An Expanded Role for the State in Regional Land Use Control
Year: 1982
Type: article
Abstract: ControlState control over land use has not achieved the "quiet revolution"predicted by Bosselman and Caies in 1971.' Many states now play a stronger role in land use regulation, but their efforts have typically supplemented, rather than supplanted, local control.'Cities have retained their monopoly largely because over the years local governments have developed a variety of institutions for handling land use conflicts. 3 However, the efficiency of local regulation is hindered by a tendency of local officials to discount the negative impacts that land use decisions can create outside city limits. 4 In California, state intervention has only partially compensated for this shortcoming. 5 The California Supreme Court recognized the dilemma created by 1. F. BOSSELMAN & D. CALLIES, THE QUIET REVOLUTION IN LAND USE CONTROL (1971).The authors predicted a new, expanded role for state government:This country is in the midst of a revolution in the way we regulate the use of our land.It is a peaceful revolution, conducted entirely within the law.It is a quiet revolution, and its supporters include both conservatives and liberals.It is a disorganized revolution, with no central cadre of leaders, but it is a revolution nonetheless.Id at 1.2. In California, for example, state land use regulation has taken three different forms.First, through the Office of Planning and Research, the state carries out planning, including the formulation, evaluation, and updating of long range goals and policies for land use.CAL.GOV'T CODE § 65035 (West Supp.1981).Second, on the coastline the state has retained direct review authority over local land use regulations to ensure that state and regional interests in a "valuable natural resource" are protected.CAL.PUB.Ras.CODE § § 30001(a), 30004(b) (West 1977 & Supp.1981).Third, the state has expanded mandatory general plan requirements for cities and counties to promote longer-term comprehensive planning.CAL.GOV'T CODE § 65302 (West Supp.1981).These efforts have aided localities in planning, but they have not removed predominate land use control from the local level.For an evaluation of programs in other states, see R. HEALY, LAND
Source: California Law Review
DOI: 10.2307/3480184
Author: Barbara Clark
Language: English
Subfield: Geography, Planning and Development
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W4230828386