The court first assumed, for the purposes of the case, that Executive Order No. 11593 established a procedure that must be followed in preparing an EIS. Although HUD had not followed these steps and had not considered historic resources in its EIS, the court declined to require HUD to conduct the procedures required by Executive Order No. 11593 because plaintiffs' presentation at the hearing of evidence as to the historic qualities of the area had served to provide HUD with sufficient information to decide whether to proceed with the undertaking. The court agreed that it would have been better had the information on historic resources been available in the EIS, but held that NEPA had been satisfied because the buildings were still standing and the plans could still be changed. Because the court believed that to require HUD to comply with Executive Order No. 11593 would be a needless act, it declined to issue the requested injunction. 374 F. Supp. at 903.
|Go to Table of Contents||Go to Top|