, (804)
295-6171 ; $15.50,
Land Use and the States, Robert G. Healy. Resources for the
Future, 1755 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036;
$2.95@
Ci;izen Involvement in Land Use Governance, Nelson M. Rosen-
baum. The Urban Institute, 2100 M St., N.W., Washington, D.C.
20037; $3.50 (URI 11500);
Land Use Controls in the U.S. -- A Handbook on the Legal
Rights of Citizens, Natural Resources Defense Council. NRDC,
Box B, 15 W. 44th St., New York, N.Y. 10036; $7.95.

g1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Alaska 20:005

ALABAMA basis for determining permissible and priority uses within the coastal
zone.
There was little action on land use related legislation in Alabama Allocation of coastal resources and a reduction of irreversible re-
during 1976, primarily because of the absence of Federal proposals source commitments are prime objectives of the state CZM program.
and special concern over the economic effects of environmentally
related legislation. Earlier, a legislative commission on land use had ALABAMA LAND USE CONTACTS: Bill J. Starnes, Director
recommended that no new measures be considered. of State Planning, (205) 832-6400; William H. Wallace, Jr., State
Strip mining legislation adopted in 1975 "still appears to be a Planner, (205) 832-6400; Bill Matthews, (205) 832-6400; Alabama
positive mechanism to regulate mining near major lakes and other Development Office, State Capitol, Montgomery, Ala * 36130,
recreation areas," planning officials say. The act requires revegetation
of mined land, although provisions authorizing the state to designate ALABAMA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
and protect areas unsuitable for mining were deleted. Luther W. Hyde, Resources Use.Planner, (205) 832-6400, Alabama
Development Office, State Capitol, Montgomery, Ala. 36130.
Land Use Policy
ALABAMA FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM CONTACT:
Although the legislature has been reluctant to consider general Sherman Shores, Resources Use Planner (205) 832-6400, Alabama
land use legislation, the state's participation in specialized programs Development Office, State Capitol, Montgomery, Ala. 36130.
such as the national flood insurance effort has increased markedly.
State law authorizes the preparation of comprehensive land man-
agement and use plans for unincorporated flood prone areas. County
commissions are similarly authorized to meet requirement of the
1968 National Flood Insurance Act, and may develop criteria for ALASKA
land management and use.
So far, 232 communities and 31 countries are participating in the Development of natural resources and control of related land
Federal flood insurance program. State participation has increased use impacts are the main land use issues in Alaska, and Outer
sharply, "stimulated in large part by initial imposition of Federal Continental Shelf oil and gas development has become the most
sanctions against communities failing to meet their deadlines," ac- pressing problem, according to state officials who say the state is
cording to state officials. Alabama is providing technical assistance to not fully prepared to plan and regulate new development associated
communities, and is working with Federal agencies to obtain flood with energy and mineral projects. The state has been among the
hazard information "in an effort to maintain an environmentally most vocal advocates of Federal planning and coastal zone man-
sound patternof growth in and around" flood-prone communities. agement aid, and state officials say Federal ssiste nce is needed
The state has identified priority flood study areas, and is attempting immediately. The state got some relief as the Interior Department
to advance flood-prone localities from the emergency program to the agreed to delay OCS lease sales, but officials say they will still be
regular phase of the program. hard pressed to provide public services for new energy development.
The flood control program is viewed by some state officials as a ,
possible vehicle,for court mandated land use controls, "It is not incon- Land Use Policy
ceivable that courts will utilize the floodplain zoning situation to de-
mand that different political units work together to achieve compre- The Native Claims Act authorized Alaska natives to select 40-
hensive land use planning and zoning." "Floodplain and Coastal Area million Federally owned acres, and Interior has set aside more than
Land Use Controls" is availabli6irom the Planning Division, Alabama 100-million from which aboriginal claims will be settled. The act
Development Office, State Office Bldg., Montgomery, Ala. 36104. also calls for Federal designation of at least 80-million acres for
parks, wildlife refuges and national forests.
Coastal Zone Manageme nt Conservation groups have recommended preservation of some
100-million acres of wilderness, while the Interior Department has
Major revisions in Alabama's coastal zone management legislation urged Federal ownership of about 83,5-million acres, I 9-mi "ion
were adopted in 1976. The state's CZM program was authorized in of which would be under U.S. Forest Service supervision for log-
1973 with the adoption, of Act 1274. The legislation established the ging and mining. Conservation groups including the Sierra Club
Coastal Area Board with authority for developing, coordinating, and say their recommendations will permit the protection of "com-
maintaining a coasta Iarea program, and provided for the promulgation plete ecosystems" and will link near-contiguous land units and
of regulations for enforcing thelact. The state Planning Division was permit more efficient management.
designated to carry out the CZM program. Opponents of the conservation iStS' plan contend that it will
In response the requests from various coastal area groups, the 1976 "lock up" natural resources and prevent development needed to
legislature repealed Act 1274 and passed an amended coastal area de- bolster Alaska's economy.
velopment act which was signed into law Aug, 23, 1976, by Gov, Under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement, Act and Statehood
Wallace. Act 534 created an advisory committee composed of 14 Act, the state is selecting up to 104-million acres of Federal lands
citizens representing varied coastal interests, with the advisory com- which will be placed under state control. Interior officials have
mittee chairman having voting powers on the CAB. The composition granted the state an extension until April I to exercise its ex-
of the board was also changed to provide more representation by lo- clusive preference right to select land. State claims will take
cal officials and representatives of other state agencies with an interest precedence over Alaska native claims if there is a conf I ict.
in coastal management.
Act 534 also defines the Alabama coastal zone as the area lying Coastal Zone Management
seaward of the 10-ft. contour line. The measure also provides for
CAB staffing and the orderly transfer of authority between the state Alaska continues to dispute the offshore oil leasing schedule cur-
Development Office and CAB. rently established by the U.S. Interior Department, and is negotiat-
Alabama officials say they are continuing to concentrate on un- ing with the agency to slow the pace of future Outer Continental
regulated development in wetlands, shoreline erosion, storm damage Shelf development, although initial lease sales were held early in
and flooding and competition among industrial, commercial, agri- 1976. State officials are cautiously optimistic that a "more ac-
cultural and residential developers for coastal lands. ceptable lease schedule" can be worked out.
Data gathering efforts are continuing on the problems of com- Interior is proceeding with an environmental impact statement
mercial, residential land industrial development, recreational facil- on the program, and exploratory drilling activities are now under
ities, mining, transportation, navigation, solid waste disposal, agri- way in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. "The first wave of
culture and commercial fishing. Data Will be used to develop policy onshore changes is beginning to touch coastal communities" near
goals within each area. These policies are expected to serve as the planned OCS development sites, according to officials of the state

C1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Alaska 20:006

Division of Policy Development and Planning. Co., a major utility which sought to keep the proposition off the
Coastal management in Alaska, meanwhile, continues in its pro- ballot. APSC and several other concerns are currently planning three
gram development phase. The second round of coastal management large reactor units along the Salt River.
bills introduced in the 1976 legislature again failed to pass. However,
a resolution was adopted establishing a joint,legislature administra- ARIZONALAND USE CONTACTS: Harry F. Higgins, State
tion committee to review coastal management. The resolution Planning Director; Dennis Thompson, Associate Director; Dennis
acknowledges the unique qualities of the numerous pressures on Davis, Associate Director; Office of Economic Planningand De-
coastal resources, opening the door to future legislation to deal with velopment, 1645 W. Jefferson St., Phoenix, Ariz. 85007, (602)
coastal issues, state officials say. 271-5005.
Because of the great expanse and diversity of the Alaskan coast-
line and because of the varying pressures on the needs for coastal
resources, the state is emphasizing the role of local planning in
coastal management. State guidelines for local planning are being
developed "to allow local flexibility to address the problems of ARKANSAS
particular relevance in each area," including offshore oil development
and other resource management issues. Under Gov. David H. Pryor's Administration, land use planning
The Alaskan coastal management program is now being developed is considered a local issue which should not be substantively ad-
with a $920,000 Federal grant for the state's third year of work dressed by state government. State officials are currently preparing
under the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act. CZM activities to provide mapping and technical assistance to states under con-
are handled by the Division of Policy Development and Planning stitutional amendments giving counties increased autonomy over
in the governor's office. The division primarily plans a coordinative issues such as land use.
role, assisting other state agencies responsible for coastal resources,
local governments, and Federal agencies managing coastal resources Land Use Policy
and lands. The state anticipates completion of its coastal manage-
ment program in 1978. Under state constitutional changes, all 75 Arkansas counties
Alaska officials envision a two-level management program, in- will be granted home-rule authority. Effective Jan. 1, 1977, counties
cluding overall management for the entire coast, and "intensive will automatically have the authority to implement programs
management" for coastal areas faced with rapid urban and indus- through legislation, including land use controls, unless prohibited
trial development. from doing so by state law. County planning legislation has been
authorized by the state since the mid-1930s. State officials have
ALASKA LAND USE CONTACTS: Robert LeResche, Director, expressed hope that "planning will be made a functional part of the
(907) 465-3512; Katherin L. Allred, Senior Planner, (907) 465- overall local governmental process."
3512; Division of Policy Development and Planning, Office of the Gov. David Pryor her consistently contended that land use plan-
Governor, Pouch AD, Juneau, Alaska 99801. ning and regulation is a.local issue to be handled either by municipal
or county agencies. Pryor has opposed efforts to adopt state legis-
ALASKA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: lation, in contrast to his predecessor, Dale Bumpers, who left of-
Glenn J. Akins, Coastal Management Program Coordinator, (907) f ice to take a Senate seat.
465-3574; Division of Policy Development and Planning, Office of Less than half of the state's counties currently have planning
the Governor, Pouch AD, Juneau, Alaska 99801. commissions. Most localities have resisted planning either at the
state or local level. State officials generally feel that Arkansas is
not faced with the kinds of growth and development pressures
which have led to the enactment of planning laws in states such as
California, Oregon or Florida, and no state legislation is expected
ARIZONA unless required by Federal law.
At the state level, technical assistance continues to be the thrust
During 1976, the state legislature virtually ignored a reintroduced of the Department of Local Services' natural resource management
bill which would have designated geographic areasend certain land program. As part of that program, local land use and ownership
uses of state concern. The legislation was bogged down during 1975 maps are being prepared for distribution to all counties. The maps,
over the issue of compensation for landowners affected by state reg- a part of the state's natural resources inventory system, are based
ulation, and the legislature ref@ sed to reconsider the measure during on the U.S. Geological Survey's land use data analysis program,
U
1976. and are augmented by statistical data.
There has been speculation that similar proposals will be intro-
ducad in the legislature for consideration in 1977, but state officials
are uncertain what form the bills will take, or if they will be ap- Energy Facilities and Lands
proved by the legislature. State officials are currently investigating the usefulness of the
Land Use Policy vast deposits of lignite, or brown coal, found in Arkansas. U.S.
Bureau of Mines estimate of lignite reserves, made in 1954, totaled
Arizona planning officials are concentrating on coordinating some 25-million tons, but that has been updated to about 10.5-
existing planning programs and authorities to develop unified growth billion tons by state geologists, and officials say the reserves have
policies for consideration by Gov. Raul Castro. The state is attempt- attracted the interest of utilities such as Arkansas Power and
ing to assess the impact of single-function programs in air pollution, Light Co.
water quality, economic development and 701 comprehensive plan- Because of its relatively low Btu content, officials do not expect
ning. Officials have noted that land use controls "are already there," Arkansas lignite to be mined immediately, unless the cost of more
and must be coordinated. efficient fuels increases sharply, although lignite development is
expected to play an important role in the state's long-term
Energy Facilities and Lands economic plans. Lignite strip mining would consume considerable
acreage, since more brown coal would have to be mined to gen-
Arizona voters overwhelmingly defeated a November referendum erate the same amount of energy produced by other fuels.
which would have required legislative approval before new nuclear The impact of the additional mining might be more severe, since
power plants could be sited in the state. The question was approved mining would take place near areas more densely developed than
for voter consideration after a citizens group, Arizonans for Safe regions such as those in Wyoming which have experienced mining-
Energy, won a Superior C curt test against Arizona Public Service related growth.

C1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

California 20:007

ARKANSAS LAND USE CONTACTS: Ronald Copeland, problems of air and water pollution and inadequate public facilities,"
Director, f501) 371-1211; Tom Herrin, Deputy Director for Com- and the increasing public need for adequate housing opportunities.
munity Development; Department of Local Services, Suite 900 -- Dissenting, Justice Stanley Mask contended that "it cannot be
First National Building, Little Rock, Arkansas, 72201; Bert Wakely, seriously argued that Livermore maintains anything other than total
Coordinator, (501) 371-2611; Office of State Planning Coordination, exclusion," scoring "elitist" suburban communities for Wilding "a
American Foundation Bldg. Fourth and Ringo St., Little Rock, Ark. mythical moat around their perimeter, not for the benefit of man-
72201. kind, but to exclude all but its fortunate current residents." Mask
said the city had not prepared a timetable for providing adequate
public services, adding that there is "no inducement" for existing
residents to upgrade public facilities to accommodate new growth.
CALIFORNIA The Livermore case was considered a major test case by California
localities, as was the Petaluma case, in which a Federal appeals court
Despite signs that environmental enthusiasm is waning somewhat, upheld the town's right to impose an annual limit of 500 new housing
California retained its position as one of the states most active in land units. U.S. District Court originally struck down Petaluma's plan in
use planning and regulation. Coastal zone management legislation was 1974, and after the appeals panel reversed the trial court ruling, the
finally adopted after some initial setbacks for advocates of state con- U.S. Supreme Court refused to review the case, in effect upholding
trols, indicating that concerns over regulation's impact on the econo- the appeals decision.
my, especially he construction industry, are strong, In other litigation, the state Supreme Court ruled that coastal land
The state Supreme Court also upheld localities' authority to developers must obtain permits from the state Coastal Zone Conserva-
adopt virtual bans on new construction if public facilities are inade- tion Commission even though work on their projects may have started
quate, although that issue must still be resolved by the U.S. Supreme before the enactment of original coastal legislation in 1972. Orange
Court. County officials had granted Avco Community Developers, Inc., a
Broad state land use policies are being finalized, aimed at con- rough grading permit and had approved a subdivision map for the
centrating new development near existing urban areas and revital- company's 74-acre project prior to the act's passage, but the court
izing older urban centers. Farmland preservation legislation, rejected ruled that a state coastal commission permit was still required.
by the state legislature, will be reintroduced, and may prove to be Avco has appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing
the primary land use issue for. 1977. that it had a vested right in the proiect beginning construction before
the coastal act was adopted (Supreme Court docket number 76-888;
Land Use Policy Calif SupCt 17 Cal3d 785, 18 Cal3d 177b, 132,132 CalRptr 377,
553 P2cI 537; Avcci Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast
Gov. Jerry Brown's Office of Planning and Research is in the Regional Commission).
process of drafting a report recommending land use policies and
specific actions that state, regional and local government agencies
will be called upon to implement. Included in the report are propos- Coastal Zone Management
als requiring industry to use urban facilities and sites approved by re-
gional and state agencies; local redevelopment agencies to undertake After several false starts, the legislature adopted a measure creating
or finance new construction for private use largely with state funds a permanent Coastal Zone Conservation Commission to regulate
and ensuring decent housing for low-income residents; taxes to dis- development along the coast. CZCC's jurisdiction includes a 1,000-
courage rural land speculation; and cities to share property and sales yd. strip of coastal land, which expands to almost five miles in environ-
tax revenues. mentally critical areas. In urbanized areas, CZCC's jurisdiction is mini-
OPR Director William Press said the plan is based on the fact that mal, but the agency will control coastal development until localities
California "has become the world's symbol for urban sprawl.,.'. and we bring their plans into conformance with state guidelines.
can no longer continue to grow that way. We've got to move toward a Advocates of the legislation, led by Sen. Anthony Beilenson, en-
more compact urban form and revitalize existing urban areas." The countered their first major roadblock in June 1976 when the Senate
areas that will be most affected by the plan are Los Angeles, San Finance Committee refused to approve the CZM bill, largely in
Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, Fresno and Bakersfield, where response to opposition from business and labor interests. The bill,
more than 90% of the state population lives, Press noted. as debated by Finance, would have established broad guidelines for
To achieve this more compact urban form, the report advocates localities to follow in regulating growth, such as concentrating new
rebuilding deteriorating inner city areas, utilizing vacant urban development near existing urbanized areas and protecting "sensitive"
land and development of new areas adjacent to existing urbanized areas such as estuaries, beaches and wetlands.
areas, with no leapfrog development. Press said he expects opposi- Revised legislation, utlimately passed, was prepared by Sen. Jerry
tion to the plan from growth-Priented organizations, but contended Smith, and included a narrower coastal zone than than envisioned
such opposition will be ill-found, The study is "not a no-growth in Beilenson's bill. Other concessions included reduced CZCC author-
report, it's a managed growth report. It just says it makes more ity over coastal farmlands and more specific guidelines for controlling
sense to build 'here' than it does to build 'out there."' coastal development. The revised bill also limited CZCC's authority
Copies of the report will be available from the California Office to reduce opposition from other state agencies and localities.
of Planning and Research, 1400 10th St., Rm. 256, Sacramento, Several weaker alternative coastal bills, proposed by Assembly-
Calif. 90254. men Barry Keene and Mike Cullen, were rejected by the Senate Nat-
The state Supreme Court has upheld a Livermore referendum and ural Resources Committee in August, representing a major setback
ordinance which prohibits new home construction until schools, for industry and local government advocates seeking to block Smith's
sewage disposal facilities, and water supplies meet certain standards bill. Final passage came in late August, followed by the enactment
to support new development. The land use controls, upheld 5-2, in September of a $1.747-million appropriation to fund initial CZCC
were challenged by area developers (Associated Homebuilders of operations. The new legislation officially eliminates the six regional
the Greater Eastbay, Inc., v. City of Livermore, SF-23222). Plain- coastal commissions established under Proposition 20 in 1972, al-
tiffs contended that the city did not comply with a state law requir- though they may be revised if the CZCC determines that the permit
ing localities to hold public hearings "fore imposing construction review workload requires additional personnel.
ban. The case was remanded to the trial court for consideration During 1976, Californ@a was embroiled in several controversies
of the ordinance's possible impacts on the city and region. over the siting of energy facilities in the coastal zone to handle crude
Writing for the majority, Justice Mathew O.Tobriner wrote that oil from Alaska. Exxon Corp. proposed an onshore oil processing
such controls "are constitutional if they are reasonably related to facility for crude produced at its Santa Barbara Channel lease tracts,
the welfare of the region affected by the ordinance". The court but opted for an offshore facility beyond state jurisdiction when the
recognized "the growing conflict between the efforts of suburban stdte attempted to impose conditions on the Plant's operations aimed
communities to check disorderly development with its concomitant at protecting the environment.

(@)l 977 Business Publishers, Inc.

California 20:008

The dispute with Exxon is considered crucial by state officials, COLORADO
who believe the case will test California's power "to regulate facili-
ties and operations with the state's territorial jurisdiction that are Having criticized current land use law as too weak and "unwork-
required to support exploration, production and development of able," Gov. Richard Lamm's Administration is developing amend-.
oil and gas in Federal waters." ments for consideration by the 1977 legislature. Initial proposals re-
California is also contesting a Standard Oil of Ohio plan for a ceive little attention during 1975 and 1976.
$45-million supertanker terminal at Long Beach, plus a pipeline Efforts to control growth by restricting the availability of sewers
across southern California to Texas. The plan will have major air quality and similar facilities were sharply curtailed by estate Supreme Court
impacts, according to local officials and environmentalists. The issue ruling ordering the city of Boulder to extend sewer lines to areas
of coastal energy development was complicated in 1976 by a tanker beyond the urban boundary.
explosion in Los Angeles Harbor which has prompted pressure for
additional curbs on coastal siting of energy facilities. Land Use Policy

Passed in 1974, Colorado's land use law calls for the designation
and regulation of areas of "statewide interest," subject to review by
Agricultural Lands the Colorado Land Use Commission. The law (H.B.1041) includes
criteria to guide localities in the designation of such areas.
Legislation aimed at preserving prime farmland was blocked for The act has come under fire from a variety of interests. Gov.
the second year in a row, but advocates of the plan are optimistic Lamm has contended that Colorado's reputation in land use plan-
that the 1977 legislature will approve the measure. ning "exceeds the realty." The state has made progress, "especially
During 1976, a state Senate committee killed a measure authored in terms of reinforcing local governments' powers," Lamm says,
by Assembly Land Use and Energy Committee Chairman Charles "but in other areas, such as energy and preserving agricultural land,
Warren which would have created a 12-member commission made we're weak."
up of public, municipal, county and state representatives empowered H.B.1041 has also been criticized by state land use commissioners
to veto local zoning decisions which would lead to urbanization of forgiving LUC I 'ittle flexibility in dealing with land use problems.
farmland tracts exceeding 80 acres. Real estate, farming and con- Some environmental groups have advocated legislative changes to
struction interests strongly opposed the bill, while environmental give the state more substantive power over land use issues tradition-
groups supported it. ally handled by local governments, although some state legislators
Warren said the measure would have protected some 18,000 acres doubt that such proposals could win approval.
of prime farmland, and would have prevented further declines in LUC officials developing the Lamm Administration's proposals
state agricultural production, in addition to curbing urban sprawl. are expected to include tax incentives for preserving prime farmland
California has lost some 30 square miles of farmland annually in and open space. They are also considering recommendations to co-
recent years, Warren said. ordinate the land use act with another measure, S.B.35, which sets
In 1965, the state adopted the so-called Williamson Act, which minimum standards for subdivisions.
grants tax breaks for landowners who maintain agricultural lands Based on a series of public hearings, LUC concluded in a Decem-
as open space under 1 0-year contracts. Critics of the act complain ber 1976 report to Gov. Lamm that primary authority for land use
that it has only temporarily delayed land conversions while giving regulation should remain at the local level, with the state providing
large landowners and speculators short-term tax windfalls. technical and financial assistance for planning. At present, "local
Warren's bill, narrowly passed by the Assembly, is expected to governments feel that they are not receiving the amount and
be reintroduced intact in 1977, but it will face competition from quality of assistance from the state that is needed to fulfill their
another proposal advocated by Sen. George N. Zenovich and land use responsibilities," the report said.
Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright, Chairman of the powerful Ways The existing structure of state government "hinders the delivery
and Means Committee. The Boatwright-Zenovich*bill, prepared of state services," the report continued, largely because some 20
largely by the state Chamber of Commerce, would require cities agencies scattered in five major departments provide land use re-
and counties to develop agricultural land preservation plans by lated services independently with little policy guidance, a problem
April 1979, with a state review board having final approval which has been cited by Lamm.
authority. Localities would be authorized to channel review board In addition, state regulatory decisions are made "without full
decisions in court. All locally designated lands would come under knowledge or consideration of all interrelated environmental and
Williamson Act provisions for 10 years. land use factors.7 Commission officials noted that they are frequently
Warren's bill includes a concession to the California League of called in to resolve disputes at the "eleventh hour" because land use
Cities permitting municipalities to proceed with existing develop- factors were not considered during initial planning, adding that there
rnent plans for 10 years, after which urban expansion must be are no mechanisms for resolving interjurisdictional disputes.
curbed. That provision angered county officials, who contended Based on hearing testimony, LUC concluded that the state's key
that cities would be given excessive influence over county land land use acts, S.B.35 and H.B.1041, are functioning adequately but
use decision-making. Battle lines are already being drawn, as must be coordinated and simplified. S.B.35 lacks strong enforcement
county and city officials seek to consolidate their traditional authorities to deal with violators of subdivision regulations, and im-
power bases in the state Senate and Assembly, respectively. poses needless burdens on small-scale developers, the report found.
Gov. Jerry Brown has taken no position on the farmland H.B.1041 has encouraged local involvement in land use planning
preservation controversy, and aides have adopted an officially and regulation but is procedurally complex, and has not been funded.
neutral stance, although Warren and his allies have expressed adequately. The report cited considerable testimony urging changes
concern that Brown will side with Boatwright and Zenovich in in "matters of state concern," which are covered in H.B.1 041, al-
advocating a relatively weak preservation bill. though no apparent consensus developed regarding the extent of
state involvement.
In the Boulder case, the state Supreme Court ruled that the city
CALIFORNIA LAND USE CONTACT: William Press, Director, must extend sewer and water service to newly developed areas out-
(916) 445-4831; State Office of Planning and Research, 1400 10th side the city limits. If the land conforms to regulations and require-
St., Rm. 256, Sacramento, California 95814. ments, the city may not refuse sewer service simply to control growth,
the court said.
Boulder had refused to approve service to an area five miles be-
CALIFORNIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: yond the city limits, contending that the project did not coincide
Joseph E. Bodovitz, Executive Director, 1415) 557-1001; Califor- with phased development plans for the region. The Boulder compre-
nia Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, 1540 Market St., San hensive plan identifies areas to receive urban service by 1990, with
Francisco, Calif. 94102. other areas not expected to be serviced until after that time.

(g)1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Connecticut 20:009

Pre-1990 areas included Boulder and a developed area outside CONNECTICUT
the city limits known as Gunbarrel Hill, which iscurrently served by
sewers. The disputed property lies between the city and the Gun- Efforts to conserve agricultural lands received emphasis in 1976,
barrel Hill area. The developer met city land use regulations includ- with state officials preparing legislative proposals calling for the
ing maintenance of open space, and his request for'service was ap- acquisition of development rights for some 325,000 farmland
proved by the Boulder Water and Sanitation District. However, the acres. Similar proposals have been defeated by the state legislature.
city refused to approve a service contract because the project would State officials are also implementing legislation mandating ex-
violate the phased development timing envisioned in the comprehen- panded conservation and development planning, and are concluding
sive plan. the second phase of their coastal zone management program.
The state Supreme Court ruling upheld a decision handed down
by a lower court. The Supreme Court also ruled Boulder County Land Use Policy
officials, and not the city, must make the final decision to approve
the disputed project. In the court's view, county commissioners In 1976, the state legislature adopted PA 76-130, mandating the
had found the proposed project in conformance with the compre- preparation of a conservation and development plan covering land
hensive plan. and water resources, transportation, air quality and energy. The
In an effort to reverse the court ruling, Boulder voted 18,180- plan is to be completed for legislative consideration by 1979.
17,749 to adopt a growth control policy patterned after the Petaluma, The plan would be advisory, although state agencies would be
Calif., program upheld in the Federal courts. In addition to carrying required to review proposed programs to determine whether propo-
out the comprehensive plan, the voter-approved policy is aimed at sals conform to the plan. The plan would include proposed state
avoiding major tax increases. The policy sets an annual 450-unit land acquisitions, public service improvements exceeding $100,000,
limit on the number of residential building permits which can be purchase of public transportation equipment or facilities exceeding
issued over the next five years, a restriction which applies only to $100,000, and similar plans required by other state and Federal
projects of five or more units. The program also directs the city laws.
council to adopt a "system for evaluating proposed projects and The plan envisioned in the legislation is an expanded version of
allocating building permits among builders on the basis of merit." an earlier proposed document prepared by the now-defunct state
A two percent annual growth rate is specified. Department of Finance and Control. That plan, presented to the
The restrictions do not apply to subsidized housing projects legislature in 1973 and adopted as executive policy in 1974, in-
for which commitments have already been made, but apparently do cluded a series of land and water use policies designed to guide
apply to future low-income housing proposals. where and at what densities development should occur. The land
use policy map divided the state into categories: 25% suitable for
urban development, 505/6 for limited development and 25% for per-
Energy Facilities and Lands manent open space. The plan also included water use policies, indi-
cating opport unities for new and expanded use of water resources.
Colorado-officials, along with other Western states, have resisted The legislature has also adopted a measure consolidating state
Federal plans to expand coal production through strip-mining until planning functions into a Department of Planning and Energy Policy.
the Interior Department agrees to enforce state reclamation rules, The department is responsible "for formulating plans for transmittal
which are more stringent than Federal regulations. State leaders are to the state planning council concerning the physical, social and
concerned that Federal requirements are vague and give mine oper- economic development of the state." Department plans are reviewed
ators excessive leeway in, determining the extent to which reciama- by the council and transmitted to the Legislative Committee on
tion is practical. State Planning and Development. Plans may be developed in con-
During 1976, the state Land Reclamation Board adopted regula- junction with other agencies. The department also integrates the
tions requiring mining permit applications to be accompanied by provision of social services and statewide water resources, and
revegetation and land restoration plans for proposed strip mining assists other agencies in developing planning capability.
sites. Primary emphasis of the department involves continuing work_
The state legislature considered, but failed to pass, a on the state plan of conservation and development with new activ-
bill which would have extended state regulatory authority to all ities in air, transportation and energy in addition to on-going land
surface mining operations. As approved by the House, mine opera- and water policy planning.
tors would be required to submit mining plans to obtain permits, and . The department also provides staff support for the state Planning
state officials would be empowered to take court action to stop un- Council, and participates in transportation and coastal zone manage-
authorized mining, for which fines of $100 to $1,000/day could be merit planning. The department designates planning regions, pro-
levied. vides funds and assistance for regional planning, administers certain
The state Senate debated a weakened version of the House bil I, Federal planning aid, reviews Federal grant applications, and over-
adopting several amendments granting exemptions for small strip sees the preparation of environmental impact statements.
mine operators. Some state officials criticized the Senate bill as be- In court action, a Federal judge enjoined the Department of
ing weaker than Federal standards, Housing and Urban Development from distributing some $4-million
Colorado voters followed the nationwide pattern by rejecting in community development funds to the suburbs of Hartford, con-
a referendum proposal which would have required legislative ap- cluding that the jurisdictions would use the funds to maintain
proval of nuclear power plant siting decisions to insure plant safety. existing exclusionary land use policies. The suit was brought by
In other energy related developments, the legislature rejected Gov. the city.
Richard Lamm's proposed bill which would have given the state Judge M. Joseph Blumenfeld of the U.S. District Court in Hartford
authority to consider social, environmental and economic impacts found that HUD exceeded its authority by informing CD grant appli-
of a proposed facility before making site selections. State officials cants that low-income resident projects were not necessary, in spite
contended that Colorado lacks comprehensive facility siting policies, of statutory requirements that such planning be undertaken. HUD
although opponents of the bill said the proposal would have led to had contended that the requirement was waived because the infor-
excessive state regulation. mation was too difficult to obtain.
Hartford officials said 90% of the region's low-income persons
were forced to live in the city becasue of exclusionary policies
pursued by the suburban jurisdictions. Little low-income housing
COLORADO LAND LOSE CONTACTS: Wil Ulman, Director, was available outside Hartford, city officials said. Hartfordsought
(303) 892-2778; State Land Use Commission, 1313 Sherman St., to force the suburbs to provide low-income housing, so that the city
Rm. 415, Denver, Colo. 80203; Philip H. Schmuck, Director; John would not be forced to spend its CD funds for such projects. The
McLucas, Assistant Director; Colorado Division of Planning, 1313 suburbs had programmed the HUD funds for sewers, parks and
Sherman St., Rm. 520, Denver, Colo. 80203, (303) 892-2351. other services.

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Connecticut 20:010

In his decision, handed down in late January, Blumenfeld said the Coastal Zone Management
low-income resident projects were a key element of the 1974 Commu-
nity Development Act, noting that Congress intended to reduce the
existing concentration of low-income residents in central cities.
"The statute clearly has, as one of its objectives, the spatial decon- Connecticut received grants totaling $486,083 from the Federal
centration of lower-income groups, particularly from the central cities, Office of Coastal Zone Management for the second year of state
Blumenfeld said. "Congress apparently decided that this was part of the CZM Program development. The second program phase is nearing
solution to the crisis facing our urban communities." Blumenfeld said completion, and has covered some 15 months.
the subruban jurisdictions could reapply for Federal funds if they in- Planning work for Connecticut's CZM program is being carried
cluded the required low-income resident projections. emphasizing that out by a special unit within the Department of Environmental ro-
HUD would be expected to weigh the data carefully in making grant tection's environmental quality division, with assistance from otther
decisions. state agencies, coastal regional planning agencies, and citizen members
chose from among diverse interest groups.
Principal CZM activities include identification of critical gao-
graphic areas, including wetlands, recreational areas and harbor im-
Agricultural Lands provement sites, for special attention in the program and definition
of a management boundary which outlines the inland limit of the
coastal zone. Eight proposed boundaries are now under study, and
will be discussed in a series of public hearings.
The state has completed an overall inventory of farmland, dividing In addition, Connecticut is developing a land and water use stt-
acreage into tillable acres, pasture, woodland, and other kinds of land egy by reviewing existing plans and governmental functions for their
which are a part of a farm unit. The inventory has been done for all relevance to the state coastal problems. Specific local programs under-
eight counties, and data are available for total county acreage. going review include zoning regulations, subdivision regulations, and
The state is now planning to gather more detailed information controls on development of inland wetlands. At the state level, review
about agricultural land uses based primarily on random sampling of is underway on the regulation of tidal and inland wetlands, structures
farmers. The state is also planning to poll farmers on the issue of sell- and dredging, and stream channel encroachment. The state analysis
ing development rights to the state as part of a program to conserve will attempt to determine the cumulative impact and degree of over-
agricultural lands. lap, and to develop a more coordinated system for managing coastal
State agriculture officials plan to reintroduce farmland preserva- resources.
tion legislation that was rejected in 1975. The farmland inventory Connecticut is also studying drilling impacts to forecast how the
was carried out as a compromise between the legislature and Gov. coastal zone will be affected by development of oil and gas on the
Ella Grasso. The legislation would have authorized a state commission Outer Continental Shelf. Sites suitable for OCS development are
to acquire at least 325,000 acres, or some 70% of the state's farm- being inventoried, and a method for siting large scale facilities is
land. The goal enjoyed considerable support in the legislature, but the also under study. A model for determining net benefits and costs
one percent additional tax on real estate sales proposed to finance the of proposed projects is being prepared, and is expected to be com-
program was opposed.The state legislature includes numerous devel- pleted soon.
opers and builders. Structures for managing the coast at all levels of government are
State officials are hoping that the poll of farmers will demonstrate being developed, and will be proposed for public review and comment.
support for the development rights purchase program. About $30- Citizen participation and information efforts are also proceeding,
million would be generated by the real estate sales tax envisioned including the preparation of a "developers handbook" summarizing
by state officials. That amount would be augmented by bonding DEP regulatory programs. A summary of Long Island Sound resources
authority, although it is hoped that the real estate tax alone will be is also being published.
adequate. As a basic approach, "Connecticut's CZM program is following
Efforts to stem farmland urbanization in Connecticut have re- the management option of shared state-local authority with the
ceived mixed reviews over the last several years. Differential assess- state developing specific policies and standards for local implementa-
ment legislation, Act 490, was passed in 1963 and was amended in tion and maintaining an oversight function." Related state programs
1972. The measure has been generally unable to halt development of include: (1) regulation of structures and dredging in coastal water$;
farmland, primarily because land prices have increased sharply, ac- (2) tidal wetlands regulation; (3) state and local regulation of inland
cording to a report by the Connecticut Conservation Association. wetlands; and (4) limited floodplain regulation.
A more recent study prepared by the state Department of Environ-
mental Protection concluded that Act 490 has been successful but
recommended additional steps to insure long-range preservation of
farms and open space. "Uncontrolled urban growth or sprawl which CONNECTICUT LAND USE CONTACT. Lynn Alan Brooks,
creates a myriad of social, economic and environmental problems is Commissioner (203) 566-2800; David Harrigan, Deputy Commis-
becoming increasingly evident" in Connecticut, DEP said, but Act sioner (203) 566-2800; Department of Planning and Energy Policy,
490 has worked in slowing unplanned growth in many towns and has 340 Capitol Ave., Hartford, Conn, 06115.
encouraged farmland preservation by giving tax breaks to farmland
owners.
The legislative proposals for farmland preservation are based CONNECTICUT AGRICULTUhAL LANDS CONTACT: Don
largely on a report prepared by the Governor's task force which Tuttle, Director, (203) 566-7173, Board of Agriculture, State Office
recommended protection of 325,000 acres, the amount needed to Bldg., Rm. 269, Hartford, Conn. 06115.
meet one-third of Connecticut's food supply needs. The task force
urged local zoning authorities to designate agricultural reserves
in consultation with other jurisdictions and citizen groups. "The
land within the reserves should be preserved for growing food by the CONNECTICUT COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
state purchase of development rights. The value of these rights is the Charles McKinney, (203) 566-7407; Department of Environmental
difference between the value of the land Ifor agriculture and its value Protection, 71 Capitol Ave., Hartford, Conn. 06115.
for other uses."
Development rights purchase should be initiated by farmers, who
should retain all ownership rights, the task force said. The report
recommended issuing bonds to finance the land acquisition program,
although state officials generally agree that there is insufficient polit-
ical support for such a financing approach.

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Florida 20:011

DELAWARE FLORIDA
1976 was the first year of implementation of the Local Govern-
The potential impact of Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas de- ment Comprehensive Planning Act, which was approved in 1975 by
velopment represents the major land use issue in Delaware, state the state legislature. Under the law, all counties and municipalities
officials say, and attention continues to be focused on the coastal must prepare comprehensive plans by July 1979. One possible growth
zone, where industrial sitings are limited to areas already urbanized. control tool to back up those plans was partially removed during
These restrictions may be relaxed somewhat in the future, according 1976, as a state court overturned a population and living unit "cap"
to state officials. imposed by Boca Raton.
Land. Use Policy Land Use Policy

Rep. Pierre du Pont, the incoming Republican governor, is gen- The only specific requirement for 1976 under the comprehensive
erally rated highly by environmental groups, and was a key partici- planning act was the designation by localities of planning agencies.
pant in negotiations leading to the enactment of Coastal Zone Man- About 426 designations were made by local governments, and plans
agement Act amendments in 1976, so state officials expect him to or portions of plans were received from 19 localities for review by
continue current policie's calling for protection of the coastline. the state.
Rep. du Pont supported Federal land use legislation on the The legislature also considered, but failed to enact, a bill amend-
House floor in 1974, but most officials agree that comprehensive ing .the state Land and Water Management Act's provisions dealing
land use legislation will remain in the planning stages in Delaware with regulation of developments of regional impact (DRI). Since the
for the foreseeable future. Continued emphasis on local planning DRI program was initiated in July 1973, procedural ambiguities
and controls is anticipated.. Localities have conventional zoning have developed, state planners say. The proposed amendment would.
authority, but controls must follow locally developed comprehen- have established procedures for evaluating substantive changes in
sive'plans. previously approved development orders.
The legislation also would have created a process for reviewing
long-term projects comparable to planned unit developments. The
Division of State Planning and major developers supported the leg-
Coastal Zone Management islation, which passed the House but failed in the Senate.
The 1976 legislature adopted another DRI amendment,to require
Wetlands are designated and permits required for development an analysis of the demand for or use of energy as an element of state
under regulations issued by the state Department of Natural Re- review of proposed projects.
sources and Environmental Control. The regulations, based on Despite initial problems, the DR I program "continues to provide
1973 legislation mandating the protection of wetlands and the an effective means for balancing the local, regional and state interests
regulation of development, requires developers to submit applica- in determining the present and future land use decisions in Florida,"
tions for construction permits, including plans for proposed projects. according to state officials. More than 200 DRIs have been reviewed
The permit application must specify reasons for siting facilities in by the state, mostly residential projects, covering some 750,000
coastal areas., giving priority to, coastal -dependent projects. I.. dwelling units.
Department officials say the regulations will tend to discourage The use of population and dwelling unit "caps" as a growth con-
applications for projects requiring the filling of wetlands for projects trol tool was limited during 1976 by a state court ruling which over-
which could be located elsewhere. turned such restrictions imposed by Boca Raton. The controls,
. The regulations have been opposed Iby developers, some of whom adopted under city charter amendments, violate equal protection
claim the department lacks the authority to promulgate stringent and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution, state Judicial Cir-
development controls, but no formal court challenge is expected, cuit Judge Thomas Sholts ruled, in response to landowners' suits.
partly because the U.S. Army of Corps of Engineers' expanded The suits were filed in 1973 after a city charter amendment was
dredge and fill permit program already imposes strong curbs on adopted by referendum in November 1972 establishing a population
building, reducing the immediate impact of the state regulations. limit of 105,000 and a dwelling unit cap of 40,000. The population
The regulations, in the drafting stage for more than two years, limit was adopted as recommended in a report on "The Problems of
were promulgated as former Gov. Sherman W. Tribbitt prepared Growth" prepared by local environmentalists in June 1972.
to leave office. Some state observers were surprised that the reg- . Sholts said both the cap and implementing ordinance violated
ulations were issued, since state Natural Resources Secretary Federal and state constitutional guarantees of due process for land-
John C. Bryson had said earlier that they would be delayed to owners seeking changes in allowable land use. In his ruling, Sholts
give the incoming administratio n@ an opportunity to review them. specif iced that he did not question the concept of the cap as a
Environmental. groups, however,,urged that the regulations be growth control tool provided that it would,"rationally promote
adopted without further delay. Tribbit said he did not order the public welfare without unnecessary and unreasonable consequences
adoption of the rules, but supported them, contending that to private property rights." Sholts found the Boca Raton restrictions
"they should have been adopted long ago." -without benefit of professional or scientific study," adding that
Some state officials said the regulations were delayed during the caps were "crude and repugnant to the court's concept of orderly
the 1974-75 recession, when development activity slowed, easing legislative action."
pressure to convert wetlands to urban uses. Consultants initially had recommended dwelling unit limits rang-
ing from 47,000 to 61,000. Those recommendations were lowered
after the 40,000 cap v%es already adopted. To implement the cap,
the city adopted an across-the-board 50% reduction in multi-family
DELAWARE LAND USE CONTACTS: Nathan Hayward, zoning districts, with an additional 10% reduction adopted later.
Director; Nicholas Fisfis, Director, Capital Improvements Co- Sholts emphasized that the concept of a growth control cap was
ordinator; David S. Hugg, Principal Planner, Natural Resources not questioned. "if a fixed limit on housing substantially and .
Policy and Coordination Section; State Planning Office, Thomas rationally promotes welfare, it may well pass constitutional muster,"
Collins Building, 530 South du Pont Highway, Dover, Del. 19901 Sholts said, noting that the cap might have withstood a court test
(302) 678-4271. if the city had been more methodical in,developing supporting data,
or if it had adopted a dwelling unit cap in the 47,000-61,000 range
as recommended by consultants.
Sholts' ruling came in two consolidated cases: Boca Villas Corp.
DELAWARE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: v. Pence, and Keating-Meredith Properties, Inc. v. City of Boca Raton
Bob McPherson, (302) 678-4271; State Planning Office,Thomas (consol idated C.A. N o. 73-106/540, Pal m Beach Cou nty C i rcu it
Collins Building, 530 South du Pont Highway, Dover, Del. 19901. Court, Sept. 30, 1976).

@1977 Business Publish ers,.,l nc.

Florida 20:0112

Following what some state officials call the worst cases of land cal zoning authorities. The amendments give the state legislature
sales fraud in Florida's history, the legislature amended existing laws authority "to provide general restrictions upon land use in order
to increase the state's land sales regulation powers. Legislation pro- to protect and preserve natural resources, the environment, and
vides for inspection of property, refunds, uniform accounting reports vital areas."
f rom developers, tighter restrictions on escrow accounts, r and other However, "the General Assembly shall not, in any manner,
measures to protect land purchasers. regulate, restrict or limit the power and authority of any county,
municipality or any combination thereof, to plan and zone," ac-
Coastal Zone Management cording to the amendments. State officials expect the controversy
to continue until the amendments are tested in the courts.
The Division of Resource Management within the Department of Land use litigation in Georgia did not increase significantly in
Natural Resources continues as the lead agency for CZM programs. 1976 following a state Supreme Court ruling which subjects,
During the second year of funding under the Federal Coastal Zone virtually all local zoning decisions to court review to determine
Management Act, the majority of the inventory and primary data whether those decisions are consistent with. the public welfare. Dis-
collection work on which the state's program will be based was Com- senting justices had contended that the ruling would substitute lo-
pleted. A state interagency coastal zone management committee' cal judgement for that of the courts, and would lead to a sharp in-
nine regional citizens' advisory committees on coastal zone manage- crease in suits challenging land use decisions. State officials said no
ment and nine regional planning councils worked with the Bureau of such increase has occurred.
Coastal Zone Planning on the development of proposed policies for
the state's CZM program. Coastal, Zone Management
Florida received a $722,496 program development grant from the
Office of Coastal Zone Management for work during the third pro- Georgia is now working with the governor's CZM Advisory Council
gram year. The grant will be used to develop a master plan for guid- to develop a CZM program. The council, appointed in May 1976, in-
ing future coastal uses. cludes business, environmental, local government, and state repre-
Third-year tasks, state officials said, will emphasize county in- sentatives. Ultimately, the council will recommend to the governi
volvement in the CZM process, and will be aimed at encouraging a preferred CZM strategy, along with legal, administrative and organ-
citizen participation. The state also plans to identify the potential izational mechanisms needed to implement the plan.
problems caused by onshore oil and gas activity related to Outer I Georgia received a $67,000 supplemental grant for its second
Continental Shelf development, and recommend possible solutions. year CZM work program related to Outer Continental Shelf oi Iand
The Department of Natural Resources will administer the third- gas exploration. The OCS element has been integrated into the state's
year funds and will allocate portions to the nine regional planning overall CZM program.
councils and three other state agencies for assistance in conducting State officials are developing planning principles and methods,
the work program. along wit h policies for permissible coastal uses and areas of particular
concern. A tentative coastal boundary will be adopted, and local
FLORIDA LAND USE CONTACT: R.G. Whittle, Jr., Director, land use plans in coastal areas will be developed. The state is also
(904) 488-1115; Division of State Planning, 660 Apalachee Parkway, implementing the Coastal Marshland Protection Act, which requires
Tallahassee, Fla. 32304. @ state permits for marshland alterations in estuarine areas.

FLORIDA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: GEORGIA LAND USE CONTACTS: James T. McIntyre, Jr.,
Bruce Johnson, Chief, (904) 488-8614; Bureau of Coastal Zone Plan- Director (404) 656-3820; Richard B. Cobb, Deputy Director; Lowell
ning, 202 Blount Street, Tallahassee, Fla. 32304. D. Evjen, Director, Planning Division; Office of Planning and Budget,
270 Washington St., S.W., Atlanta, Ga. 30334 (404) 656-3861.

GEORGIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT.
James H. Dodd, address above. (404) 656-3832.
GEORGIA

State land use policies are being developed by a government task
force to define areas of responsibility among state and local govern-
ments. State officials are also weighing the impact of constitutional HAWAII
changes allocating authority1for land use planning and control.
In recent years, Hawaii's Land Use Law has been changed consid-
Land Use Policy erably, primarily with the shifting of the state Land Use Commission
from a legislative to a judicial body. Legislation enacted in 1975 also
The Georgia Office of Planning and Budget is preparing a state- eliminated requirements calling for mandatory five-year review of
wide land use policy plan for recommendation to the governor with state land use district boundaries, and provided interim land use
a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop- guidance policies to guide the commission in decision-making.
ment. The plan will be implemented through state functional plans Under its current quasi-judicial function, the LUC considers peti-
and the A-95 review process. tions for district boundary amendments using contested case pro-
The plan will identify and describe quantitatively the major is- cedures, resembling proceedings in a court of law.
sues confronting state government in coordinating physical and
economic development, and wi 11 consider long-range solutions to Land Use Policy
state problems. The plan will also outline a planning and research
program to increase the state's ability to detect and resolve growth Since the passage of Act 193 in 1975, the commission has.
related problems. In addition, the plan will determine the proper adopted new rules and regulations, and has conducted about 20 hear-
roles and responsibilities for state and sub-state agencies in plan- ings under its new procedures. Planning Department officials ac-
ning for and affecting growth. knowledge that the procedures have come under criticism by re-
On Nov. 2, state voters approved an "edited" state constitu- stricting public participation in land use decision-making, lengthen-
tion prepared by a legislative committee to revamp the existing ing the process of gathering information and increasing costs by re-
constitution. The revised document includes provisions which have quiring participants to fully justify requested changes. To date,
created some controversy regarding the state's role in land use plan- possibly because of public unfamiliarity with the procedures, there
ning and control. Some observers have contended that the new con- have been relatively few requests by private individuals and organi-
stitution gives the state authority to adopt certain land use controls, zations to participate in LUC proceedings, although all timely inter-
while others say that the edited constitution maintains existing lo- vention requests received so far have been granted,

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Idaho 20:013

The commission's rules and regulations, formally adopted in HAWAII LAND USE CONTACTS: Hicleto Kono, Director, (808)
December 1975, set standards for classifying lands as urban, agricul- 548-6914; Frank Skrivanek, Deputy Director, (808) 548-3034;
tural, conservation and rural. The rules are designed to concentrate Shoji Kato, Planning Division Head, (808) 548-4610; Department of
new growth near existing urbanized areas, contain sprawl and en- Planning and Economic Development, State of Hawaii, P.O. Box
courage development aimed at meeting low and moderate income 2359, Honolulu, Hawaii 96804.
housing needs. HAWAII COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: Dick
Areas are classified as urban if they have "city-like" population Poirier, (808) 548-4609; State Planning Division, 250 South King St.,
densities, proximity to services and employment centers, and land Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
reserves to accommodate growth for 10 years. Tracts are favored for
urban classification if they are adjacent to developed areas, will not
encourage "spot development," and will not require "unreasonable
investment in public supportive services." The commission's rules I DAHO
discourage development of steep slopes.
Agricultural districts include productive farmlands and adjacent Following the pattern set in 1975, the state legislature defeated a
land which may not be highly productive. Lands may not be taken series of land use bills proposed by Gov. Cecil D. Andrus which
out of agricultural use unless such conversion will not substantially would have required localities to develop regional impact statements
impair production of adjacent lands. Conversion is also permissible for major developments, protected prime farmland, and provided
to accommodate reasonable urban growth. technical assistance to cities and counties in developing comprehan-
Conservation districts include watersheds, floodplains, erosion- sive plans.
damaged areas, parks, scenic, historic or archeological sites, wilder- The legislature also narrowly rejected efforts to "gut" the 1975
ness, beach preserves and wildlife habitat. Steep slope areas and wet- Local Planning Act, one of the few pieces of land use legislation to
lands are all included in conservation areas unless specifically placed be approved by the conservative Idaho legislature. The state House
in other classifications. approved an amendment to th .a 1975 bil I which would have re-
Rural districts are primarily made up of small farms and low- quired owner permission before a tract could be included in a local
density residential development. Minimum lot size of one-half acre comprehensive plan. The state Senate rejected the bill.
is prescribed for rural areas adjacent to urban districts, and five-acre
lots are required for rural areas next to agricultural zones. Land Use Policy
Also during 1976, Hawaii's land use control program was as-
sessed in a study prepared for the Conservation Foundation by In 1976, state land use activity centered on implementing the
Phyllis Myers, who concluded that the program is a useful model for 1975 Local Planning Act which requires all cities and counties to
other states to follow. Hawaii's basic Land Use Law, passed in 1961, prepare comprehensive plans according to state guidelines. The legis-
was useful even if less than perfect," the report said. Enactment of lation also calls for state agencies to comply with local plans, restricts
the state law has encouraged the development of land use planning possible conflicts of interest in land use decision-making, establishes a
capabilities by counties, according to CF's assessment. Report is permit and appeals process, and prohibits local permit approval
available from the foundation at 1717 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., where public health, safety or welfare is threatened. Compromise
Washington, D.C. 20036. provision also requires localities to identify areas of urban impact by
1977 and regulate development in those areas to curb urban sprawl.
Since passage of the planning legislation, virtually all localities
Coastal Zone Management have become involved in either updating or developing an ongoing.
planning process. The Idaho Bureau of State Planning and Commu-
nity Affairs has prepared a "Planning Handbook for Local Govern-
Hawaii's participation in the coastal zone management program ment," including step-by-step planning procedures. The handbook
was mandated in 1973 by the state legislature. The State Department also summarizes planning and zoning laws, explains the development
of Planning and Economic Development received a Federal grant of of comprehensive plans, recommends plan implementation strategies,
$500,000 in 1976 for a third year of planning under the Coastal Zone and provides model subdivision and zoning ordinance guidelines.
Management Act of 1972 to develop its f inal CZM program for sub- Although local officials' attitudes vary, state officials said there
mission in 1977. has been widespread acceptance of the planning guidelines. Most lo-
cal officials have welcomed the guidance, according to state planners
who concede that Idaho planning and zoning laws were vague prior
During the second year of planning work, extensive contact was to passage of the 1975 law. Until recently, there has been considera-
made with the public, interest groups, scientists, and county, state ble confusion over what constituted comprehensive planning in
and Federal agency representatives to identify problems within coastal Idaho, state officials said.
areas. These problems were divided into six major categories: (1)
natural resources; (2) historic and cultural resources; (3) natural Energy Facilities and Lands
aesthetic resources; (4) coastal recreation resources; f5) tsunami and
storm wave hazards and freshwater flooding hazards; and (6) shore- Legislation which would have given the state authority to control
line development. virtually all energy-related development died in 1976, as did similar
legislation the year before. The state Public Utilities Commission
maintains jurisdiction over regulated projects such as major power
An "areas of particular concern" concept was developed to provide plants. PUC rejected a proposed $400-million coal-fired power plant
a flexible management tool to address statewide problem areas of sig- planned by Idaho Power Co., although the company is expected to
nificant and continuing concern. State CZM policies and proposed propose another scaled-down version.
implementing legislation are being submitted to the Governor for his PUC officials generally agree with ldaho,Power that additional
approval along with the development of Hawaii's CZM program appli- generating capacity is needed in the state. The utility's facilities are
cation prepared under Section 306 of the CZM Act. Legislation im- located in adjacent states closer to coal sources and there has been
plementing the program, to include CZM policies, the designation of considerable debate over the issue of siting facilities in the state.
coastal zone boundaries and CZM agency, and the delineation of Officials are less concerned about regulating stri p mining in I daho,
areas of particular concern, will be considered by the state legislature which has little coal.
early in 1977. Citizen and agency advisory committee review will also
continue during the final drafting of the state CZM plan. IDAHO LAND USE CONTACTS: H.W. Turner, Administrator,
If the program mee 'ts criteria establishied by the CZM Act, the (208) 384-3900; Shirl C. Boyce, Jr., Chief, Bureau of State Planning
state expects to be eligible for Federal implementation funds by and Community Affairs; Division of Budget, Policy Planning and
late 1977. Coordination, State House, Boise, Idaho 83720.

(g)1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Illinois 20:014

ILLINOIS no evidence of discrimination, but also found no "compelling pub-
lic interest" to justify the rezoning denial, noting that the decision
No statewide land use policies or programs have been undertaken, perpetuated patterns of segregation.
although the state has become increasingly active in the management
of the Lake Michigan coastal zone, which faces heavy development
pressure from competing land uses.
Urbanization of farmland is generally not considered a problem, Coastal Zone Management
and efforts to guide growth at the state level are at the study phase.
Illinois was awarded a Federal grant of $336,000 in 1976 for de-
Land Use Policy velopment of a state CZM program. The grant is the third to be
awarded to the state and will be administered by the Department of
Localities retain virtually all land use powers, including zoning Transportation. The first grant, awarded in 1974, totaled $206,000,
and some subdivision controls, but there are no requirements for while the 1975 grant amounted to $384,000.
comprehensive planning to guide land use controls. The third grant will be used to develop a comprehensive program
Several bills have been introduced in the legislature, although they for allocating Illinois' Lake Michigan shoreline in a sound, rational
have received little attention. H.B.800 would require counties, town- manner. The state's 59-mile shore is confronted with such problems
ships and municipalities to prepare comprehensive plans, establish as beach and bluff erosion, limited beach access, and competing and
procedures for exercising land use authority, and repeal several conflicting use by public and private developers.
existing land use laws. Other legislation, S.B.1 57, would create a Illinois sees as its objective the protection and, where possible,
Land Use Study Commission to determine if a state land use policy the restoration of the natural resources of the Lake Michigan coast.
is needed. The commission would be charged with considering en- The state is also assisting local jurisdictions along the lake to exercise
vironmental, economic and population factors, and would make their responsibilities to guide future lakeside activities.
recommendations on the relationship between state and local reg- During the CZM program's third, year, I I I inois wil I ref ine the CZM
ulatory authority. policies developed earlier, and secure the necessary state authorities,
Other measures would provide grants from the state Department including legislation, to insure program implementation.
of Revenue to owners of open land based on property taxes paid The state will also be providing financial and technical resources
and the income of the land owner as an incentive to discourage de- to localities to assist in the development of CZM policies. The com-
velopment I H.B.1 927), and would create a Division of Land Use pletion of several on-going coastal geological studies and the con-
Planning and Management within the state Department of Local tinuation of erosion protection assistance is also planned for the
Government Affairs, and establish requirements for land use plan- third year of CZM activity.
ning to be followed by state agencies (H.B.1491).
In legal action, the state Supreme Court rejected localities' ILLINOIS LAND USE CONTACTS: Leonard Schaeffer, Director,
authority to use their zoning powers to impose environmental (217) 782-4520; Illinois Bureau of the Budget, 108 State Housej
curbs more strict than those required by a state agency. In Carl- Springfield, 111. 62706; Jack Brizius, Deputy Director, (217) 782-@54114;
son v. Village of Worth (62 111.2d 406), the court overturned the Illinois Bureau of the Budget, 108 State House, Springfield, 111. 62706.
village's requirement that a landfill comply with local zoning. The
landfill was granted a permit to operate by the state Environmental
Protection Agency.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an Illinois community's ILLINOIS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: Peter
exclusionary zoning decisions may not be overturned unless there Wise, Department of Transportation, Division of Water Resources,
is proof that the locality was motivated by racial discrimination. In Marina City Office Building, Room 1010, 300 N. State St., Chicago,
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing and Develop- 111. 60610.
ment Corp., the court upheld the city's action denying rezoning for
a low- and moderate-income housing project, including townhouses,
in an area zoned for single-family residential units.
The decision reversed the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, INDIANA
which had found that a zoning action which has the effect of dis-
criminating against minorities may be overturned, regardless of in- State officials do not envision the development of statewide land
tent. "Disproportionate impact" of a zoning action on minorities use policies, although protection of state-clesignated critical areas is
"is not the sale touchstone of invidious racial discrimination," ac- under consideration. "Land use is a dirty word" in Indiana, at least
cording to Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell's decision. "Proof at the state level, planning officials note, and efforts to substantially
of racially discriminatory intent or purpose is required to show a increase state powers at the expense of localities would almost cer-
violation of the equal protection clause" of the U.S. Constitution's tainly be rejected.
14th Amendment.
Fair housing advocates said the case was not a total loss, how- Land Use Policy
ever. The court returned the case to the appeals court to determine
whether the zoning action violated the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Local governments retain full authority for planning, zoning and
The case involved an 80-acre tract owned by a Roman Catholic subdivision regulation in Indiana. Most of the state's 92 counties do
order which contracted with MHDC for the development of a 15- not have formal planning agencies. Master plans must be adopted by
acre parcel bounded on two sides by -single-family homes. MHDC localities exercising subdivision control authority, although there
agreed to provide subsidized housing, including 190 townhouses, are no state requirements for the development of local comprehensive
with financing provided under Section 236 of the 1968 Housing plans.
and Urban Development Act. During 1976, the state began a study of critical areas, and is
The tract was orginally zoned for single-family homes, and a considering a policy under which guidelines would be developed by
rezoning request was filed with the city commission, which urged the state for implementation by local governments. Although the
the city council to reject the proposal. According to the city's policy is in the formative stages, state officials expect the program to
comprehensive plan, which had been in effect since 1959, land cover wetlands, archaeological and historic sites, and similar areas.
could only be zoned for multi-family units if a buffer zone were The program would not infringe on existing local powers, planning
included between the project and adjacent single-family units. The officials say.
city council rejected the proposal. Indiana has also begun an inventory of state-owned lands. During
.U.S. District Court Judge Thomas R. McMillen upheld the city, 1977, legislation is expected to be introduced calling for the preserva-
concluding that established procedures had been followed and the tion of prime agricultural lands, although prospects for passage are
proposal had been rejected for valid reasons. The appeals court saw uncertain.

(g)1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Kansas 20:015

Coastal Zone Management On the issue of Federal land use legislation, state officials have
expressed concern that such proposals may not take into account
Due to a conflict with the Federal Office of Coastal Zone Manage- diverse land use systems in the various states. "Highly restrictive
ment, Indiana's CZM program has been suspended, although state guidelines" for state planning "would not be appropriate or accept-
officials expect to continue to participate, and say they are commited able," Iowa planners contend.
to completing a program for final OCZM approval. The state has re-
ceived no OCZM grants since a $220,000 award was approved in Energy Lands and Facilities
1975, but Indiana officials expect to apply for second year funding
during 1977. The legislature adopted HF 1470 giving the Iowa Commerce
During the first year, "technical difficulties" were encountered, Commission authority to approve the siting of electrical generat-
Indiana officials say. OCZM said funding requests were denied during ing plants producing over 100 megawatts. The bill establishes a one-
1976 because the state did not provide sufficient detail to document step process for certification with other agencies which report to
progress made under the first-year grant. State officials say energy the commission, and requires a public hearing in the county most
facility siting remains a critical problem in the coastal zone, which heavily impacted by a proposed plant. Plants must be required to
is currently dominated by existing commercial, industrial and resi- meet present or future needs. Construction and operation must
dential development, With few sites left for major energy facilities. cause minimal "environmental upheaval" and adverse land uses.
Flooding, erosion and sedimentation are also major coastal zone Strip mining legislation went into effect in July 1976, requir-
problems, state officials say. ing mine operators to plan for the disposal of coal wastes and restore
When program funding resumes, Indiana plans to use funds to affected land to at least its original vegetation capability. Mine oper-
set its coastal zone boundary, define permissable land and water ators must also register with the state Department of Soil Conserva-
uses, designate areas of particular concern, establish methods of tion.
controlling coastal uses. and create organizational structures to
implement management programs.' IOWA LAND USE CONTACTS: Robert F. Tyson, Director (515)
281-5888; David A. Discher, Planning Director (515) 281-3861;
INDIANA LAND USE CONTACTS: Theodore T. Pantezis, James Lynch, Program Administrator (515) 281-3704; Office of
Director, Planning and Research Group; David Woll, Assistant Dir- Planning and Programming, 523 E. 12th St., Des Moines, Iowa
ector, Local and Regional Planning; Eugene Waterstraat, Assistant 50319.
Director for State Planning; 143 West Market Street, Third Floor,
Harrison Building, Indianapolis, Ind. 46204, (317) 633-4346.

INDIANA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: KANSAS
Theodore T. Pantazis, 143 West Market Street, Indianapolis, Ind.
46204, (317) 633-4346. Land use legislation in Kansas has been studied by special legis-
lative committees since 1974 but, to date, no comprehensive land
use process has been enacted. The depletion of groundwater has
emerged as the main land use issue in the state, which will face
IOWA significant alterations in its land use patterns if groundwater
depletion continues at its present rate.
For the third year in a row, the Iowa legislature rejected compre-
hensive land use legislation in 1976. As in passed years, a proposal Land Use Policy
received state House approval, but a similar bill was blocked in the
Senate. Cities and counties have full planning and zoning authority and
The legislature adopted other measures authorizing state control are advised by regional planning bodies. This authority is discre-
of major energy facility siting, and designation, with local consent, tionary, but the elements of the comprehensive plan are established
of historical preservation districts. by state. Cities are not bound to the plan unless the city commission
adopts the plan by a majority vote. City and county zoning must be
Land Use Policy in accordance with a comprehensive plan or a land use study, if no
plan has been adopted. Subdivision regulations must be preceded by
Legislation (HF 505) implementing statewide land use planning a comprehensive plan. Less than half of the municipalities in the
with counties retaining primary authority was defeated by the state state have adopted zoning ordinances. However, the vast majority of
Senate, despite earlier approval of a stronger bill by the House. the cities, with populations greater than 200, have such regulations.
Senate debate centered on amendments approved in committee Cities may also adopt extraterritorial zoning for land up to three
which diluted original state authority for land use planning, and miles beyond the city limits. Restrictions may not be placed upon
which specified that counties would retain zoning controls. The bill's land exclusively for agricultural purposes and if the county or town-
sponsors in the Senate accepted the weakening amendments, hoping ship adopts zoning regulations for the same territory the city must
to restore the original provisions during conference negotiations with relinquish its control.
the House. Bil I sponsor Sen. Steve Sovern had recommended that Several proposed amendments to the existing planning enabling
S
tate and local commissions be given authority to set general policy statutes will be studied by an interim legislative committee. Included
o preserve prime farmland and natural resources. in the amendments are changes in the planning commission composi-
Although the weakening amendments were intended to reduce tion and meeting requirements; requirements for regional and state
opposition from conservative legislators, the bill was defeated on a review of local plans; revised requirements for the granting of special
33-14 vote, essentially duplicating actions taken during the 1973'. use permits; and requiremen ts that all public improvements must be
74 legislature. in conformance with the comprehensive plan.
Sovern attributed the legislation's defeat to delays in reporting With the assistance of state agencies, the Divis ion of State Plan-
the bill out of committee, suggesting that the proposal was used by ning and Research has.begun to identify environmentally sensitive
Republican opponents to influence voting on other issues, areas in the state. Two studies currently underway will identify state
Although land use legislation was endorsed by both state political and local natural resource management options and the development
parties and Gov. Robert Ray, a concensus on similar proposals "is potential and needs of each regional planning areas in the state. .
not likely for the forseeable future," according to state planning Meanwhile, in response to the increasing depletion of groundwater
officials. Iowa will probably continue to control land use through in western Kansas, Gov. Bennett has appointed a task force to study
the "incremental approach," officials predict, adopting policies the problem and make recommendations toward solving the deplb-
for specific resources instead of taking a more comprehensive tion problems. Task force will represent the interests of a broad
approach as envisioned in HF 505. sector of the state's population including citizens, universities, state

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Kansas 20:016

agencies, the legislature, business and industry. Recommendations of of the revised statutesw Erlanger officials were in the process of re-
this task force may significantly affect the land use pattern in the enacting the zoning ordinances when Hoff applied for his permit.
western portion of the state. According to David Schneider, an attorney in the case, the de-
cision will affect other communities that have not adopted com-
Agricultural Lands. prehensive land use plans and have not revised their zoning ordinances
Kansas has become the 39th state to permit tax differentials for since 1966.
agricultural lands. A Constitutional amendment to allow the taxa- Energy Facilities and Lands
tion of farmland on the basis of use value, rather than its potential
development value, was presented to the voters in the 1976 general In another land-related court action, the U.S. Supreme Court r!-
election. Measure, overwhelmingly passed, is expected to be imple- cently let stand a state Supreme Court decision prohibiting strip rnin-
mented by the 1978 legislature after considerable study this year. Ing on the property of some Muhlenberg County residents under three
1906 mineral deeds. State court ruled that the method of producing
KANSAS LAND USE CONTACT: H. Edward Flentje, Director, coal anywhere in the state depends on the language of the individual
Division of State Planning and Research, 501 Mills Bldg., 109 W. deed, since some have allowed use of the surface of the land and some
Ninth St., Topeka, Kan. 66612, (913) 296-3496. have not.
State court said that the language of the deeds "is such that it
must be readily realized that there was no grant of rights necessary
for removing the coal by the open pit or strip method, but rather
KENTUCKY the language expresses the granting of rights which are primarily
those necessary in the conducting of an underground mining oper-
Land use activity in the state has been very minimal, according to ation."
members of various land use-related agencies. The Office of State The Commerce Union Bank owns the coal, which is leased to the
Planning is currently under the Secretary of the Cabinet in the of- Island Creek Coal Co. The Badgett Mine Stripping Corp. is a sublessee.
fice of Gov. Julian M. Carroll. In their appeal the companies said one of the coal seams cannot be
mined at all by the underground method and in another seam only
Land Use Policy half the coal can be recovered in this way.
In 1976, land use legislation, S.14, modeled after the Oregon KENTUCKY LAND USE CONTACT: Gordon Duke, Director, Of.
land use bill, was introduced. Measure would have called for the de- fice of Policy and Management, 209 Capitol Annex, Frankfort, Ky.
velopment of guidelines for designation of critical areas and means of 40601, (502) 564-7300.
preserving open spaces and agricultural, forest, and natural lands.
However, the Senate rejected the measure. Bill sponsor, state
Son. John Lackey (D.-Richmond) then introduced a substitute pro-
posal based on the recommendations of the state Council of Land LOUISIANA
Use Planning. Substitute bill called for development of county land
use plans and the.creation of a 15-member Land Use Coordination Louisiana's involvement in land use policy is directed primarily
Council. Council, with a $50,000 operating budget, would have the through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
power to coordinate the county plans with state and Federal land 701 Program and Coastal Zone Management Act, and in the future
use activities. through Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control Act. State has
Senate objected to the proposal permitting the council to in- existing laws and permitting procedures which are indirectly land
tervene in county planning activity and further restricted the use oriented, but there is no comprehensive state initiated land use
council's authority to no more than advising on the designation policy.
of critical areas. Senate did retain a provision in the bill mandating
counties to enact land use plans under guidelines established by the Land Use Policy
council should the Federal government adopt a national land use
plan. As amended, the Senate passed the measure 18-17. State Planning Office completed a study in 1974, entitled
House voted first to rescind the $50,000 authorization for the "Growth and Conservation Policy," that is currently under re-
council, then to make it bear the cost of any activity it required consideration for use in policy development for the HUD 701
of local governments, and to'make the entire measure ineffective program. It is envisioned that a task team will study the policies
unless a Federal land use plan was enacted. Finally, the House for possible modification and applicability on the state level.
killed the measure by a 2-1 margin. Policies will subsequently be presented for review to several state-
Meanwhile, the state Supreme Court ruled that local laws must level bodies for further analysis, after which executive endorsement
comply with comprehensive land use plans or the communities may will be considered.
be without authority to manage growth. Decision resulted from a Other developments in the area of land use include a use value
suit brought by developer Robert R. Hoff against the city of Erlanger assessment tax mandated in the new constitution which precludes
in Kenton County. Hoff had sought a permit to build a service sta- taxing of agricultural, horticultural, marsh and timber lands at
tion on a shopping center lot. Permit was denied because the zoning fair market value. Buildings of historic architectural importance
ordinance did not allow such development. may also be included. This law is intended to protect valuable
At the time of the permit request, however, the city was still in land resources and critical areas.
the process of adopting zoning ordinances that would comply with State Planning Office now has in operation a functional land
the Kenton County comprehensive plan, as required by the Revised use information and data analysis system with graphic and sta-
Statutues of 1966, which gave communities five years, or until tistical capability. System provides a means of integrating and
June 16, 1971, to revise their zoning ordinances. At that time, the associating spatial and geographic data such as land use, soil
law said, all organizations, plans, and regulations were to conform associations, flood hazard areas, populations and socio-economic
with the planning and zoning laws contained in the statutes. Statutes data., Hopefully, the system will function as a decision-making
did include a requirement for development of a comprehensive land tool for state level projects and programs.
use plan. In land-related court decisions, the most significant is a recent
Since the city had not met the requirements of the law, the judgment to prevent construction of the I nterstate-41 0 loop in
Supreme Court held that the Kenton County Circuit Court was cor- the New Orleans area based on its environmental impact to the
rect in ruling that Erlanger officials had acted arbitrarily in denying coastal wetlands. Funds for this project have since been diverted
the permit. Court also ruled that readoption of existing ordinances for construction of a north-south expressway in Louisiana which
untiL new ordinances were formulated did not meet the requirements will achieve interstate status.

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Maryland 20:017
Coastal Zone Management Agriculture Commissioner will be responsible for determining an
average 100% productivity for good cropland, orchard, and pasture-
Three bills were introduced by the state legislature in an attempt lands in each'county in the state. This information will in turn be
to fulfill the requirement of the Coastal Zone Management Act of used by. the assessors. The state tax assessor will determine similar
1972 that each state develop a management program for its coastal values for open space lands.
zone.. Amendments completely changed the recapture provisions and
House bill 1315 delineated the inland coastal zone boundary at now if the land use is changed the owner will pay a penalty equal to
the five ft. countour line for land and at a point,where the influence a percentage between farm use assessment and the so-called fair
of sea water and occurence of marine fish and shell-fish were no market assessment. Penalties will be 10% of the difference in value-
longer significant. Bill established the Office of Coastal Resources tions if the land has been under the law for less then five years; 20%
Management within the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. How- for five-1 0 years; and 30% if the land has been under the law for
ever, parish government interests opposed H.B.1 315 and it was never more than 10 years. These provisions apply to the part or parts of
reported out of the committee. the farm that change. Also included in the law are appeal procedures.
House Committee on Natural Resources proposed an Iternative Maine was the recipient of several Federal land use-related grants
bill that greatly reduced the area to three miles inland from the including $373,750 from the Department of Housing and Urban De-
coastline and "three geographical miles inland from the landward velopment; $57,400 from the Water Resources Council; and $100,000
boundary of those bays or other similar water bodies which are for 208 water quality planning from the Environmental Protection
immediatelyadjacent to such modified coastline." The unnumbered Agency.
bill eliminated the OCRM and transferred the Louisiana Coastal
Commission from the Wildlife and Fisheries to the Office of the Coastal Zone Management
Governor. Bill, like its predecessor, was not reported out of com-
mittee. Maine received several major grants for coastal zone management
Another substitute bill, H.B. 1512 was passed by the legislature in 1976 totaling $357,967, with an additional grant for the Outer
and signed by the governor. Bill extends the planning phase of such Continental Shelf of $146,000. The state is actively pursuing the de-
a program for another year under the direction of the Louisiana velopment of a 306 application to cover its entire coast. The coastal
Coastal Commission.-Legislation changed the commissions member- planning program has been redirected to place a greater emphasis on
ship by adding one member to represent Orleans Parish and one the role of local government and . balanced approach to planning
member to represent users of solid minerals. Commission is re- which considers economic and social as well as environmental
required to report proposed legislation to the natural resources objectives.
committees of both houses by March 1, 1977, that will set bound-
aries, establish permit programs, and provide for enforcement "all MAINE LAND USE CONTACT AND COASTAL ZONE MAN-
in relation to a state and local coastal zone management program." AGEMENT CONTACT: Allen Pease, Director, State Planning Office,
Commission now becomes the third such agency mandated to review Executive Dept., 189 State St., Augusta, Me., 04333 (207)
and resolve the state's coastal zone problems. 289-3261.
LCC committee recently proposed to define the coastal boundary
as being three miles inland from the coastline, including first bays or
similar water bodies. However 'several parishes prefer a five-ft. MARYLAND
contour boundary, citing possible loss of energy impact funds.
Maryland has recognized the need for coordinated, comprehen-
LOUISIANA LAND USE CONTACTS: Patrick W. Ryan, Exe- sive planning on the state level since 1933 when the State Planning
cutive Director, Louisiana State Planning Office, 4528 Bennington Commission was established by the legislature, providing a model
Ave., Baton Rouge,-La. 70808, (504) 389-7041. according to which many other states established such boards. In
1959 the State Planning Commission was succeeded by the State
LOUISIANA COASTAL ZONE CONTACTS: Joel Lindsey, Loui- Planning Department in response to the growing need for expanded
siana Slate Planning Office, 4528 Bennington Ave., Baton Rouge, La. planning functions on a statewide level, as a result of population
70808, (504) 389-7041. increases and economic development in the state. The enabling
legislation for the Department is Article 88C of the Annotated Code.
The State Planning Department was reorganized into the Depart-
ment of State Planning in 1969. The General Assembly extended
MAINE the role of the department in land use planning under the Land Use
State legislature enacted amendments to the farmland and open Act of 1974. .
space tax legislation to increase the attractiveness of the incentives Land Use Policy
offered under this program. Also, the Department of Agriculture, in
-cooperation with the Soil Conservation Service, is conducting an in- The Department of State Planning iscurrently involved in the prep-
ventory of prime agricultural lands in the state. aration of a generalized land use plan because of the increasingly
complex problems and responsibilities facing the state. The plan
Land Use Policy is based on the following four premises: @1) the generalized land use
and planning process can establish an effective basis for solving land
Purpose of the farm productivity and open space land law is to use and related problems in the state; 2) the plan and process can
encourage the preser 'vation of farmland and open space land in order strengthen and maintain intergovernmental cooperation, codrdina-
to maintain a readily available source of food and farm products tion, and management in the conservation and development of the
close to the metropolitan areas of the state to conserve the state's state's land resources; 3) the plan can provide for the conservation
natural resources. and optimization of expenditures by guiding orderly land use arrange-
Included in the changes, a farm may be one that has produced ments and promoting sound public investment patterns; and 4) the
an income of $1',000 on 111 acres in 'one of the last two years as plan and process can have a substantial impact upon the future
well as in three of the iast five. Also, the owner may be provisionally quality of life in the state.
granted the tax relief subject to proof that the farm produced the The many work activities are coordinated through the "Study
required income during the current or second tax year. Design for the Maryland Generalized Land Use Plan" which sets
Land between 10 and 20 acres must produce an additional $100 forth a structure for continuing research, analysis, and data collec-
per acre but $2,000 is the maximum required for all lots of 20 tion, as wall as a process for i ntergovern mental and public participa-
acres or more. Value of commodities produced for consumption tion. The design specifies a methodology for formulation, evaluation,
may now also be included in meeting income requirements. The selection, and recommendation of the state land use plan.' 3ackground

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Maryland 20:018

and special studies have been undertaken to assure that a broad per- Energy Lands and Facilities
spective and range of consideration are incorporated into the state
planning effort. Special studies are being concluded on the topics of No applications have yet'been made under the Coastal Facilities
real estate development and state land use policy; key facilities in Review Act, although there are existing facilities such as the LNG
the state; fate and future of older urban areas; statewide land use terminal at Cove Point and the storage tanks at Piney Point that would
issues drawn from a survey of state and sub-state goals and objectives; have been subject to CFRA review if they had been proposed after
and survey of Federal laws and regulations. CFRA was passed. Just prior to enactment of the legislation, St. Mary's
The relationship between employment opportunities and changes County prevented expansion of the Piney Point facilities to include
in population have been used as the. basis for a mathematical model a refinery. Denial of building permits for this facility was upheld
which projects population levels for each county. Projection was in both the district and appelate courts in the case Steuart Petroleum
carried out in five-year increments to the year 2000. Model, con- Co. v. Board of County Commissioners of St. Mary's County.
taining both a demographic and economic sub-model, has the capac-
ity to provide detailed information on the age, race and sex charac- Agricultural Lands
teristics of each county's population, labor force and employment.
Department of State Planning received a grant from the National Included in the recent land use related legislation was the authori-
Aeronautics and Space Administration to establish the Maryland zation of an Agricultural Lands Preservation Foundation. It is the
automated geographic information system. MAGI is a computer- intent of the state to preserve agricultural land and woodland in order
based system designed to store geographic data in a consistent and to provide sources of agriculture products within the state for the
coordinated manner. Information stored in this system can be dis- citizens. Legislation is an attempt to control the urban expansion
played via computer maps in a manner similar to standard map which is consuming the agricultural land, curb the spread of urban
graphics. Background studies are released in the form of a series blight and deterioration, and protect agricultural land and woodland
of technical reports. To date, nine volumes of text and two dozen as open space.
different data maps have been prepared.
The land use technical report series includes manuals on natural MARYLAND LAND USE CONTACT: Vladimir A. Wahbe, Secre-
soils groups; geology, aquifers and minerals; topographic slope, tary of State Planning, 301 W. Preston St., Baltimore, Md. 21201, (301)
forest vegetation; public lands; existing land use and. its classification; 383-2451.
and the compendium of natural features. Over 3,600 manuals and
2,500 maps have been distributed, often with an accompanying MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
staff explainationon the use of the materials. Scott Brumburgh, Coastal Zone Program, Tawas State Office Bldg.,
A two-part framework has been chosen for the organization of Annapolis, Md. 21401, (301) 269-3382.
goals and policies necessary for the success of the state land use
plan. "Natural resources" is a broadly defined category which
incorporates the views that the natural environment provides those
elements necessary for supporting human life such as clean air and
water and suitable land for residence and that it provides certain
resource commodities that are used in the production of goods and MASSACHUSETTS
services used in our modern society such as mineral resources for
energy; raw materials; forest and forestlands for fiber; agricultural Studies summarizing the status of land use controls in the state
land for growing crops and livestock. "Settlement and growth" is and outlining strategies needed to encourage economic development
the second category and it encompasses man's activities which have have been published by the Office of State Planning. Copies of
or will change the natural environment. Settlement refers to the "Status and Future Actions Report on Land Use Planning and Im-
historic use of land which has produced a pattern on the landscape plementation Efforts in the CommonweaM of Massachusetts"
which reflects the values of past generation and exerts strong in- and "An Economic Development Program for Massachusetts" are
fluences on future land decisions and growth refers to future changes available from the Office of State Planning, John W. McCormack
in land use as a result of such things as population increases and Bldg., Rm. 2101, One Ashburton Place, Boston, Mass. 02108,
changes in employment opportunities, (617) 727-5066.
A series of alternative land use plans have been prepared and will
be evaluated and in the process of selecting the f inal plan. After Land Use Policy
employing the results of evaluation and receiving comments the
recommended generalized state land use plan will be submitted to "Status and Future Actions Report on Land Use Planning and
the governor and General Assembly. Implementation Eftortsin the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,"
Legislation enacted this year included the flood control- wa tersh ed financed in part through a comprehensive planning assistance grant
management act and creation, continuation and administration of from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development under
the scenic rivers program. The flood control legislation provides a the provision of Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, is divided
procedure f o r determining interim flood hazard areas, a system for into four major sections. First section describes the state's institu-
developing rules and regulations governing uses within flood hazard tional framework for planning, regulation and intergovernmental
areas, penalties for violations and enforcement measures. The scenic coordination and decision-making. Section I I summarizes the
rivers legislation is to protect the water quality of state rivers or most important state, regional and local planning and implemen-
portions of them and related adjacent land areas possessing out- tation efforts including:
standing scenic, fish, wildlife and other recreation values. 1 . Ai.r quality maintenance program, which is being undertaken
by the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering
Coastal Zone Management in the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Program,
authorized by the Federal Clean Air Act of 1970, involves
the development and implementation of an AQM plan, which
Maryland, like the 29 other states bordering the oceans or Great will address each pollutant and select strategies for pre-
venting violations of established standards,-
Lakes is in the process of developing a coastal zone management
program. In 1976, the state Department of Natural Resources 2. Solid Waste Management Plan, which was financed in part
Enargy and Coastal Zone Administration revised its request for through grants from the U.S. Environmental Protection
assistance under Section 305 of the Coastal Zone Management Act Agency under the Federal Solid Waste Disposal Act. Plan
of 1972. Major emphasis in the third-year program is on Federal, recommends the establishment of privately financed, con-
state, and local government as well as general public involvement in structed and operated resource recovery facilities in various
refining the program. parts of the state;

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Michigan M019

3. Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, which requires the ment of Martha's Vineyard will be funded by the other NOAA grant
state to prepare, and periodically update, a statewide-corn- of $22,000, in addition to funds from the U.S. Environmental
prehensive outdoor plan in order to receive Federal funds Protection Agency and the Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
for land acquisition and development projects; ment. This is the first time that three Federal agencies have provided
funds to assist a local government in coastal planning.
4. Historic Preservation Program, which consists basically of
local historic inventories and plans;
MASSACHUSETTS LAND USE CONTACT: Frank T. Keefe,
5. EPA 208 Water Quality Management Program,which is Director, Office of State Planning & Management, 100 Cambridge St.,
authorized and funded under the Federal Water Pollution Rm. 909, Boston, Mass. 02202, (617) 727-5066.
Control Act Amendments of 1972. Under the act, the state
is required to establish an integrated approach for planning MASSACHUSETTS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
and control over such activities as municipal and industrial Marc Kaufman, Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, 18 Tremont
wastewater, storm and combined sewer run-off,,nonpoint St., Boston, Mass..02108, (617) 727-2808.
source pollutants, and land use as it relates to water quality;
6. Energy Programs, which are under the direction of the Energy
Policy Office in the Executive Office of Consumer Affairs.
EPO has developed and is@ in the process of implementing
programs involving energy conservation, off-shore explora-
tion and coal exploration in the southeastern part of the state. MICHIGAN
Recommendations are being developed regarding nuclear
power, solar energy and natural gas pricing; , Office of Land Use, Department of Natural Resources has been
7. Agricultural Planning, which supports the preservation and reorganized, expanded and given a new name. Renamed the Division
protection of agriculture in the state. Recommendations of Land Resource Programs, the office will continue its previous
in a policy statement, prepared by the state Department responsibilities of guiding the implementation of Gov. William G.
of Food and Agriculture and endorsed by the governor as Milliken's executive order 1973-2 which directed the Department
the official policy of the administration, include designation to "assume complete responsibility for the development of a state
and mapping of state farmlands, utilization of publicly owned land use plan and to prepare legislative proposals to effectuate that
agricultural lands, and development of legislation for the program."
purchase of development rights of farmlands. Division of Land Resource Programs will continue to administer
Section I I I of the report presents a description of the relation- the Farmland and Open Space Preservation Act and the County
ship of the proposed HUD-701 program to past and present plan- Rural Zoning Act. New program responsibilities transferred to the
ning and implementation programs in the state. Final section de- division include the state's coastal zone management efforts; na- ,
scribes how the state will satisfy the land use'element requirements tural rivers and natural areas programs; inland lake management unit;
prior to application for HUD 701 assistance after Aug. 22, 1977. and Shorelands Management Act of 1970 and Soil Erosion and Sed-
Second report, "An Economic Development Program for Massa- imentation Control Act of 1972. General inquiries may be sent to
chusetts," prepared by Gov. Michael S. Dukakis, is a working docu- the Division of Lend Resource Programs, Department of Natural
ment focusing on economic growth. Included in the report are Resour ces, Box 30028, Lansing, Mich. 48909.
sections regarding off-shore oil and gas development, housing con-
struction, transportation, and port development. Land Use Policy
In another land-related matter, ownership of Mashpee, a town of Despite strong support from Gov. Milliken, H.B.4234 is expected
16,000 acres valued at over $175-million, is being claimed by a tribe of
Indians who have posted notice with the registry of deeds. Title to the to die in;committee with no carry over provisions from this legisla-
town's land is clouded by the action; no mortgages are being written on tive session. This land use bill, originally introduced in February
its property, and some mortgage and construction loans are being re- 1975, was referred to the House Committee on Urban Affairs from
called. Maftee's entire economy is threatened, and the town was which it was reported out with substitute. It was next referred to the
recently unable to market a $14-million school bond issue. House Appropriations Committee where it was tabled. Bill's primary
sponsor, Philip 0. Mastin, did not run for reelection this year but
similar legislation is expected to be introduced in the next session.
Coastal Zone Management Meanwhile, the Zoning Advisory Committee of the Division of
Land Resource Programs, Department of Natural Resources has
Gov. Michael S. Dukakis recently presented a draft of the first prepared a report entitled "Michigan's Zoning Enabling Acts --
comprehensive plan for controlling commercial and recreational Recommendation for Revision" that presents a two-part strategy
use of the state's 1,200-mile'coastline.to Robert Knecht, chief of the for revision of the state's zoning enabling acts. First part presents
Commerce Department's Office of Coastal Zone Management. Pro- recommendations which should be given immediate legislative
gram, comprised of 33 specific policies and still subject to revision, consideration to clear up high-priority problems or grant essential
is an attempt to preserve natural and recreational areas, such as powers which will help local units of government in their use of
marshes and beaches, while a, the same time specifying where com- zoning. The second component of the report suggests the initiation
mercial development will be permitted under present state laws. of a concurrent effort to comprehensively revise enabling statutes
Program, which would be administered by the state Office of with serious consideration given to the creation of a new single zoning
Environmental Affairs, generally encourages economic growth in enabling act which would authorize zoning at the city, township,
those areas that are already developed, protecting undeveloped areas. county and village levels of government.
Construction which would generage additional development in flood- In a related matter, the Michigan Supreme Court it considering
prone areas is discouraged, but port and harbor development is the question of whether rezonings.are administrative or legislative
strongly supported. Policies affecting commercial development in- in character. Oral arguments have been hold and a decision on the
clude requiring a review of the appearance of buildings to be con- Zaagman, Inc. v. City of Kentwood, Turkish v. City of Warren is
structed within the coastal zone and urging inland siting of oil facil- expected shortly.
ities and power plants wherever possible. If the program is approved, New legislation introduced this year was the Kammer Recrea-
.the state will receive up to $1-million in Federal funds a year. tional Land Trust Fund Act (Public Act 204 of 1976) which des-
During 1976, the state r *eceived two coastal planning grants from ignates the revenue from oil and gas royalties on certain state lands
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. One of the be used to create a state recreational land acquisition trust fund.
grants, totaling $200,000, will be used to prepare for onshore impacts A five-member board will administer the trust. Funds generated
of Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas production. Coastal manage- for the purchase of land or rights in land are expected to be sizable.

@1977 Busi ness Publ ishers, I nc.

Michigan 20:020

Coastal Zone Management plans through the adoption of such measures as zoning, subdivision
State Department of Natural Resources received a third-year grant regulations, and official maps. Land use planning in townships mu st
of $436,308 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- first be approved by the voters of the township. If approved, the state
tration to complete development of a coastal zone management legislation provides, guidelines for the preparation of a comprehensive
program. State will provide matching funds of $218,154 which was plan and the adoption of zoning regulations. Certain towns, known
approved by the legislature. Program is being coordinated by the as "urban towns" have the same powers as municipalities.
DNR with state and regional planning commissions, the general . Special purpose'districts, including 92 soil and water conservation
public, and NOAA's Office of Coastal Zone Management. Ten and 33 watershed districts, have been established by state law.
of the fourteen state planning and development regions are partic- Minnesota also has@l 2 regional development commissions which have
ipating in the program. A 15-member Citizens Shorelands Advisory comprehensive planning authority, but cannot regulate the use of
Council has been appointed to advise DNR. Program is built on land. However, in addition to their planning role, the regional develop-
existing state; authorities with an emphasis on the strengthening of ment commissions coordinate the activities of local governments and
the role of local government. Statewide information meetings will the plans of inclepe rident boards, commissions or agencies which af-
be held early in 1977 and public hearings in April 1977. fect several communities or the entire region. Members of the regional
Gov. Milliken signed the Sand Dune Protection and Management development commissions are elected officials from local governry
Act into law on July 30,1976. Law, to be administered by DNR's or school boards. In the Twin Cities metropolitan area, the Metropol-
Geological Survey Division, requires (a) comprehensive study and itan Council whose@members are appointed, has land use authority.
inventory of Great Lakes sand dune areas in the state; (b) permit re- State agencies have the authority to plan and regulate the use of
quirements for mining in designated sand dune areas; (c) environ- certain lands. This authority is distributed among theso-called
mental impact statements; 1d) operational and reclamation plans "functional" agencies Mich administer programs relating to natural
for mining; (e) 15-year mining plans; (f) fees on sand mining; (g) resources management, pollution control, economic development
surety bonds; and th) penalties. and transportation.@ These activities are coordinated through the
Agricultural Lands development of comprehensive plans, but not regulated, by the
State Planning Agency. In most cases, regulatory authorities of state
Under the state's Farmland and Open Space Preservation Act of
1974, farmland and certain other property owners may receive agencies exist in the form of permits, standards, and direct land acqui-
special tax considerations by voluntarily entering into a 10-year de- sition, management and improvement.
velopment rights agreement on easement. Legislation was passed in 1973 allowing the state to locate cer-
Operational since May 1975, the act has had 758 applications tain types of develolpmen It s.uch as power plants; directly assist in
approved by local governing bodies with 500 receiving state approval the planning for certain I critical areas"; and to require environmental
by Dec. 31, 1975. This represents 114,000 and 31.000 acres impact statements. The 1973 legislature also created an Environmen-
tal Quality Council and a Commission on Minnesota's Future, which
respectively. It is estimated that by the end of 1976, near.900 applica- is responsible for developing strategies for legislature review.
tions for tax relief will have received state approval. In other land use-related legislation, the last legislative session
In a related matter, a technical report has been prepared by the approved a land use planning assistance program of grants for local
Michigan Farm Bureau, the Cooperative Extension Service and Center go vernment units to be administered by the State Planning Agency.
for Rural Manpower and Public Affairs and the Division of Land Re-
By la these grants cannot exceed 75% of the cost of the land use
source Programs. Report, entitled "The Use of Zoning to Retain @Vl I
Essential Agricultural Lands," reveals that the retension of essential planning program, except those grants made within a designated
agricultural lands for agricultural purposes is a proper public goal critical area may be* much as 100% of the total cost of the program.
and zoning when backed by a strong public commitment and sensi- A total of $2,500,000 was appropriated from the general fund, with
tive application can assist in reaching that goal. $300,000 designated for critical areas. H.F.1 026, effective July 1, 1976,
stated that the appropriation will be available until June 30,1977.
MICHIGAN LAND USE CONTACTS: Karl R. Hosford, Chief,
Division of Land Resource Programs, Department of Natural Re- Coastal Zone Management
sources, Box 30028, Lansing, Mich. 48909, (517) 373-3328.
MICHIGAN COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: Minnesota received a $120,000 grant to continue development of
Merle Raber, Department of Natural Resources, Stevens T. Mason a coastal zone management program from the National Oceanic and
Bldg., Lansing, Mich. 48926, (517) 373-1214. Atmospheric Administration. State had received $150,000 in 1975
from the Federal government to prepare a summary of the first
year's finding and to conduct special studies on shore erosion damage,
septic systems and wells, soils, and geology.
MINNESOTA Under the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, states are re-
"Minnesota, like other states, does not have a specific policy that quired to identify the boundaries of their coastal zone; develop a
is identified as 'a land use policy.' Instead, land use policy is com- process to determine appropriate land and water uses in the zone;
prised of a large number of policy statements that the legislature has establish priority uses within specific areas of the zone; determine
enunciated'in the statutes dealing with a variety of subjects that af- intergovernmental arrangements needed to conduct an effective
fect the use of land:' according to a report prepared by the State management program; and evaluate the adequacy of existing regula-
Planning Agency. Report was prepared by the agency's Environmen- tion for proper land and water use management.
tal Planning Assistance Program, authorized by Section 701 of the Coastal counties@have developed zoning ordinances for unin-
1954 Housing Act. For copies of "Program, Policies and Legal Author- corporated shorelands according to guidelines set by the Department
ities Affecting the Use of Land in Minnesota: Land Use Planning of Natural Resources under the Shoreland Management Act of 1969.
Report No. 1 " contact the State Planning Agency, 100 Capitol State supervision was extended to municipal shorelands in 1973.
Square Bldg., 550 Cedar St., St. Paul, Minn. 55101, (612) 296-4933.
Agricultural Lands
Land Use Policy
According to the report by the State Planning Agency, the state's Regarding agricultural lands, Minnesota enacted a deferred tax
land use planning and regulatory authority, granted by law to bring law in 1967 and amended it in 1969 and 1103. Private recreational,
about more orderly land patterns in both urban and rural areas and open space, and parkland, including land used for golfing and skiing,
to protect the indiscriminate use of natural resources, exists among are also eligible for deferred taxation. However, the land must be a
the many levels of government. Such authorities as taxation and least five acrea and either open to the public; operated by firms foi
zoning, which has a direct relationship to the land, can encourage or the benefit of employes and guests, or operated by private clubs
discourage certain types of land use and the rate of development. within membership af at least 50 people. Agricultural land must
The state legislature has granted municipalities and counties the be a family farm of at least 10 acres, in order to qualify for the
,power to develop comprehensive plans and to implement these special valuation. Qualified land is taxed according to use value;

@1977 Business.Publishers, Inc.

Montana 20-021

however, the marketvalue is%noted. If the land issold, deferred taxes MISSOURI
equ@al to the difference between market value and use value for the
last three years must be paid. On the state level, regulation of land use has not progressed be-
In 1974, the state Supreme Court upheld the law permitting farm- yond the study phase. Office of Statewide Planning, in the Depart-
land in urban areas to be assessed at a lower rate than its potential ment of Administration, has recommended steps to direct growth
market value. Court ruled that the legislature was empowered to by the siting of sewer facilities and other public services and facil-
classify property for tax purposes and that the state constitution ities. However, the state's primary role remains the provision of
required that taxes be uniform upon the same class of subjects . advice and technical assistance to localities.
In 1976, the state contracted with the U.S. Geological Survey
to prepare the Land Use and Data Analysis Program for the state.
MINNESOTA LAND USE CONTACTS: Peter L. Vanderpoel, Project is scheduled for completion in June 1977.
Director, State Planning Agency, (612) 296-4933; A. Edward Hunter,
Deputy Director, State Planning Agency, (612) 296-6662; James Land Use Policy
Solem, Director, Office of Local and Urban Affairs, (612) 296-3091;
101 Capitol Square Bldg., 550 Cedar St., St. Paul, Minn. 55101. Cities, villages and unincorporated towns in Missouri have broad
zoning and subdivision regulation authority. All zoning regulations
MINNESOTA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: must f ol low a comprehensive plan.
Steve Reckers, Coastal Zone Program, State PlaKning Agency, 100 Zoning authority for counties in the state vary according to
Capitol Square Bldg., 550 Cedar St., St. Paul, Minn. 55101, (612) classification based on assessed property values. Major counties en-
296-2884. joy the same zoning authority as cities, villages and towns. Building
codes cannot be adopted unless planning/zoning is adopted. Zoning
regulations for other counties must be approved by referendum.
MISSISSIPPI Only 22 of 114 counties in the state have enacted planning or zoning
ordinances.
In addition, the zoning authorities for all counties contain many
:Despite a prevailing attitude of suspicion toward the term "land exemptions for strip mining, commercial bu ildings, farmlands, and
use state officials are progressing cautiously toward development public utilities.
of a coastal zone management program, with in emphasis on local A measure of the sentiment toward land use control in the state
land"'controls. can be seen in the opposition led by U.S. Sen. Thomas F.'Eagleton
(D.-Mo.) to the Federal flood insurance program. His opposition to
Land Use Policy the program reflects strong pressure from constituents who contend
that the program restricts their rights to use their land as they wish.
Cities, towns and counties have broad zoning and subdivision As a result of this feeling, the city of Cape Girardeau has joined
regulation authority, and zoning must follow a comprehensive plan. with other cities in a court challenge of the constitutionality of the
No change of emphasis from the present dominance of local land flood insurance law. The state government has not taken any active
controls is anticipated. position on the issue.
Flood insurance program, administered by the U.S. Department
Coastal Zone Management of Housing and Urban Development, provides for land use and con-
struction controls to minimize losses in flood-hazard areas. It is one
Mississippi entered its third and final year of planning for coastal of only four Federal programs affecting state and local land use
zone management in December of 1976 Men it received a $136,168 decisions that actually are put into effect. Other Federal programs
grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce. State received a directly affecting state and local land management are the coastal
Federal grant of $127,038 in 1975, and $101,564, in its first year zone management program of the Department of Commerce and
in the program. the air and water pollution control programs of the Environmental
Planning for the state's coastal zone management plan is coordin- Protection Agency.
ated by the Mississippi Marine Resources Council and is a culmination
of the first and second years of planning. It will include;.an identifica- MISSOURI LAND USE CONTACT: Stephen Bradford, Director,
tion of the state's coastal boundaries; a determination of areas of Division of State Planning and Analysis, Office of Administration,
particular concern, as well astpriority uses for the coastline; a descrip- P.O. Box 809, Capitol Bldg., Rm. B-9, Jefferson City, Mo. 65101,
tion of how the state will exercise control over land and water uses; (314) 751-2073.
and bow it wil I organize itself to implement the development program.
Final plan will be submitted to the 1978 session of the state legisla-
tu re.
During the first two years of the program, several series of public
workshops and informal meetings were held to educate and inform
citizens about the coastal zone management plan. Audio-visual pre- MONTANA
sentations were made to over 80 interested civic and social groups.
A public opinion survey was conducted during the fall of 1976 to In 1975, the state enacted legislation (H.B.672) that was designed
determine attitudes and opinions of local citizens concerning the to promote good land use by employing tax incentives. However,
state's coastal resources. the state taxation subcommittee decided not to take any action on
MRC directly regulates development in state owned tide lands the Montana Economic Land Development Act which was never im-
through the Coastal Wetlands Protection Act of 1973 (Chapter 27, plemented because two state departments, the Department of Com-
Mississippi Code 1972), and cooperates with the Gulf Region Plan- munity Affairs and the Department of Revenue, considered it un-
ning Commission; which is studying development of a regional plan workable. Bill sponsors are preparing a report of MELDA to be
for the coastal counties for open spaces, recreation and esthetics. presented to the new legislature.

MISSISSIPPI LAND USE CONTACT: Milton Baxter, Ed.D., Land Use Policy
Director, Governor's Office of Planning & Coordination, 1503 Walter
Sillers Bldg., Jackson, Miss. 39201, (601) 354-7018. DCA Planning Division has prepared a working draft, still subject
to revision, regarding areas of state concern bill that will be presented
MISSISSIPPI COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: to the next legislative session. The purpose of this act would be to
J.E. Thomas, Director, Mississippi Marine Resource Council, P.O. establish a process by which the state and local governments may
Drawer 959, Long Beach, Miss. 39560, (601) 864-4602. jointly and cooperatively identify areas of mutual concern and share

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Montana 20:022
I
the responsibility for planning and management in a way consistent regulatory programs are consistent With state law. After L.B.317 was
with the interests of the state and the local community. Draft also signed into law by Gov. Exon, the state's attorney general's office
proposes the establishment of a commission for areas of state criticized it claiming the law contain unclear guidelines on determina-
concern. tion of compliance and lacked a provision to appeal adverse rulings
In order for an area to be designated a state concern, it must be by the planning office, a right which is statutory under state law.
found to be an area which contains irreplaceable natural or cultural . Amendments were passed which attempted to clarify the com-
characteristics that are of major concern to the state or an area pliance guidelines and inserted the appeal process into law. Amend-
where state policy permits or encourages resource development, and ments also contained an extra-territorial notice provision requiring
where such development could result in undesirable community and notice within a three-mile radius of proposed construction activity
environmental impact. Working draft presents the necessary pro- by a local government.
cedures for area nomination, public hearings and development of Nebraska has legislation designed to preserve agricultural lands
planning guidelines for the area. by taxing the land it its actual value for agricultural use rather
Planning Division also will attempt to amend the Subdivision than at its value for@other types of uses. In order to qualify for this
and Platting Act to allow greater control of the subdivision process agricultural use assessment, the land must be used for agricultural
and to change the "Greenbelt" Law. The purpose of the "Greenbelt" purposes and must be zoned for agricultural use by the local gov-
Law is to use the taxation power of the state to keep land in agricul- ernment with zoning jurisdiction. The attorney general's office has
tural production and discourage it conversion to residential use by ruled that in order to qualify for the assessment, the agricultural use
not classifying subdivided land as agricultural and also by assessing zone must be zonecl@ exclusively for agriculture with no other uses
an additional tax payable when the use of the land is changed from allowed. I
agricultural to another use, or a "roll-back" tax. However, under If land that is given the special agricultural assessment is taken out
the present interpretation by the state attorney general, the law does of agricultural production, it will be assessed for taxes at the higher
not have its intended affect and can promote undesirable changes value for the five years preceding its removal from agricultural use.
in use, rather than inhibiting them, and it penalizes conversion of Interest of six percent must be paid on these additional taxes. State
marginal land more harshly than prime agricultural land. law also requires that a permit be obtained from the director of the
Planning Division intends to propose the repeal of the "roll- Department of Wate ir Resources for construction within a floodplain.
back" tax and amend a section of the law to provide that the filing
of a subdivision plat changes the tax classification from agricultural NEBRASKA LAND USE CONTACTS: W. Don Nelson, Director,
to residential. The division also plans to request allocation of one- State Office of Plan ining and Programming, (402) 471-2414; Robert
half of onepercent of coal tax monies to a discretionary fund for D. Kuzelka, Comprehensive Planning Coordinator, Box 94601, State
local planning. Fund would be controlled and distributed by the Capitol, Lincoln, Neb. 68509.
DCA and its use would be solely to meet local needs caused by
anticipated Federal default.
State Commission on Local Government, established by the last
legislature, has proposed a comprehensive recodification of all state NEVADA
laws which relate to the authority and responsibilities of local gov-
ernments. If the proposal, which is supported by DCA, is passed, No significant modifications have been initiated in 1976 to the
it would replace four separate state laws which authorize cities and legislation providing preferential tax treatment for agricultural and
counties to plan and zone. open space lands passed in 1976, since the state legislature meets
In a related matter, Montana Supreme Court is expected to re- every two years. However, staff members of the state Land Use
consider a July 22 decision which upheld citizens' right to file suit Planning Agency, Department of Conservation and Natural;Re-
against the state to challenge the adequacy of environmental impact sources, are optimistic that land use-related legislation will be forth-
statements. Decision is being interpreted more broadly than had been coming in the next legislative session beginning in January.
intended, according to several court justices.
Land Use Policy
MONTANA LAND USE CONTACT: Judith H. Carlson, Director,
Montana Department of Community Affairs, Capitol Station, Helena, In summary, the state has legislation providing a tax break, for
Mont. 59601, (406) 449-3494. which application must be made, for farmland that meets outlined
qualifications. Counties are permitted to establish criteria for open
space tax breaks and @he designation of open space must be tied to
a comprehensive plan and local zoning ordinances.
Nevada passed a land use planning act in 1973 requiring all
NEBRASKA counties in the state to develop comprehensive land use plans by
July 1, 1975. The state Land Use Planning Agency, created by the
State officials are preparing to implement legislation approved by law, is now in the process of reviewing those plans.
the legislature and signed by the governor in 1975 that requires . Under the law, counties over 100,000 in population must include
counties with large populations to prepare and enforce comprehen- population projection' elements in their plans, along with conserva-
sive land use plans after July 1, 1977. Another land use measure, tion, water needs, and pollution control as critical or limiting factors
also passed in 1975 clarifies ambiguities that arose in the guidelines in planning for growt Ih. Nevada's land use legislation requires develop-
for preparation of the county land use plans. ment of a statewide la nd use planning process and designation of
critical environmental areas. It does not grant authority to regulate
Land Use Policy large-scale developme'rits or facilities with significant environmental
impact.
Under the 1915 law (L.B.317), cities and villages in metropolitan State Land Use Planning Agency is also involved in developing
counties in the state failing to enforce zoning and subdivision regula@ methods to inventory@, lands and resources; identifying demograph
tions Will forfeit land use planning and regulatory powers to county trends and the impact assessment of large-scale development; pro- ic
governments. Four of Nebraska's ninety-three counties are con- jecting land use needs'; and inventorying needs and financial resources
sidered metropolitan. These counties, having cities with populations for the private and public sectors.
of 5,000 or more are required to prepare and enforce zoning and sub- The state is also involved in the joint California-Nevada Tahoe
divisions by July 1, 1977. Regional Planning Agency, which administers the resort area of Lake
The State Office-of Planning and Programming is directed to re- Tahoe. In a related matter, the Nevada Supreme Court reaffirmed
view the land use programs of all counties and municipalities in the the legality of the bi-sItate agency in 1974 by dismissing various legal
state by July 1, 1977, and to reexamine the programs annually in challenges filed by Douglas County, Nev., where the lake and gambling
order to insure that the procedures and practices under the land use casinos are located.

@1977 Bu siness Pu blishers, I nc.

Now Jersey 20- 023

NEVADA LAND USE CONTACTS: Bruce D. Arkell, Planning Co- Land Use Policy
ordinator, Capitol Complex, Carson City, Nev. 89710, (702) 885-
4865; Addison Millard, State Land Use Planning Agency, Depart- Division of State and Regional Planning, within the Department
ment of Conservation and Natural Resources, Capitol Complex, of Community Affairs has been in the process of preparing a draft
Carson City, Nev. 89710, (702) 885-4363. plan for state development. Plan indicates where development is ap-
propriate and should be encouraged and where major resource and
open space preservation efforts should be focused. Present data in-
dicate that much of the state's projected population growth can be
accommodated within areas well served by existing transportation
networks and other public facilities.
Development plan also delineates areas where agricultural uses
NEW HAMPSHIRE should be maintained, open space be preserved and development be
limited to current levels. Plan is not designed to duplicate the plan-
ning activities of other public agencies or to replace any function
Since the state legislature meets biannually, there has been no performed now by these agencies. Development within the state
change in the status of land use controls or proposed legislation. In will be determined by public policy and the dynamics of the private
.1975 several land use planning bills were defeated because of grow- sector. Plan is intended to describe the general direction and goals of
ng concern for local control over land use regulations and no sup- the state development policy and to encourage coordination among
p1rort from Gov. Meldrim Thomson. all participants in the development process.
Land Use Policy Division of State and Regional Planning has prepared, by execu-
tive order of Gov. Brendan Byrne, a preliminary draft of a statewide
housing allocation plan. Plan includes a housing needs study and
Office of Comprehensive Planning has prepared an Overall Pro- state housing goals to guide municipalities in adjusting their munic-
gram Design for fiscal years 1977-1979 and an application for com-
preIhensive planning assistance program funding July 1, 1976 to ipal land use regulations in order to provide opportunity for develop-
ment of a variety of housing to meet the needs of state residents.
June 30, 1977, from the Department of Housing and Urban De- Public hearings have been conducted regarding the housing allocation
velopment. OCP is attempting to deal with the statewide issues of plan andit is currently being reviewed. For further information con-
policy and program development, land use and water resource tact the Division of State and Regional Planning, Bureau of Urban
planning, and housing planning. Regarding land use, the goal of the Planning, P.O. Box 2768, Trenton, N.J. 08625.
OCP is to complete a program which will serve as a unifying force In related matters, Gov. Brendan Byrne signed legislation pro-
for state actions regarding growth and development and resource hibiting discrimination in granting home mortgages and forbidding
use and conservation. the practice of redlining, refusing to grant mortgages in less de-
sirable neighborhoods. Under the new law, fines of up to $5,000 in
Coastal Zone Management each case where a lending institution refuses to grant a mortgage
for arbitrary reasons based on geographical location can be levied by.
OCP is also responsible for coastal zone management in the state the state banking commissioner. New law requires that lender file
and is in the process of Preparing a comprehensive plan to be pre- reports with the state disclosing mortgages that are either granted
sented to the legislature. Plan will emphasize inventorying biological or refused and permits class-action suits by residents of the affected
populations and mineral and petroleum resources; ways of assessing a reas.
the impact of various land and water uses; and development of Following its decision in Mt. Laurel that all localities in develop-
policies regarding the use of the coastal zone based on the impacts ing areas must help meet their fair share of regional low- and mod-
of those uses. erate-income housing needs, the state Supreme Court has ordered
NEW HAMPSHIRE LAND USE CONTACTS: George E. McAvoy, a locality to rezone specific tracts to provide subsidized housing.
Court stopped short of establishing a specific formula for allocat-
Director, (603) 271-2176; Office of Comprehensive Planning, State ing fair share housing in the Middlesex region, but said it would do
House, Concord, N.H. 03301 ;James E. Minnoch, Director of State so if municipal advisors "deemed it useful." Rezoning order, ap-
Planning, (603) 271-2176; State House Annex, Concord, N.H. plicable specifically to Madison Township, came in a 4-3 decision
03301.
which the court apparently made reluctantly. According to Justice
Robert Clifford, the decision was made with "fingers crossed."
NEW HAMPSHIRE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: The state courts took similar action in another case under the
Jerrold A. Moore, (603) 271-2155; Off ice of Comprehensive Planning, Mt. Laurel doctrine, with a county court ordering Montville Town-
State House Annex, Concord, N.H. 03301. ship to provide low- and moderate-income housing to meet its share
of the region's housing needs. Suit was successfully brought by de-
velopers and individuals challenging a large-lot zoning ordinance
which designated large areas of the township for one to three acre
single family residential development. The trial court stopped short
of mandating specific remedies for meeting low- and moderate-
income housing needs.
NEW JERSEY
Coastal Zone Management
Several pieces of land use related legislation were introduced in
the state Legislature during 1976. The "Agricultural Preserve Damon- Permanent injunction by the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn to
S
tration Program Act," appropriating funds from the State Recrea- block exploration for oil and gas in offshore tracts in the Atlantic
tion and Conservation Land Acquisition and Development Fund for Ocean off the New Jersey coast is being sought by the Natural Re-
programs to acquire and conserve lands for recreation and conserva- sources Defense Council, along with Nassau and Suffolk Counties of
tion purposes, was approved. Rules and regulations for the program, Long Island. Plaintiffs obtained a temporary restraining order Aug, 13,
designed to preserve agricultural open space and to retain such four days before the U.S, Interior Department had scheduled lease
activities, have been adopted and the demonstration program is cur- sales of 154 of the coastal trackts, but the decision of Judge Jack B.
rently underway. However, both the "Development Review Act," Weinstein was overturned.
Senate Bill 1013, relating to planning and the review of land use de- Lawsuit contends that Interior's environmental impact statement
cisions regarding large-scale development, and the "Municipal De- on the lease sale was inadequa!e because it overlooked the possibility
velopment Rights Act," Assembly Bill 1118, regarding planning and that local shore communities. might bar installation of pipelines that
zoning, have not yet been adopted. would carry oil inland. Without pipelines, NRDC argues, oil companies

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

New Jersey 20:024

would be forced to transport oil by tanker, a development which Authority to regulate subdivisions of more than five lots is granted
would greatly increase chances of an oil spill. In oral arguments, the to counties under the Subdivision Act of 1973. The act establishes
state's mayors, planning directors, and other local officials testified guidelines for subdivision control and requires localities to coord-
that their communities intend to use zoning powers to prohibit oil- inclate controls with the state environmental improvement agency.
related activities. U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the leased I I n 1 97@, the state legislatu re rejected an environmental qual ity
tracts may contain as much as 1.4-billion barrels of oil and up to bill which would have required state agencies to prepare environ-
9.4-trillion cubic ft. of natural gas. mental impact statements on proposed projects. A similar bill was
Interim coastal development guidelines were also prepared during passed in 1972, but it was repealed in 1974. The 1975 bill, which
1976 by the state Department of Environmental Protection to accom- was considerably weaker than the 1972 version, was opposed by
modate growth and protect the natural resources of the coastal zone. many supporters of the concept who considered the measure in-
Utilizing the guidelines, DEP's Division of Marine Services will review adequate. Incoming Gov. Jerry Apodaca, made a November 1974
applications for construction permits for projects under the Coastal campaign pledge to support full reinstatement of the act.
Area Facility Review Act. A bill providing compensation to any property owner denied
CAFRA, enacted in 1973, authorizes DEP to prepared environ- use of his property by public regulation failed in 1975 and was not
mental protection programs and policies for the state's coastal areas reintroduced in 1976.
while providing new development that is economically and socially
beneficial to the area and the state. Energy Facilities and Lands
The guidelines categorize sites where development is to be "en-
couraged," "restricted," and "discouraged." Local master plans and An energy resources board, charged with preparing an energy
municipal zoning regulations will not be preempted by the guidelines. plan for power plant and mine siting, still lacks implementation
The DEP policy will serve "as a guide to citizens, developers, local and powers. A bill giving the board such authority was considered in
county governments, and other state agencies," according to DEP 1975, did not pass and was not reintroduced in 1976. A spokesman
Commissioner David Bardin. "The written guidelines will aid in the for the ERB said that there is probably "less than a 50-50 chance"
processing of CAFRA permits for projects such as single-family de- of the board receiving the authority because of the traditional con-
velopment, high-rise housing, hotels and motels, campgrounds, marinas, servatism of state landowners, coupled with the power of the state
and commercial and industrial facilities." energy industry. I
New Jersey recently received a third-year grant of $690,000 from The Legislative Energy Committee has supported energy
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to continue policies including: nuclear reactors, offshore drilling, coal slurry
developing a coastal management program. Funds will be used to pipelines, interstate regulation of natural gas prices, loan guarantees
develop guidelines for future uses of the coast for recreation, trans- for synthetic fuel plants and coal development on Federal lands.
portation, industrial development, beach home construction, energy
facility siting, and various other competing activities. State will provide NEW MEXICO LAND USE CONTACTS: Graciela Olivarez, State
matching funds of $172,616 to the Commerce Department grant. Planning Officer; Robert Landmann, Deputy State Planning Officer;
Office of Coastal Zone Management, Department of Environ- Robert Toberman, Administrative Assistant; State Planning Office,
mental Protection, has prepared and submitted to the governor.and Executive-Legislative Building, Santa Fe, N.M. 87503 (505)
legislature a report of alternate environment management strategies 827-2315.
for the state's coast. Department will consider and evaluate strategies
regarding quality and pollution of tidal water; wildlife management;
public access and privacy; recreation and tourism; energy sitings; res-
idential development and transportation systems. For copies of the
report, "Alternative for the Coast," contact the OCZM, DEP, Box
1889, Trenton, N.J. 08625. NEW YORK
NEW JERSEY LAND USE CONTACT: Richard A. Ginman, Di- Several land use disputes centered on the Adirondack Park Agen-
rector, Division of State and Regional Planning, 329 W. State St.,, cy in 1976, resulting in court rulings upholding APA's authority to
P.O. Box 2768, Trenton, N.J. 08625, (609) 292-2953. impose regional land use controls on aesthetic grounds and per-
mitting restrictions to be enforced without compensation to af-
NEW JERSEY COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: fected landowners.
Alex Corson, Department of Environmental Protection, Office of An innovative farmland preservation program was initiated in
Public Information, P.O. Box 1390, Trenton, N.J. 08046, (609) Long Island's Suffolk County, including the purchase of development
292-2994. rights to maintain existing agricultural uses. After initial disputes over
funding, the county approved the program, which is expected to
serve as a national model.
NEW MEXICO Land Use Policy
Several court decisions in 1976 affirmed the Adirondack Park
No land use legislation was considered in the state's 1976 legisla- Agency's authority to regulate regional development. APA authority
tive session. However, the legislature's energy committee, estab- to consider aesthetic and scenic values in reviewing project applica-
lished during 1976, is studying energy problems of the state and tions was confirmed by the Appellate Division of the State Supreme
will introduce a number of bills in 1977. The prospective measures Court, Mich upheld APA's right to block the construction of a boat-
Mll include energy facility siting, grants to energy-impacted com- house. In affirming an earlier Supreme Court ruling the court concluded
munities, and increased taxes on extraction of coal and uranium. that "it is now well-established New York law that aesthetics is a valid
Land Use Policy subject of legislative concern and that legislation aimed at promoting
the governmental interest in preserving the appearance of an area is
permissable exercise of the polic power." The original decision, noted
To assist in policy planning, the state is preparing a critical that the creation of APA was "the most ambitious attempt by the
area analysis and a study of growth areas. State must prepare land state legislature to control the use of land." It is obvious, the court
use planning elements in order to meet the Department of Housing said, "that one of the prime concerns of the legisltaure was to pre-
and Urban Development's 701 comprehensive planning guidelines. serve the aesthetic and scenic value of the part."
A historic impact review process is also being prepared. Additional support for APA's authority came in another ruling
Counties and municipalities of the state have broad zoning which dismissed a $36-million damage suit brought by Horizon
authority, and counties have power to zone in special districts. Andirdriclack Corp., owner of more than 24,000 acres in the park .

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

North Carolina 20:025

Horizon claimed-that the APA Act's development controls deprived energy shortages, development pressures in the eastern portion of the
the corporation of almost all economic use of its property, and county have decreased, and owners of larger developable tracts have
thereby constituted a "taking" for which compensation was required had difficulty selling their property. Reappraisals are underway to more
under the U.S. Constitution. accurately determine existing land values. For information on the
Horizon purchased the land in 1972 for about $2.3-million, and Suffolk County program, contact: Margaret Tschiember, Suffolk County
planned to construct almost 7,000 dwelling units in an area which Executive's Office, E xecutive- Legislature Bldg., County Center, Haup-
APA said could support only a maximum of about 1,600 units. pauge, N.Y. 11787.
In dismissing Horizon's claim, the Court of Claims concluded
that "aesthetic, open space and environmental considerations are Coastal Zone Management
valid bases for regulation in the Adirondack context." The court Following delays caused by the 1975 abolition of the Office of
conceded that the regulation of private land uses in the region "is Planning Services which originally served as the lead CZM agency, the
a matter of concern to residents of the Adirondacks, but such reg- Department of State was designated to supervise development of CZM
ulation "is no less than has been required of urban, suburban and plans. A broad coastal planning area has been delineated, comprising
even rural property owners in the context of zoning lavv... The 28 "coastal" counties including all of New York City, Long Island,
Adirondack Park is 6 resource of greater than local concern, and jurisdictions along the tidal Hudson River and the coastline counties
has been so declared by the legislature. As such, it is only appropriate along the St. Lawrence River, Lake Ontario, the Niagara River and Lake
that the state, together with the local interests which are also affected, Erie. The state program is focusing on communities and local areas in
be given some degree of control." APA authority is also being chal- relatively close proximity to the shoreline, permitting the state to
lenged in 11 other damage suits totaling about $28-million. In two work closely with local governments and regional planning groups.
other court actions, Wambat Realty and Ton-Da-Lay Associates are As the CZM program has progressed, state officials report an
also challenging the constitutionality of the APA Act. increase in interest among local governments and planning agencies
In APA's annual report to the legislature, chairman Robert F. seeking to participate in the development of CZM policies. "This
Flacke conceded that the agency is a long way from gaining unani- positive reaction indicates a growing awareness of coastal zone
mous support from local officials and citizens, but contended that management and an interest in formulating the second year CZM
"there is evidence of greater understanding and acceptance of re- work program," officials said.
gional land use planning than ever before." To capitalize on the In the spring of 1976, New York received a second year develop-
increased public acceptance of APA@ the state should provide greater ment grant from the Office of Coastal Zone Management of
funding for local planning assistance grants and agency operations, $799,666, which was combined with state aid to provide almost
APA recommended. $1.2-million in total funds. The second year program emphasizes
APA regulations "are not stiffing the Adirondack economy... but public participation, identification of geographic areas of partic-
are in fact safeguarding the very basis of this economy -- forestry, ular - concern, permissible and priority land uses, Federal coordin-
tourism, farming and second.home development that is compatible ation and consistency, and segmentation. Funds have been allocated
with the Adirondack environment," APA said, New growth and to conduct initial studies to identify GAPCs and permissible land
development are possible within the constraints of the APA Act', uses aimed at identifying methods and findings which can be applied
and "more and more local governments are perceiving the advantage to similar situations statewide.
of local land use planning" within the regional framework of the New York is also accelerating its segmentation program to enable
legislation, according to Flacke. eligible geographric'areas to proceed with final Section 306 approval.
"It is our hope," APA said, "that the lessons learned from the Segmentation efforts are being undertaken on Long Island and along
experience of APA, from our mistakes as well as successes, will the St. Lawrence River.
prove instructive," particularly in demonstrating the effectiveness . New York also received a $373,000 Outer Continental Shelf
of state/local cooperation in land use planning. APA's annual supplemental grant to determine OCS development impacts on the
report is available from APA, P.O. Box 99, Ray Brook, N.Y. 12977. coastal zone, make plans for those impacts, and provide policy
guidance for the governor and legislature. State officials see the
Agricultural Lands CZM program as "an opportunity for Federal, state and local
governments and the public to work together to find workable
After several false starts, Suffolk County officials approved a solutions to the important problems facing the state's coastal land
program calling for the purchase of development rights for farmland and waters@"
in the eastern portion of Long Island in an effort to curb sprawl and
prevent urbanization of those areas. Private landowners wil I retain NEW YORK LAND USE AND COASTAL ZONE MANAGE-
title to the land, but will be subject to use restrictions. MENT CONTACT: Henry G. Williams, Director, Division of State
The program, which envisions the initial preservation of some Planning, (518) 474-7210; Department of State, 162 Washington Ave.,
3,800 acres, was almost killed by the county legislature because of Albany, N.Y. 12231.
funding problems. With land prices ranging from $4,400 to $12,000/
acre, the program is expected to cost about $21 -million at first, with
about $60-million expected to be needed eventually to protect 15,000
acres.
To finance the first $21 -million development rights purchase, the NORTH CAROLINA
county has approved a 30-year bond issue, although opponents of the
program contend that the county's bonding authority will be over- North Carolina's 1974 Land Policy Act created a Land Policy
burdened. Some county legislators have contended that speculators Council empowered to develop and implement a state land use pro-
have driven up land values in anticipation of the program's approval gram. Final recommendations of the LPC for a statewide land re-
by transferring targeted properties at artificially high prices between sources program are to be presented.in early 1977 to the governor
dummy corporations, thusmaking the land appear to be more valuable. and general assembly.
OPPonetits have also complained that the program will benefit only the The recommendations are expected to include a land policy, a
still-rural eastern portion of the county, while all residents will have planning process, land resource information systems, and property
to help pay off the bonds. In any event, the Suffolk County program tax reform.
is seen as a prototype by many planners who expect it to be used as Land Use Policy
a model by other states and localities.
County officials are currently conducting preliminary studies to The state is preparing a land classification system based on 10-
support the program, including economic and market analyses to year plans prepared by local governments as a basis for future plan-
determine agricultural value of the targeted lands. Contrary to initial ning programs. Plans will constitute local statements of intent,
ears, land prices have actually dropped since the program was adopted, indicating where urban services will be provided and where future
county officials report. Because of the county's lack of mass transit and growth will be channelled. Completed plans are to serve as guides
f

@1977 Business Publishers, I nc.

North Carolina 20:026

for investment of public funds. establish minimum planning standards to be met by local governments
LPC will propose legislation for General Assembly consideration but no action is anticipated on the proposal in the near future. Similarly,
during 1977. The LPC includes eight cabinet members, the lieuten- more comprehensive growth management measures have been dropped.
ant governor, the speaker of the House, a second House member, a The legislature considered and defeated several measures to amend
Senate member, and representatives of city and county groups. local zoning and planning enabling acts. One measure, S.2379, would
have forced townships to relinquish unused zoning and planning
Coastal Zone Management authority to counties after July 1979. Another measure, S.2229,
was adopted authorizing townships to voluntarily surrender their
North Carolina's coastal zone management program has com- authorities to counties.
pleted its first phase during which local governments in coastal coun- The legislature also defeated bills which would have: (1) created
ties are to prepare land classification plans to identify interim areas a state housing finance agency, H.B.1431; (2) allowed cities to over-
of environmental concern. The Coastal Resources Commission is ride county ordinances regarding extraterritorial zoning, H.B.1 582;
currently initiating a second phase program which focuses on those and (3) created a permanent state energy agency, H. B. 1068.
areas of environmental concern. CRC is also determining what areas Principle land use authority rests with local government, and
meet the state enabling legislation's criteria for AECs. Following a municipalities can exercise zoning controls as far as two miles be-
process of formal designation, special development standards will yond their borders. Counties are authorized to adopt property tax
be enforced by both local and state agencies. levies to fund planning if approved by voter referendum. The leg-
The LPC is working with coastal planners, and the two units islature approved enabling legislation for regional planning organiza-
frequently exchange staff, state officials say. Land classifications tions but no appropriations were included.
employed in preliminary coastal zone plans were developed, in part, The legislature also agreed to provide $2-million to implement
by the LPC staff. the state regional environmental assessment program (REAP), plus
$11-million for a computerized resource data system. For informa-
Energy Facilities and Lands tion on REAP, contact: William Johnson, (703) 224-3700. In other
An energy conservation plan and an emergency energy pro- action, the legislature defeated two resolutions which included
provisions calling for land use studies.
gram has been adopted by the North Carolina Energy Council which
has created by the legislature in 1975. Both documents will be pre-r Energy Facilities and Lands
sented to the 1977 session of the general assembly. The proposals
give the governor authority to impose measures adopted on a volun- North Dakota is currently implementing strip mine control and
tary basis during 1973-74. energy facility siting legislation adopted in 1975, although minor
modifications to the strip mining bill are under consideration by the
NORTH CAROLINA LAND USE CONTACT: Stephen Thomson, Natural Resources Council.
Director of Land Policy, (919) 829-4131; Department of Administra,- According to state planning officials, the legislature is at an im-
tion, Administration Building, Raleigh, N.C. 27611. passe on the issue of coal severance taxes to generate revenues for
communities impacted by energy projects. Oddly enough, one of
NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CON- the issues slowing enactment is the distribution of Federal revenue
TACT: Ken Stewart, Executive Secretary, Coastal Resources Com- sharing funds. Initially, coal taxes and revenue sharing were con-
mission; (919) 829-4918@ Department of Natural and Economic sidered separate issues, but they have been linked and the dispute
Resources, Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611. has become intensely partisan.
Republican legislators are backing an increase of the existing
50d1ton tax to 70d, a levy which opponents say will not cover the ful I
costs imposed by. disruotive energy development. Instead, Democrats
are backing a tax based on 33% of the price of coal.
NORTH DAKOTA Under the facility siting act, the state Public Services Commis-
sion will review proposed projects and prevent the scattering of
Gov. Arthur A. Link has proposed several bills to organize and co- facilities.
ordinate state environmental protection functions and unify local land
use controls. The state is also implementing strip mine legislation an NORTH DAKOTA LAND USE CONTACTS: Austin Engel,
acted in 1975 to deal with massive coal development anticipated in Director; Russell Steiger, Planning Administrator; Oscar Lund,
the near future. Land Use Coordinator; North Dakota Planning Division, Ninth
Land Use Policy Floor, State Capitol Bldg_ Bismarck, N.D. 58501, (701) 224-2818.

In a message to the legislature early this year, Link called for the
adoption of comprehensive land use legislation. Present statutes govern@-
ing township, county, and city planning, currently "confusing and
in potential conflict," should be "clarified and harmonized," Link OHIO
said. State aid to localities must also be provided for land use planning,
"both in terms of minimum guidelines and, procedures and staff as- The Ohio joint legislative Land Use Review Committee, created
sistance," according to the governor. in August 1975, has held several public hearings and has issued an
Link also called for a "general purpose, critical areas land use interim report.
planning statute," including procedures for land development Meanwhile, the United States Supreme Court, on June 21, 1976,
and land uses "that have apeater than local impact." upheld an Eastlake, Ohio charter provision requiring that land use
State officials are also seeking legislative approval for a plan to changes be approved by 55% of those voting by referendum.
redefine the powers and duties of the state Natural Resources Council.
"Natural resources are of primary importance to the state and its Land Use Policy
people," Link noted. "Coordination of agencies dealing with energy
development, land use, conservation of soil, water, air, game and fish The Land Use Review Committee is expected to makep final re-
management, and recreation and parks is, a sound proposal for the port to the General Assembly in January 1977. Public hearings were
state of North Dakota." held by,the LURC to assist with preparation of the report.
The state NRC and legislature considered several proposals in With a membership composed of seven members of the house
1976 and 1977, but most have been shelved or defeated. For some of representatives, seven state senators, and an apointee of the
time NFIC has been considering critical areas legislation which would governor, the LURC was created in 1975 and given a two-year bud-

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Oklahoma 20:027

get of $275,000. The LURC is organized into six issue-oriented sub- tion, who added that "we are not fully satisfied to leave these matters
Committees: agency coordination, large-scale development, significant to the experts." A representative of the National Center for Urban
lands, local enabling legislation, taxation and land use, and review Ethnic Affairs, which is involved in grassroots community organiz-
procedures. ing, believes that "the ruling takes zoning decisions out of the hands
The Policy and Program Coordination Section of the Governor's of those who may have a vested interest and puts it into the hands
office was created by executive order on June 30, 1976. Charged of neighborhoods where everyone has a vested interest."
with coordinating the planning and policy making of state agencies, Availability of subsidies rather than awarding of increased den-
the section is headed by a program coordinator, who also represents sities serves to predicate development, said a city planning consultant
the governor on the Land Use Review Committee. to Glouchester, Mass., John Howard, who disagreed With the claim
Groundwork for state planning activities was laid in a series of that the ruling will inhibit development of lower income housing in
reports prepared by the interagency land use policy work group areas which adopt referendum procedures.
which were published in 1975 by the state Office of Budget and
Management. Reports analyze state land use goals and discuss pos- Coastal Zone Management
sible programs. (For information about these reports contact
William Didge, listed below.) Ohio is currently operating in the second year of its coastal zone
The United States Supreme Court, on June 21, 1976, upheld a management program, financed by $419,000 in Office of Coastal Zone
charter provision of the city of Eastlake, Ohio, which required that Management monies, and matched by $220,000 in state funds.
zoning changes be approved by 55% of the electorate. In "City of East- The second year program includes land capability analyses and
lake v. Forest City Enterprises" (74-1563), thecourt ruled that the studies covering topics such as: islands, energy, fish, sand, historic
suburban Cleveland jurisdiction's referendum procedure does not sites, natural areas, wetlands, flood plains, and erosion areas. An ex-
violate constitutional guarantees to due process. Case sterned from a panded public involvement program, including newsletters and movies,
suit brought in state court by the company, whose request for a zon- is being initiated, and a public advisory committee is being established.
ing change from industrial to multi-family residential was approved
by city planning officials, but rejected by residents. OHIO LAND USE CONTACTS: Jeff Cabot, Program Coordinator,
Although the referendum procedure was upheld by the trial court (614) 466-7461; Program Coordination Section of the Governor's Of-
and by the state court of appeals, the measure was struck down by f ice, Rm. 2401, State Off ice Tower, 30 E. Broad St., Columbus, Ohio
the state Supreme Court, which concluded that the referendum sub- 43215. Peter H. Henderson, Staff Director, (614) 466-6836; Ohio Land
jected zoning requests to voter "whims" and deprived applicants of Use Review Committee, 20 E. Broad St., Columbus, Ohio 43215.
"fair ancl@rational" procedures.
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, in the majority opinion, con- OHIO COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: Bruce
tended that the referendum procedure does not represent an im- McPherson, Supervisor, (614) 466-4768; Shoreline Management Unit,
proper delegation of legislative authority since "all power derives Division of Water, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Fountain
from the people." Referendum "is a means for direct political par- Sq., Columbus, Ohio 43224.
ticipation, allowing the people the final decision, amounting to a
veto power, over enactment of representative bodies," the court
said. The practice, Burger added, "is designed to give citizens a
voice on questions of public policy."
Neither the suit nor the Supreme Court's ruling, addressed the
reasonableness of the industrial zoning classification, and neither dis- OKLAHOMA
cussed the use of referendum procedures to support exclusionary
zoning practices. Burger noted, however, that if a referendum-backed State officials are concentrating their efforts on achieving passage
zoning decision is "arbitrary and capricious, bearing no relation to of a bill which would increase state controls over development in
the police power," that decision may be overturned by legal action. areas adjacent to scenic rivers and similar waterways. The issue has
The court's decision was disputed by Justices John Paul Stevens, gained increased attention in Oklahoma in the wake of an unsuccess-
William J. Brennan, and Lewis F. Powell, Jr. Drawing a distinction ful suit Mich sought to halt development of a recreational project
between approval of general zoning policies and approval of changes along the pristine Illinois River. State environmentalists tried to
affecting a specific piece of land, Stevens conceded that an initiative force the preparation of a full environmental impact statement by
or referendum is a legitimate tool for deciding "questions of com- the Federal Office of Interstate Land Sales Registration.
munity policy." However, "it is equally clear that the popular vote
.s not an acceptable means of adjudicating the rights of individual Land Use Policy
litigants." The court should hav a forced Eastlake to consider the
application on its own merits, said Stevens who was joined in his The scenic rivers legislation would provide for increased planning
dissent by Brennan. and management of river areas through the creation of a state ' Scenic
In a terse separate dissent, Powell acknowledged the legality and River Planning and Zoning Commission, made up of state and local
properiety of "submitting generally applicable lbgislative questions, officials, The commission would resolve conflicts between jurisdic-
including zoning provisions, to a popular referendum." But, such a tions over river development, and would identify and regulate con-
procedure is "fundamentally unfair" when applied to specific zoning struction in designated critical areas.
change applications, Powell said, because it gives the applicant "no State officials say the proposal would not result in "strict pre-
realistic opportunity... to be heard, even by the electorate." The servation," nor will it lead to a total loss of local authority. The bill
"spot" referendum technique "appears to open disquieting opportun- demonstrates "the public concern and the lack of control" over de-
ities for local government bodies,to bypass normal protective pro- velopment in remote scenic areas, state officials note. Some environ-
cedures for resolving issues affecting individual rights," Powell said. mental groups are only half-heartedly supporting the bill, contending
The decision was generally criticized by developers and fair hous- that it provides inadequate state controls, Chances for passage are
ing advocates. Local officials have access to sufficient information uncertain in the legislature, which is dominated by local interest
to make reasonable decisions and need not delegate that authority groups.
to the voters, said the National Association of Homebuilders. "The State officials have tried unsuccessfully to reform enabling mea-
effect of this kind of requirement is going'to chill the efforts of any sures for local planning and zoning, but strong opposition persists in
builders who may put up any low- or moderate-income housing," the legislature. Rather than continue to press for comprehensive re-
contended a spokesman for the National Committee Against Dis- forms, state planners will seek minor changes to remedy specific prob-
crimination in Housing. lems in local land use control.
On the other hand, environmentalists and community activities Currently, cities and incorporated towns have broad zoning powers.
generally praised the decision, "The referendum is an effective method Counties have numerous exemptions, including farmlands, oil and gas
of public participation," said a spokesman of the Conservation Founda- facilities. Requirements for zoning to conform to comprehensive plans

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Oklahoma 20:028
apply only to cities with more than 500,000. The State's largest muni- ments must supply evidence that zoning decisions are consistent with
cipalities appear to be satisfied with existing authorities, state planners comprehensive plans, under the ruling. Furthermore, the court found
say. that zoning decisions must be justified by detailed findings of fact.
"Green" broadened the definition of comprehensive plans by estab-
OKLAHOMA LAND USE CONTACT: Bob Burke, Director, (405) lishing that "framework" plans, specifying general land use categories
840-2811; Department of Economic and Community Affairs, 5500 N. for rural areas, constitute comprehensive plans within the meaning
Western St., Oklahoma City, Okla. 73118. of Oregon law.
Voters of Oregon may utilize initiative and referendum powers
to reject comprehensive plans or general zoning ordinances. accord-
ing to a Court of Appeals decision, "Allison v. Washington County."
The case extends the initiative and referendum process to all local
OREGON land use decisions that are legislative in nature; the court defined
legislative matters as those involving general policymaking as
Statewide planning goals and guidelines for Oregon, are man- opposed to judicial questions regarding specific parcels. However,
dated by a 1973 land use law passed by the state legislature. Under land use legislation, which is statewide rather than local in character,
its provisions, which became effective January 1975, land use plans such as measures involving sewage rather than zoning, is not subject
are required from cities, counties, special districts, and state and, to referendum. The court held that the electorate's powers are no
Federal agencies. greater than those of its local legislative body.
The Governor's 1977-79 budget, submitted to the legislature
in January 1977, requests $11.8-million to fund coordinated, Coastal Zone Management
comprehensive planning activities in Oregon. Of the total, $8.2-
million will be passed through to local governments in three cat- In December 1976, the LCDC adopted statewide planning goals
egories of grants: coordination, planning assistance, and mainte- addressing coastal resources -- estuaries, shorelines, beaches and dunes.
nance/update. The standards will be submitted to the Federal Office of Coastal Zone
In last November's general election, Oregon's voters rejected a Management, and the state will apply for funding to implement co-
ballot measure that would have repealed the state's land use plan- ordinated management of coastal resources.
ning legislation's requirement that local governments develop com- Once certified by OCZM, Oregon's coastal management program
prehensive plans meeting statewide goals. The ballot measure was will make available an estimated $1.5-million to cities and counties in
rejected by a 57-43% margin, while it was orginally enacted by fiscal 1978-79. Another form of state assistance to local coastal plan-
only a 55-45% vote. ning efforts will be the provision of inventory data necessary for com-
prehensive plan preparation.
Land Use Policy Under goals set by the 1973 state planning levy, the state's coastal
zone management plan was due for completion by Jan. 1, 1975. At
A land use planning process and policy framework has been es- that time it was expected that Oregon's plan would be among the first
tablished in Oregon with'the adoption of statewide planning goals in the nation. Delays pushing back the completion date received severe
and guidelines by the state Land Conservation and Development criticism from 1,000 Friends of Oregon, a citizen watchdog organization.
Commission I LCDC). Under the goals, all cities, counties, special The south slough of Coos Bay was the first estuarine area to be
districts, state and Federal agencies are required to develop land use acquired for preservation under provisions of the National Estuary
plans that "shall be the basis for specific implementation measures." Sanctuary Act. Combined efforts of the state land use, the Nature
Plans are submitted to the LCDC for review. Concervancy, the LCDC, and interested citizens accomplished this
Land use guidelines developed by the LCDC serve as "suggested goal.
directions that would aid local governments in activating the man-
Loca it
date 'd goals. ' I' ies@-therefore, are able to develop alternative OREGON LAND USE CONTACTS: Harold F. Brauner, Director
means of achieving statewide planning goals. Department of Land Conservation and Development, 1175 Court St.,
The guidelines suggest the preparation of plans and implemen- N.E., Salem, Ore. 97310, (503) 378-4926.
tation measures. Areawide planning goals, identification of critical
areas and future planning are among the provisions requested in the OREGON COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: James
guidelines. Ross, Deputy Director, Und Conservation and Development Com-
Suggested implementation measures include the use of traditional mission, 1175 Court St., Salem, Ore, (5031378-4926.
mechanisms such as zoning, public facilities planning, and capital im-
provement budgets. All jurisdictions must provide mechanisms for
involving citizens in land use decision making.
Other goals provide for conservation, of: agricultural lands, shore-
lines, forest lands, open space, and natural lands. The goals also pro-
vide for preserving environmental quality, planning for an efficient PENNSYLVANIA
transition from rural to urban land uses, meeting housing needs, and
conserving energy resources. Control of major development has been identified as the "center-
Oregon's Supreme Court, in "Baker v. Milwaukie," established piece" of the land use program proposed by Pennsylvania's Office of
the principle that comprehensive plans are the controlling land use State Planning and Development. This policy is outlined in an April
documents of the state. Therefore, community zoning ordinances 1976, report, "A Land Policy Program for Pennsylvania." The study
must conform to comprehensive plans, even when the plan is adopted was commissioned in 1973 by Gov. Milton J. Shapp.
following a site's zoning designation.
In "Baker," the court ruled that zoning has a "servient relation- Land Use Policy
ship" to planning; the document "must be given preference over con-
flicting prior zoning ordinances." The case involved a 3.8 acre site's Adoption of a state growth policy for guiding large-scale develop-
1968 zoning designation for a maximum density of 39 units per ment projects was suggested in the study which asserts that "state
acre, when a comprehensive plan adopted by the city about a year land use planning and management need not be costly" due to the
later set a maximum density of 17 units per acre on the site. When availability of Federal grant monies.
a building permit allowing 26 units per acre was issued for the site, The draft and other state planning studies recommend adoption
Jean Baker, a local homeowner, filed suit and won. of policies and initiation of additional studies in the following areas
The state Supreme Court in "Green v. Hayward" established pro- of land policy:
cedural guidelines for use in preparation of comprehensive plans and o Urban Growth: Construction of major private developments
for application of finalized plans to zoning decisions. Local govern- would be paced to match construction of sewers and other support-

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Rhode Island 20:029

ing infrastructure. The state would attempt to guide development visory committee to guide state land use planning efforts.
through public investment policies, impact analyses, and state
standards. Coastal Zone Management
Additionally, a survey of land use impacts of sixty state programs
is currently being undertaken by the planning office. The effort at- Pennsylvania has completed an analysis of coastal land and water
tempts to develop a body of knowledge which would be useful in use impacts, existing legal authorities, recreational deficiencies and
the preparation of policy recommendations, land use legislation, ecologically sensitive areas, under a.$225,000 grant from the Office of
and administrative changes. Coastal Zone Management. The state has received $292,000 in third-
* Urban Land Use: The report contends that continuation of year Office of Coastal Zone Management monies.
present metropolitan development trends will make achievement of Pennsylvania's third-year work schedule calls for delineation of
important land use objectives "unlikely." management boundaries, assignment of permissible land and water use
9 Property Taxation: Fundamental restructuring of the prop- priorities, adoption of a coastal zone policy framework, and develop-
erty tax is suggested. Report, which sets a primary aim of discourag- ment of a method and organizational structure to implement the man-
ing land speculation, cites the Vermont capital gains tax, designed to agement program. Formulation of a viable management program will
decrease short-term land. speculation by increasing the tax rate as involve state interaction with private citizens, industry, and local
profits for land held only a short time increase. governments.
A related study of growth management mechanisms for highway
interchange areas is currently underway, 11 examines a number of Agricultural Lands
taxation mechanisms designed to achieve land use objectives and
to recapture for the public value added to land by transportation The Agricultural Advisory Committee, a state mechanism to im-
system investments. A legal, social and economic evaluation of the prove communication between the DER and farming communities on
development rights transfer concept is also part of the effort. The environmental questions, has been organized into several work groups
S
tate envisions, employing, on a "site specific basis," some of these to formulate recommendations and to disseminate information manuals.
techniques in an effort to "balance entrepreneur profits and the Functioning work groups include: waste management, erosion and sed-
public interest." imentation control, education and training, and air quality management.
a . Agriculture-and Rural Development: Citing the importance Committee's major project has consisted of drafting, editing and
of rural areas, the major study recommends formation of agricul- reviewing a manure management manual, and committee proposals have
tural zones in areas subject to urban development pressures. Such included a resolution supporting delay in implementation of erosion
a zone would discourage nonfarm-related activities. Report recom- and sedimentation controls because of financial hardships placed on
merids preservation of prime agricultural lands, through direct in- farmers.
vestment, in areas subject to urban development pressures. State Preferential tax assessments are accorded to Pennsylvania farms of
purchase of development rights to the lands would be the likely at least 20 acres, forestland of at least 50 acres, and open space of at
mechanism for direct public investment. least 10 acres. Eligible land must be designated for one of the three
A study, now in preparation, attempts to formulate a policy uses in a master plan adopted by the planning commission of the mun-
considering all aspects of the economy and land use of rural areas. icipality in which the land is located.
The premise that improving rural conditions will have a positive im-
pact on the state's agricultural base is central to the effort. PENNSYLVANIA LAND USE CONTACT: Robert Benko, Chief
0 Managing Forest Resources: Preparation of guidelines for the of Long Range Planning, (717) 787-2086; Office of State Planning and
management and use of public and private forest lands, is recom- Development, Finance Building, Room 503, Box 1323, Harrisburg, Pa.
mended by the planning office. Moreover, a series of 26 separate 17120.
forest capability maps have been designed to enable the user to de-
termine potential uses and levels of productivity. PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
* Critical Resource Areas: The report says that priority con- George E. Fogg, Coordinator, Coastal Zone Management Program, De-
cerns include the future of a proposal to link public and private ef- partment of Environmental Resources, P.O. Box 1467, Harrisburg, Pa.
forts to preserve natural areas, and the need to protect wetlands, cul- 17120. (717) 787-4053.
tural sites, and archeological areas.
An ongoing state study is examining the relationships between the
state's land and water planning programs. Activities studied include:
environmental master plan requirements; comprehensive water quality
management; and water and coastal zone planning. RHODE ISLAND
a Hazard Areas: "Local communities should be given every op-
portunity to lead in developing and carrying out effective hazard re- During 1976, the state legislature failed to adopt Gov. Philip
duction programs," the study said, adding that "if local governments Noel's proposed statewide land use policy which ms based
do not act, the state must." largely on a state planning report prepared in 1075. The legislation
9 Mineral Development and Land Use: A state land use policy would have provided overall standards for development of urban,
could help avoid "collisions between mining and other land uses" by transitional, and rural areas. State planning officials plan to press
guiding urban development away from areas of valuable mineral de- for passage during the current legislative session.
posit,, and excluding mining in critical area,, the major study said. State officials also hope to gain final approval of coastal zone
To organize and operate a state land use program, the study recom- management plans during 1977 once revisions to initial plans are
mends that the state planning board work closely with the state plan- completed.
ning office and that a special land use committee be formed. These
bodies would be charged with drafting guidelines and coordinating land Land Use Policy
use activities of state agencies.
To publicize the land use strategies, the state planning office has Statewide land use legislation was introduced by former Gov.
prepared informational mechanisms including a film, a slideshow, five Philip Noel during 1976, but no action was taken. A new proposal
brochures, and land use study outlines for students. is expected to be introduced in 1977 incorporating comments from
In other state departments, the citizens advisory council of the De- the public and local officials, although passage is not anticipated
partment of Environmental Resources supported enactment of Fed- until 1978, state officials say.
eral land use legislation in the first of a series of recommendations to Last year's bill would have established state land use policies
the department. Other suggestions included support of flood control and provided three avenues for state land use control. The state
legislation and creation of a natural areas program. . . would have been authorized to establish administrative land use
The citizens advisory council to the De 'partment of Natural Re- standards governing the adequacy of public facilities and the
sources has announced support of a proposal to organize a policy ad- carrying capacity of the land. The state would also have designated

(g)l 977 Business, Publishersi Inc.

Rhode Island 20:030

critical areas, and would have also controlled developments of RHODE ISLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
regional impact, a concept patterned after the program being im- Stephen Olsen, Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode
plemented in Florida. Island, Kingston, R.I. 02881, (401) 792-6224.
The 1976 bill would have created a land appeals board to resolve
tfisputes between the state and localities, and would have consoli-
dated and modernized state land use enabling laws for local zoning,
subdivision control and other powers, some of which have not been
revised since the 1920s. Many of the proposed revisions were based
on the American Law Institute's model land use code.
Just before he left office, Noel created a task force to review SOUTH CAROLINA
the legislation in cooperation with local officials and representatives
of interest groups. The task force is expected to endorse a revised
bill creating legislative standards governing development of steep
slopes, flood-hazard areas, wetland, shallow soil areas, poorly drained During 1976, coastal zone management legislation was twice ap-
areas, and coastal beaches. The bill would also give the General Assem- proved by the legislature but was vetoed by Gov. James B. Edwards.
bly authority to designate critical areas. Localities would be required Those vetoes were sustained in the legislature on four separate votes,
to designate zones of varying development density in an effort to according to state planners.
coordinate development with the availability of adequate public
facilities, a key policy of Noel. Land Use Policy
The revised bill is expected to reduce the state's administrative
land use powers compared to the 1976 version, with the legislature State officials do not anticipate adoption of any comprehensive
playing a more direct role. The new bill will retain the state appeals state land use policies or programs. Recommendations made in 1975
board but will limit its powers. The board will not deal with individ- by a gubernatorial land policy study committee have been rejected,
ual local land use decisions, but will ensure that general local or- reflecting a general "lack of support" for land use programs in both
dinances comply with state guidelines. the governor's office and legislature, according to state officials. The
Standards for designating DRIs will also be softened, with the study committee's recommendations included proposals for resolving
state serving mainly in an advisory capacity. The state will still environmental and economic conflicts, establishing land use policies,
oversee certain types of major development, however, but will
only supp,Ilement, not replace, existing local functions. Farmland and encouraging community development.
preservation activities will remain a local responsibility, although Most routine zoning is handled at the city level in South Carolina
the state may become involved in farmland protection through the alth ough all counties and municipalities have full planning and zoning
bill's critical areas designation program. r authority.
The 1976 bill was introduced with little hope of passage pri-
marily as a starting point for a debate, state officials said. The legis- Coastal Zone Management
lature probably will not be able to enact a bill during 1977, al-
though state officials plan to press for passage next year.
Legislation adopted in 1976 would have created a coastal manage-
ment council with authority to regulate critical areas such as sand
dunes, beaches and tidal wetlands. The council would have been
Coastal Zone Management authorized to issue or deny permits for development, and would have
Rhode Island officials are currently revising their CZM plan for prepared CZM plans within two years, subject to legislative approval.
I The legislation was rejected by Gov. Edwards as an unwarranted ex-
submission to the Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management in ercise of state controls at the expense of local governments. Admin-
1977. Rhode Island is one of several eastern states for which OCZM istration officials also opposed the bill because it lacked provisions
hopes to grant final implementation approval this year. Major changes validating state ownership of tidal wetlands, an issue which has been
in the plan will include an explicit statement of needs and goals, "a tied up in state courts for some time.
more generous inland boundary for planning purposes," and the Compromise legislation currently being worked out by Adminis-
designation of "preferred areas" for conservation and development. tration and legislative negotiators is expected to call for a locally-
Rhode Island has also completed its environmental inventory, oriented CZM program with state guidelines giving state tidal owner-
covering such topics as resource assessment for marine and terrestial ship. Some form of coastal legislation will be adopted this year, al-
systems and existing land and water uses; and impact assessments though the details must still be worked out, state officials say.
for marine activities, potential land uses and environmental alterations. During 1976, South Carolina received a third-year grant frorn the
In January, Rhode Island was awarded a six-month supplemental Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management of $417,000 supplemented
grant of $238,000 to assist in preparing a coastal management plan with $208,000 in state funds. So far, South Carolina's CZM pro-
by OCZM, to be matched by $59,500 in state funds. The new funds gram has received some $1.3-million in Federal, state and Outer
will be used to refine the draft CZM program presented at public Continental Shelf impact grants.
hearings. The grant will also be used to develop new elements required Late in 1976, a coastal zone council was established by executive
under the CZM Act amendments of 1976 for coastal energy facility order, including representatives of coastal counties, large municipalities
planning, shoreline erosion control and shoreline and beach access. and environmental interests. A CZM Advisory Committee was also
Rhode Island received an initial $154,000 grant from OCZM in formed made up of private industry, university, and regional plan-
1973, and another award of $304,000 in 1975. The latest grant came ning groups. These units will provide coordination for CZM programs.
in addition to an earlier $192,779 grant in 1976. Since 1971, the State officials currently expect to enter the final stage of CZM plan
state Coastal Resources Management Council has been overseeing implementation in 1978.
Rhode Island coastal resources by issuing permits for all shoreline
and state water activities. The council is made up of 17 citizens ap-
pointed by state and local officials.
Rhode Island had been planning to submit its CZM plan for SOUTH CAROLINA LAND USE CONTACT: Joe Wickel, Direc-
Federal approval by March 1976, but that timetable was delayed by tor of Community Development, 1205 Pendleton St., Columbia, S.C.
Federal requests for additional information. 29201, (803) 758-3306.

RHODE ISLAND LAND USE CONTACT: Daniel W. Varin, Chief, SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CON-
(401) 277-2656; Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program, 265 TACT: Dr. Wayne Beane, Wildlife and Marine Resources Dept.,
Melrose St., Providence, R.I. 02907. 1116 Bankers Trust Tower, Columbia, D.C. 29201, (803) 758-8442.

@1977-Business Publishers, Inc.

Texas 20:031

SOUTH DAKOTA Land Use Policy
The deadline for completion of county comprehensive plans, Strip mining regulations, promulgated by the state Railroad Com-
July 1, 1976, was remo 'ved by the South Dakota assembly during mission, require mine operators to present evidence on the capability
the 1976 legislative session. of the proposed mine site to support alternative activities both be-
fore and after mining is completed. Mine applications must include
Land Use Policy projected post-mining land uses for sites, descriptions of anticipated
reclamation procedures, estimates of reclamation costs per acre, and
Legislature passed an erosion and seclementation control law pro- steps to be taken to comply with air and water pollution standards.
viding for regulation of land-disturbing activities. The state Conserva- Land must be restored "to the same or a substantially beneficial
tion Commission is to develop guidelines by July 1, 1977, and con- condition" taking into account past land uses and the mine operator's
servation districts will then have until July 1, 1978 to adopt stand- declared future land use plans. Topsoil must be segregated and re-
ards. Although neither the commission nor the districts issue per- placed after mining is completed.
mits, all permit-issuing authorities must consider erosion rulings and The regulations also call for the Railroad Commission to designate
standards in decisionmaking. lands unsuitable for surface mining based on petitions from private
A concurrent resolution of the legislature authorized an interim citizens. Lands may be.designated if reclamation is not feasible, or
study of need for energy facility siting legislation. Several executive if mining operations would cause "signif icant damage" to natural,
branch agencies are also preparing energy siting legislation which in- historic, archaeological or cultural sites. Mining may also be blocked
cludes procedures to mitigate social and economic impacts of energy if it would substantially reduce voter supplies and timber resources,
development. Siting legislation will be considered during the legisla- cause flooding, endanger public facilities, or disrupt aquifer recharge
ture's 1977 session. zones.
Texas municipalities with populations exceeding 2,500 have full
SOUTH DAKOTA LAND USE CONTACTS: Dan R. Bucks, Com- authority for planning and zoning in incorporated areas, although
missioner; Steve Merrick, Deputy Commissioner; State Planning they have virtually no powers to control develop in unincorporated
Bureau, State Capitol, Pierre, S.D. 57501, (6051 224-3661. areas. In such cases, cities wield only subdivision powers.
Texas also plans a program aimed at encouraging farmland pre-
servation through preferential tax treatment, but that program is
TENNESSEE avoiting the adoption of constitutional amendments.
Coastal Zone Management
The Agriculture, Forest, and Open Space Act, passed by the
Tennessee Stale Legislature in 1976, allows land owners relief on Texas is now in its third year of the development phase in planning
property taxes in return for a decision to keep land as open space. a coastal program. The state has received over $11-million in Federal
Land Use Policy funds for f iscal 1977. The state General Land Office has recommended
legislation aimed at improving intergovernmental policy coordination
The majority of land use planning in Tennessee is performed and implementing an innovative technique for assessing in,advance
in-house by the state planning department, which is currently pre- the probably impacts of specific coastal activities. "Use of the pro-
paring a series of issue papers on wetlands, critical areas, energy posed activity-assessment routine points out very clearly the expected
consequences of proposed activities," state officials say. The coast-
facilities and second home development. The papers will provide al management program has been developed in cooperation with
an information bank on state land use. numerous special interest groups and enjoys "strong support from
The planning office is also preparing an index of maps depicting all*groups, including industrial and environmental," CMP.director
state land use between 1965 and 1975. Information on statewide Ron Jones said.
land cover and other data is available on computer program. The Four coastal management bills, based on Land Off ice recommen-
conservation department manages several acts which seek to pre- clations, have been introduced in the state legislature by Sen. A.R.
serve land: the Scenic Rivers Act and the Scenic Trails Act@ Schwartz and Rep. Pike Powers. The recommendations were de-
Cities, incorporated towns, and counties of Tennessee have veloped over three years in conjunction with a 40-member advisory
broad zoning authority which includes specific reference to flood committee representing affected interest groups.
control. Community planning commissions may be formed for Legislation would create a Natural Resources Council; authorize
unincorporated areas. Regional planning commissions, formed by state acquisition of essential and endangered coastal wetlands from
the state, have subdivision control power in unincorporated areas. private owners; and permit the state to assume some of the jurisdic-
tion now exercised by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over dredge
TENNESSEE LAND USE CONTACTS: Mr. Jack Strickland, and fill activities in wetlands adjacent to navigable rivers. The new
Special Assistant for Policy Planning, (615) 714-3800; Ground NFIC would replace the existing interagency Council on Natural
Floor, State Capitol, Nashville, Tenn. 37219; Niles C. Schoening, Resources and the Environment and would advise the governor
Director, Tennessee State Planning Office, (615) 741-1676; John and legislature of particular coastal problems.
Wilson, Director of Natural Resources; (615) 741-1676; Capitol
Hill Building, Room 660,301 7th Ave., N, Nashville, Tenn. 37219. General Land Off ice Commissioner Bob Armstrong backed the
legislation, contending that it will not require new state regulations
or additional spending. "We need new legislation because the pre-
sent law is too expensive, time consuming, and doesn't do what it
TEXAS is supposed to do - protect renewable resources and at the same
time encourage economic growth," Armstrong said.
eneral statewide land use legislation stands little change of enact-
ment in Texas, but the outlook for legislation giving counties author- TEXAS LAND USE CONTACTS: James M. Rose, Director,
ity to adopt ordinances, including land use controls, is better than in (512) 475-2427; Walter G. Tribbitts I 11, Assistant Director; Division
G

past years, "about 50-50," according to state planning officials. "Rea- of Planning Coordination, Capitol Station, P.O. Box 12428, Austin,
son goes out the window" when "land use" is mentioned in Texas, Tex. 78711. Dennis Thomas, Assistant Director, (204 223-3265;
officials note, and no major increase in state authority is expected. Office of State-Federal Relations, 1019 19th St., N.W., Suite 730,
The state Railroad Commission has adopted regulations implement- Washington, D.C. 20036.
ing controversial strip mining legislation which was enacted in 1975.
The Sept. 20, 1976, deadline for companies to file for coal, lignite TEXAS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: Ron
and uranium mining permits was met with few difficulties, and hear- Jones, Director, (512) 475-6902; Coastal Management Program,
ings are underway on those permit requests. General Land Office, State Office Building, Austin, Tex. 78701.

ig)1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Utah 20:032

UTAH VERMONT

State's Air Conservation and Environmental Coordinating Com- During 1976, Vermont's general assembly considered but failed
to adopt three alternative land use bills. One of the proposals, the
mittee has taken the first step toward reclassification of large areas product of the House natural resources committee, was passed by
of land as either class I or 11 under non-significant deterioration reg- the House of Representatives but died in the Senate agriculture
uletions promulgated by EPA. Formal recommendations on reclassi- committee as the session ended,
fication are expected in early 1977, following January hearings. Further legislative initiative regarding land use will rest with newly
elected Gov. Richard A. Snelling, who has not yet indicated his
Land Use Policy intentions.
Land Use Policy
Utah voters rejected by a three-to-two margin a state land use
program put to referendum in November 1974. A referendum on Vermont began working to develop a comprehensive land use
the program, which had been scheduled to go into effect April 1974, plan with passage of the Land Use and Development Act in 1970.
was initiated by a John Birch Society petition. The Utah vote went Planning under the act was to proceed in three phases: development
against the general trend in the West that year during which three of interim and permanent land capability and development plans,
governors were elected on platforms emphasizing conservation of and designation of general land use areas for the state.
natural resources. The interim and permanent land capability and development
The defeated land use proposal would have authorized creation plans were developed and adopted with I ittle controversy. The
of a state Land Use Commission and would have appropriated permanent plan was adopted in April 1973. However, the third
$306,000 to assist county planning efforts. The commission would phase engendered considerable opposition, particularly from Re-
have worked to fit county plans into an overall state plan. publican legislators.
Submission to the legislature of critical areas legislation, cover-, Phase three initially introduced to the general assembly as Act
ing lands designated by local authorities, was required by the 250, would have mapped the state into five areas: urban, village, na-
proposal. However, the commission would not have been given tural resource, conservation, and rural. Local governments, in turn,
regulatory powers. would have adopted land use plans within the districts. In the ab-
An agency to protect the Great Salt Lake was, however, created sence of local initiative, state plans would have gone' into effect.
by a 1975 bill (HB 23) and established in July 1975. State officials This process would have been one of the most extensive planning
report that the lake, after receding for generations, is rising and that procedures in the nation, second only to that of Hawaii.
continued improvement is predicted. The agency is currently grap- To implement the policies of the state capability and develop-
pling with problems relating to economic impact of the land use ment plan, the Vermont planning office has developed a set of
regulations designed to protect the lake. Lake-based recreation and guidelines to be used by regional planning commissions. Further@
industrial enterprises are clearly threatened by the regulation. more, state-sponsored planning seminars are held each month. At
HB 23 creates a board of supervisors and a special division of such seminars, planners have asked for greater coordination of
the state department of natural resources to coordinate various functional plans and programs to assure consistency with Vermont's
levels of government with authority over the lake area. The board land use policies, rather than just Federal guidelines.
consists of five county commissioners from lake counties and seven The state planners also have launched a program aimed at
representatives of the state natural resources department. guiding growth through control of public infrastructure expendi-
Both the special division and the board share responsibility for tures. Assessing growth generated by sewage facilities, public build-
preparing a comprehensive plan for controlled development of the ings and roads is the first step in achieving this goal.
lake area. They are currently determining their exact legal authority Despite the hope that proponents of land use planning place in
to enforce the plan. this effort, former Governor Thomas Salmon, himself a strong
land use advocate, feels that infrastructure coordination, despite
being "a very significant mechanism that moves toward a land use
Energy Facilities and Lands policy, cannot replace a state land use policy."
A plan to enable industries to obtain a single land use permit
A state energy policy will be recommended for consideration by to locate in designated industrial districts was approved by the
the 1977 state legislature. It will contain broad guidelines for state state environmental board in 1975. The plan, proposed by the
evaluation of proposed energy resource development projects, but Vermont economic development commission, would authorize
no land use or site-regulation authority, Designation of rural areas of municipalities to allow industries to locate in designated areas where
the state suitable for energy resource development will be one aspect only a single-stop permit would be needed. It is hoped that the pro-
of the policy. cedure will overcome the reluctance of industries to locate in
Utah has chosen to exercise in-lieu land selection rights to the Vermont due to the state's strict environmental controls.
oil shale area of the Uinta Basin. The matter is currently being con- VERMONT LAND USE CONTACTS: Leonard Wilson, Director;
tested in court, but the state expects swift resolution of the matter. Bernard D. Johnson, Assistant Director; 1802) 828-3326; State
A 300 megawatt power project in southern Utah, proposed by Planning Office, Pavilion Office Building, Montpelier, Vt. 05602.
three utility companies, has failed. The proposed plant, the Kaip-
arowits Power Generating Project, would have involved construction
of a coal-fired generating station and of four underground coal mines
to feed it. The plant would have been located on the Kaiparowits
plateau near Grand Canyon National Park, among other recreational
areas. VIRGINIA
An Interior Department environmental impact statement stated
that the project would have generated development of a 14,000- With the exception, of the coastal zone management program, most
person town. Following failure of the power project proposal, holders state land use-related efforts are being run on a "low-profile basis,'
of the coal leases began advancinga coal gasification proposal, how- according to some state planning officials. The CZM has gained third-
ever I ittle interest has surfaced to date. year funding and is progressing according to expectations, planners
say. The legislature has been reluctant to approve major land use bills,
UTAH LAND USE CONTACT: James Edwin Kee, State Planning and in 1976-77 adopted only part of a package of key facilities pro-
Coordinator, (801) 533-5245; 1 IS State Capitol, Salt Lake City, posals. The state is also attempting to encourage localities to adopt
Utah 84114. comprehensive plans as provided under a 1975 act.

(g)1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Washington 20:033

Land Use Policy Virginia officials expect the CZM program to "serve as a guide
in an effort to reduce conflict among a growing number of inter-
A series of key facilities bills was introduced in the state legisla- ests which often compete for the same shoreline area."
tion in 1976, although only a few of the more specialized proposals
were adopted. One proposal, H.B.783, calls for the state Corpora- VIRGINIA LAND USE AND COASTAL ZONE CONTACT:
tion Commission to consider environmental, social and economic Don W. Budlong, Assistant for Planning, (804) 786-7652, Office
impacts in the location of airports. A second proposal, H.B.783, re- of Commerce and Resources, Fifth Floor, Ninth St. Office Bldg.,
quires environmental impact review for major state facilities. Richmond, Va. 23219.
The legislature rejected several other key facility proposals, how-
ever, including a bill which would have authorized the state Council
on Environment to coordinate the state's review of permit requests
for major facilities such as power plants, transmission lines and simi-
lar projects, That review would have included land use, environmental , WASHINGTON
economic and social impacts. Another bill would have coordinated
COE impact review for major highways, but the state Highway De- Gov. Dixie Lee Ray is expected to de-emphasize general land use
partment succeeded in blocking the bill. Similar proposals for impact activities at the state level in favor of continued local control, al-
analyses on water and dam projects were also rejected. though her Administration is backing legislation to increase the
Efforts to consolidate existing state environmental agencies under state's role in power plant siting. Comprehensive land use legislation
a single Natural Resources Office failed, but proponents expect simi- aimed primarily at discouraging new development on food, fiber or
lar legislation to be reintroduced. resource producing lands through local controls was rejected in 1976
The legislature also adopted a proposal, H.B.949, authorizing local- and again faces strong opposition in the legislature.
ities to create special agricultural districts which would qualify for
tax breaks to discourage urbanization. Districts would be created on Land Use Policy
the recommendations of planning commissions and special advisory
committees. The legislation may be vetoed by Gov. Mills Godwin, State land use legislation, S.B.65, would create a Land Conserva-
planning aides say, a prospect which has caused some animosity tion and Development Commission to oversee the preparation of
among Republican minority leaders in the legislature who backed plans to curb development which would reduce the productivity of
the bill. agricultural, forest, or resource lands. Localities would have six
State officials are providing technical assistance to localities months to adopt interim regulations for those lands, and would be
seeking to comply with a 1975 act requiring the establishment of prohibited from granting permits which would encourage new growth.
local planning commissions and the preparation of local compre- LCDC would approve local plans, recommend the designation of cer-
hensive plans by 1980. Most localities are making a good faith effort tain activities of state concern, and adopt plans where localities fail
to meet the requirements, state planners say, although a few juris- to act.
dictions are apparently postponing active planning until the dead- LCDC certification would have to be obtained for local plans
line draws nearer. within four years, subject to 16 statutory criteria such as farmland
Some state officials are skeptical that the act will generate signi- preservation, housing, and environmental protection. The bill also
ficant new local planning, since no sanctions or penalties are pro- includes several broad goals for land use plans, including orderly
vided against jurisdictions which fail to create commissions or growth, energy conservation, and balariced economic expansion.
prepare new plans. Where land use and development problems are LCDC would recommend major projects requiring substantive state
most serious, critics say, localities have already initiated their own control such as airports, ports, power plants and transmission lines,
planning programs. Planning officials at the local level complain and sewer and water facilities. Localities would be authorized to
that the state provided no funds to aid localities in meeting the regulate land uses near such facilities but the state could appeal local
new planning mandates, a problem which state planners concede decisions to the Shorelines Hearing Board.
has reduced the program's effectiveness. Earlier legislation, H.B.1 68, failed because of local opposition,
sparked mainly by the Shorelines Management Act, which local
Coastal Zone Management officials say has reduced their land use authority. The legislation Is
expected to be defeated again in 1977.
Development of Virginia's coastal zone program will continue into
the third year with a $480,448, grant from the Federal Office of Coast- Energy Facilities and Lands
al Zone Management, to be matched with $120,112 in state funds.
Virginia's management program seeks to preserve the coastal Although Gov. Ray's administration has opposed sweeping state-
ecosystem, while simultaneously permitting various land and water wide land use legislation, energy facility siting proposals have been
activities in appropriate locations. Virgina has been developing its recommended giving the state more power. In her message to the
program since 1974, when the state received an initial grant of legislature, Ray contended that the state "should take more initia-
$251,044 from OCZM. The present grant is being administered by tive" in the siting of nuclear facilities. S.B.291 0 would reduce
the state Office of Commerce and Resources in conjunction with localities' authority to handle siting issues, and would authorize the
other state agencies, local units of government,' and the general public. state to pre-empt local zoning clevisions impacting proposed energy
During the third program year, according to state program man- facilities.
ager Don Budlong, Virginia will develop guidelines to help local govern- The bill is designed to "streamline" the facility approval process,
ments determine the areas where land uses have a direct impact on and enjoys the support of oil companies who fear procedural and
coastal waters and plan for the use of lands within those areas. Guide- regulatory roadblocks which can be erected by localities. Washington
lines will be prepared to help communities manage those activities is currently considering several superport and pipeline proposals.
known to have a harmfu I effect upon coastal waters. Local government groups opposed to the siting bill are expected to
Also during the third year, Virginia will develop a method for concentrate their efforts in the state House, which is generally more
designating areas of particular concern, including historic coastal sympathetic to local problems than the Senate, which usually favors
sites, ecologically fragile areas, and similar regions. The state will more state controls.
also develop mechanisms by which localities can control develop-
ment having multi-jurisdictional impacts. Coastal Zone Management
Other aspects of the program will include developing methods
to increase public access to beaches, preparing guidelines for con- In June 1976, Washington became the first state to gain full
trolling shoreline erosion, and determining the impact-and location Federal approval for its CZM plan. The state received a $2-million
of onshore energy facilities as required under the 1976 CZM Act Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management grant for plan imple-
Amendments. mentation, mat ched by $11-million in state funds. So far, Washington

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Washington 20:034

CZM funding has totaled more than $4.7-million, including OCZM, has been contemplated but is not expected to be enacted in the
state, and OCS impact planning grants. near future.
Just undertaking the transition from planning to program imple-
mentation, Washington will concentrate on increasing the role of Energy Facilities and Lands
local governments in program administration and enforcement. Local
master plans and programs must also be revised to conform with Strip mining legislation was adopted in the final days of the
state plans. Washington is also conducting studies on problems of regular legislative session, including requirements that land be re-
particular concern to individual localities, and is designing mechan- stored to the approximate original contour with the elimination of
isms for resolving conflicts with Federal agencies and improving highwalls, requirements similar to those anticipated in Federal strip
Federal coordination. Coastal resource data is also being standardized, mine legislation. Numerous other strip mine-related bil is were (
and model ordinances are being developed to guide coastal jurisdic- sidered but most failed to move out of committee, including pi
tions. posals which would have: halted strip mining in counties where
Washington's coastal management area includes a "two-tier" con- no mining occured before 1970; extended the mining moratorium
cept. The "primary tier" includes the resource boundary designated in 22 of the state's 55 counties; and increased corporate taxes on
by the state Shoreline Management Act of 1971, the basic CZM en- large land holdings, primarily by timber and mining companies.
abling legislation. The primary tier covers the marine waters, associ-
ated wetlands, and an upland area at least 200 feet inland from the Agricultural Lands
ordinary high water mark. The second tier, the "planning and admin-
istrative boundary" includes all of the 15 coastal counties which West Virginia also joined the growing list of states which have
border tidal waters. The second tier is intended to be the maximum adopted tax measures favoring existing agricultural land uses. Under
extent of the coastal zone and as such is the context within which H.B.1494, the legislature called for farmland property tax assess-
coordinated coastal policy planning will be undertaken, state officials ments to be based on current use values, not the value of the prop-
say The state plans to reach agreements with Federal land manage- arty if developed.
ment to determine the impact of the state program on parcels of WEST VIRGINIA LAND LISE CONTACT: Tom Sumter, Hous-
Federal land or private holdings within Federal lands. ing and Land Use Specialist, Resource Devel o pment /State Planning
The state Department of Ecology is the lead coastal agency, Division, Office of Federal-State Relations, Capitol Bldg., R-1 50,
and is authorized to regulate shoreline uses and acquire coastal Charleston, W.Va. 25305, (304) 348-2246..
land and adjacent wetlands. Under the state SMA, local govern-
ments formulate master programs to guide proposed activities in
the coastal zone. Preparation of CZM goals and resource inventories
is followed by adoption of specific shoreline environmental designa- WISCONSIN
tions -- natural, conservancy, rural and urban -- and use regulation%.
The regulatory system is administered locally, subject to state re- Comprehensive land use legislation is not expected to be consid-
view. Local decisions are appealed to the Shorelines Hearing Board
which includes representatives of pollution control and public lan@@ ered in Wisconsin in the near future, although state officials anticipate
agencies and local government groups. legislative debate on a number of specialized proposals for preserving
open space and wetlands. State planners are also implementing a
WASHINGTON LAND USE CONTACT: Dr. Jay Moore, Senior power plant siting bill which was adopted in 1975 after an initial
Policy Advisor, Office of Community Development, 400 Capitol defeat.
Center Building, Olympia, Washington 98504. (206) 753-2222. Land Use Policy
WASHINGTON COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT: In 1977, legislation is expected to be introduced to encourage
Rod Mack, Department of Ecology, Olympia, Wash. 98504, (206) the preservation of farmland and open space through preferential
753-6879. taxation. Anticipated proposals will include "circuit breaker" pro-
visions which link property taxes to household income, limiting total
taxes to a maximum percentage of that income. The legislature is also
expected to continue work on a bill to protect and regulate wetlands
WEST VIRGINIA which was passed in one house of the legislature last year. State plan-
ners say there is considerable support for the bills but chances for
After considerable initial controversy, the state legislature passage are uncertain.
adopted a bill setting strip mine reclamation standards, and allowed Wisconsin cities, villages and towns wield extensive, through not
a strip mining moratorium to lapse. Meanwhile, state planners are mandatory, zoning authority. While most land use controls are
again preparing proposals which would create a joint state/local voluntary, all jurisdictions must exercise controls over shorelines
commission to develop land use policy recommendations. and floodplains consistent with state guidelines.
The state Department of Natural Resources has implemented a
Land Use Policy program restricting the installation of new sewers in areas with cur-
rently inadequate treatment facilities. These restrictions are relaxed
As envisioned by state planning officials, the Land Resource somewhat for localities which have firm plans to upgrade sewage
Management Study Commission would be made up of state legisla- treatment plants.
tors, heads of agencies with land use responsibilities, and representa-
tives of local government groups. The commission would propose Energy Facilities and Lands
legislation to establish statewide land use policies. Currently, state
land use activities are undertaken largely in response to specific Fed- Power plant siting legislation adopted in 1975 is currently being
eral planning requirements or under the HUD 701 planning program, implemented, and state officials expect amendments to the basic
state officials say. A bill to establish the policy commission was re- bill to increase the state's authority to override local actions blocking
siting decisions. Some localities have attempted to block proposed
jected early in 1976, and the outlook for similar proposals in 1977
is unclear. facilities by purchasing choice sites, state officials say.
State enabling legislation authorizes counties to employ full The siting law requires utilities to submit 10-year plans with the
subdivision and zoning authority, although only a handful have state Public Service Commission, including long-term facility con-
adopted such controls, state officials note. Legislation to establish struction plans. Initial plans, filed under the act's July 1976 deadline,
guidelines for planning/zoning or make such activities mandatory are being reviewed and environmental assessments are being prepared

@1977 Business Publishers, Inc.

Wyoming 20:035

by PSC for comment by localities, other state agencies, and private WYOMING
citizens. Local governments adversely affected by 10-year plans may
present information at hearings to block siting proposals. Wyoming is in the process of implemeting a statewide land use
The siting bill is generally supported by utility groups because of planning act which was enacted in 1975. The law creates a perman-
provisions requiring expedited consideration of facility proposals. ent state land use commission and provides for protection of critical
The bill also calls for the protection of farmland. environmental areas.

Coastal Zone Management Land Use Policy

Wisconsin officials are currently revising draft CZM plans which State Land Use Commission, a nine-member body appointed by
they expect to submit for Federal approval in February 1978. Key the governor, has established land use goals within a six-month dead-
CZM issues include inadequate beach access,the increasing demand line set by the legislation. A state land use plan must be developed
for land and support services by tourism and recreational uses, within two and one half years of the bill's enactment, following
shoreline erosion, and the need for economic development balanced preparation of county plans.
against "irretrievable commitments of natural resources." Land use grant funding to counties is now in the second year of
Wisconsin's coastal zone includes 15 counties along Lakes Mich- a two-year appropriation of $460,000. Counties must prepare pre-
igan and Sliperior, with land zoned for conservation, residential/ liminary plans by June 1977 and final plans by December 1977.
recreation, and general purpose uses. Regional planning commissions Many of the jurisdictions hope to continue planning with an exten-
are inventorying land ownership, uses, and local zoning controls sion of funding.
along the coast, and the University of Wisconsin is preparing rec- Pursuant to the act's direction, the commission has initiated a
ommendations for identifying coastal activities which should be critical areas protection program. Assistance to local governments
subject to regulation, will be provided under the program in which the LUC will have
. The Wisconsin CZM program is also dealing with residential en- authority to designate areas. Any state resident can recommend a
croachment in environmentally sensitive areas, natural hazards caused potential area for LUC consideration.
by flooding and shore erosion, and economic losses suffered by state LUC operates a center for natural resources information which
ports and commercial fishermen. is linked to the community by a toll-free telephone line. The data
Legislation has been proposed to allow counties to designate base for the center, still in the development stage, should be com-
geographic areas of particular concern after consulting with citizens, pleted this year.
local interest groups and state coastal managers. State CZM officials The legislature also passed statewide subdivision regulations in
are currently developing criteria for designating GAPCs to be re- 1975. Previously, cities, incorporated towns, and counties were
viewed by the state CZM Coordinating and Advisory Council, fol- authorized, but not required, to adopt subdivision regulations.
lowed by public hearings.
In addition to a $340,000 second-year grant in 1975, Wisconsin Energy Facilities and Lands
received a $219,800 supplemental award, matched with more than
$100,000 in state funds. Since the first grant in June 1974, a total
of almost $1.2-million in Federal and state funds has been commit- Another major piece of legislation enacted in 1975 covers indus-
ted to the Wisconsin CZM program, Federal officials said. trial plant siting, including power plants. The law created a seven-
member industrial siting council to review and grant permit applica-
WISCONSIN LAND USE CONTACT: Stephen M. Born, Director, tions for construction of plants; to set filing fees for builders of
(608) 266-7958; Office of State Planning ,and Energy, Department proposed projects to cover study costs; and to allow delay of proj-
of Administration, One West Wilson St., Madison, Wisconsin 53702. ects until the community is capable of handling the influx of project-
generated growth.
WISCONSIN COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTACT:
Allen Miller, (608) 266-3687; Office of State Planning and Energy, WYOMING LAND USE CONTACT: Michael York, Chief of
Department of Administration, One West Wilson St., Madison, State Planning, (307) 777-7284; 120 West 18th St., Cheyenne,
Wisconsin 53702. Wyo. 82202.

977 Business Publishers, Inc.

1 Lot
-J@Iajt
L
@W6

DATE DUE

.ORb No. 2333 PRINTED IN U.S.A.

3 6 68 .14105 7754