Our country has so far not given sufficient attention to the sphere of landscape planning, particularly its methodology. There are still some traditions to avoid and ignore (such as urban planning, engineering planning) or unreasonably restrict the use (such as landscape architecture, forestry, land use) of the "landscape" term, even confuse landscape with the natural environment or plantations, which is especially evident in the field of spatial planning. Therefore unavoidable are such undesirable phenomena as uncoordinated wandering through various options for the landscape concept, lack of effective landscape planning methodology, insufficient integration of landscape planning in an integrated spatial planning, prolonged agony of special landscape planning, flawed methodological as well as legal landscape planning and landscape design churning. Cultural landscape is usually called Home of Nation, its living environment, therefore, for the state and society arises an obligation to develop a variety of ways to use and protect the landscape and to ensure that all types of landscapes are formed from the principles of sustainable and balanced development and would become a quality result of coexistence of human and natural environment, satisfying requirements for residential, work, leisure and environmental quality. Cultural landscape structure optimization guidelines and criteria for the national planning system are recommended to be determined using a paradigm system of landscape forming that comprises: 1) Sustainable and balanced development paradigm, 2) Geographical landscape forming paradigm, 3) Architectural landscape forming paradigm, 4) Cultural landscape structure optimality paradigm, 5) Cultural landscape forming process optimality paradigm. The land management oriented sustainable and balanced development paradigm should be understood as development of society and its activities that includes: 1) assessment of the needs of future generations, 2) compatibility of all currently available interests, 3) security of the priority of the public (community) interest. The third point of the recommended sustainable development paradigm is dictated by the realities of life, illustrating that personal interests do not express common ones guaranteeing the survival of civilization. The common interests cannot be left alone with increasingly destruction-tended individual who is immersed in the environment of growing consumption. On the other hand, it is appropriate to supplement this paradigm with an emphasis on the development of culture. Culture Factor in a modified sustainable development paradigm is seen as a particularly important securing balance of different interests and rationality of human activities. Thus, only the society of a certain high cultural level is capable of realizing sustainable development goals and objectives, what is clearly confirmed by the universal practice of land management. So, there can be the fourth point in this paradigm: 4) achievement of a high level of socio-economic and ecological culture. To summarize the methodological work experience, the following four methodological landscape concept plan directions can be given: 1) Environmental landscape management plan as a planning document, focusing on the various protected areas and buffer zones appointment, bio-ecological communication and geo-ecological stability and quality assurance; 2) Perceptual landscape management plan as a planning document that focuses on visual communication and information, and potential areas of aesthetic interpretation and regulation, environmental psycho-ecological quality; 3) Technocratic landscape management plan as a planning document, focusing on a variety of engineering management measures design, landscape structure fulfilling primarily the technological and economic interests of the formation; 4) Integrated landscape plan as a planning document that combines the above approaches, mainly the first and the second ones. The Lithuanian Landscape Planning System needs to be improved on the basis of integrating both the German (landscape plans are required for all land management sectors) and the UK (providing opportunities to develop a variety of specialized uses of landscape plans) experience in landscape planning and its organization. It is also necessary to separate the landscape planning and landscape design concepts and spheres. The proposed landscape planning system is presented in a special scheme (Figure). For landscape planning perspective it is appropriate to use the recommended outlook of landscape planning documents and content elements presented in the paper, expressing both the process and its results, and the improved benchmark model, i. e. proposals as they could be done in the best methodology. Finally, the Landscape Planning Policy of the Ministry of Environment not complying with the European Landscape Convention and EU attitudes must be changed in the ordinary version of the Territorial Planning Act so that our country would return to normal landscape planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]