<<

NIT-U-71 00].

92II CGNGREss SENATE 1st Session

ARCHlVE COPY Sea Grant Deposito PAPERS ON NATIONAL LAND USE POLICY ISSUES

PREPAREIIFOR THE

COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS HENRY M, JACKSON, Chairman UNITED STATES SENATE

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION BOSTON UNIVERSITY

U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE 57-242 WAEHINGTOiv i I97I. kt,

COiIMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS HENRY hf. JACKSON,Wsahlzstoz, Cha>rrsas CI IVTON P. ANDERSON,New Mexico GORDON ALLOTT, Colorado ALAN BIBLE, Nevada L EN B. J 0R DAN, Idaho F RANK CIIURCH, I dsho PAUI, J FA VVIV, Arkrona FRANK E. MOSS,Utah CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, '6'zominS Q,DENTIN N. BURDICK, North Dakota MARK O, HATFIFLD, Orezos GEORGE MCGOVERN,South Dakota TED STEVENS,Alaska LEE MFTCALF, Montasa HFVRV BFLI,MON, Ol lohoms hlIKE GRAVEL, Alaska Jzssv T. Vzzzsza, SlagJJireckor Wa.r,u.atJ. Vakr NZsa,Ctdej Chancel DAkrkztDszrzuz, Fr%rata@a!Skag Merober Ctt*ar,zaCoos, Aftsarttkk Cosrreet IX! Sea Grant Depository

CONTENTS

P«>r<> Letter of transrnitt,al 1 Letl;er of introduction 5 Part I. Public i»volve!ncnti» new communitydevelop»!ent 7 In troduc !.ion 0 rerview A. ':V<'.XK!.I,IOTf 9<'.9!v!INOL HY! The. need fOr effective, State invOlvet in ihC «rbani- Satian prnCC99 haS nCVCr bee» rnOrC CritiCal. Cnnstitu- tionally, the States are thc ulti<»atv.holders of rhc 1>olic<. power, Politically, State govern»!cuts are at l.asi. one step rc«!oved from the interjuri..diction<cient,eI VA!iof !rew co!n!»unities, very little positive by either the p»blic or the priva!c ectnrs!o hr>cw cn!nmrrnity concept ie more political and legal in r«ld hv capable. nf srrc- cessfnlly!. 107 Introduction A. Tl>ecrisis in shorelinerevreation; A r p<>rtor! Ia !d<«e»> oagP- rncr>t i» the coastal zone «<' 107 <>KNN MAssArt< rsgrTe INATri- vate marke!. With respect tO puhliC r«rCa!iO»;<11!t of !his Ii!ni!vd ur>ique commodity is «»dcr pricontrol, percent is rcsiricted military ar a «nd only 5 tn 7 0f the shor line is publicly ow:red. Thu~ la<>dalong the coastlir>< has 1>ccorr>o-rscarc< nf nrrr v;<1><>!biv nat«ral Pv!-ources~ ~ ~ It, ha~ hvvn«>vi»creasingl< nr in rVCPnt > Varz that the priV!!; r>in!s in nur purr»»t sncivtal vai ss >Ts N«TIT TK 0F TE<'> NI!i s< nf thrs< avail«hie l«nds ii!ust compete with ali nthrefereiiee in the Inarkrt. placeor i!>directlythrough tlu; politicall!rocess. This paper foe»amupon the priciiig policy i!I t.hcestablishrncnt and inan»gemrnt of parks»nd rcote relativr, to pricing. Page I'ar, III. Ecological prob}erneof co«st«i land n: < lgl I » i rod uol i on 0> orvie>v ~~A. I,and-us< estuariiic iuteractio!Ls BRADFORDBUTMAV, IHAssATIITEoi< TKCBNo< t!p rc nt of thc land ar<;>and siipport '88prrreru of the pop»latinn,fn»r-f!fths nf ii, in»rhai.ii!,iil,<> I,! percent.of l>e cst!iarine zonr. * * ~ IVith su 'h dense popiilatio», <'st»nriiie regions havr naiiy u. <'-coiiiiict.. * ~ * Tl«. < stiiary is sn ex>rr .nri<",ibh rcsourr<, and land»ses >vhicti inodify the estuarine oiivirou<»eiitsh<>uld be strictly czaiiiiiie<1 and rO»trolled.. B. Thc ecologi al importance nf a sal>.marsh B. w, Tilt re, htA«SAeHTsETTs INRT«O!.o A salt. »>«ivh is an intrgr«l l>art of thr estiiarinr. system which it hnrd<.rs, v s s [It] is nf vital importance to inan arui this can be readily s<'enwhe» cnninu rcially iinpnrtant org: !ginuings in th» marsh. + * + Thc salt Inarsh serves ri>ai> i» other wave braidt, »orm«ll> deposited hrre, bccoines;ivailablefor di positi<»!in ch«nii ls,harbor., «nd Other ii;<1>le«re;is. C. The effect of sedi»>cut«tio» on pri>nary l>rod»etio i i» th wct lands 1<7 JOE Y AC!»Vii ' I VSTIT!'i « >N 1> alter thvrtl«nds by a wirle variety of actioii.. ~ s s I'speci«llh dclrojrcts on siibmchere thr rHectsnf »ch operationsare pain- fiilly nh>vious,That «i!eh ol>cr>!lionscontiniie. >o be so co<»moni. trstiniony lo the p»l>li ."sig»orance I« t,o thc valur. of tliesc wetl«nds. o pl I!. Home c »>aidT and its derivatives! and radionuclides lplnrttee onIntegri enr 1~amlnsibleyoung l>eopleto makemeatu»gfiil contributioris in iml>ortsnt public dccisiot>s. I a>nc >rieerncvcrthe limited o1>portunit.icsfor such involve- tnetit. It frequently happensthat after tliey liave irivc aiid <'.ne.-gyin the acquisitionof skills and knowlerlge,and pursuedtheir advancedacademic work they are ol>ligcdto apply their tale»is in < so>ericresearcli and analyses which ges, %hercis no lack of ableyoit»g people with go<>dideas to call upon. In i»y view,it is w> stef«Ito allow ma>rymaii-years of the bestin- iell< iual efforts of irairied grad t>ttcst« bo focusedoti exerinertia. AVe riiusi, fitid tlie mea»s ta better i>iilise this vahiable and scarce i <'>01 c '

I>i the aci ivities a!ysi',and innovative thoiight, k>y persons ir>tined in a widevariety of disriplines and >inshacklcdby i>istitiiiional attitudes atid coiivctt- iio>ial sce.The <:ommittoe's 1>rofessiorialstafl' car>,of ,give oiily lii»iteeant to a p:irticultr>'stiies limitaiio>is' ar< share lby >ill congressional comit>it>o«t>i d ui thc Stot legislatures. Rci a prelii»inaryex- 1>«ri>netttivhicli was intr»c wo>k of several advanced stude»is on thc it>fo>n>ation-g«tltet'lllg»»d res ', >tch lieedsof the coll>- i»ittee,it> a parti<«lsr siibjcci, area, Itr I!< i embdent roffof the corn>»i ,iee> o die<;i»s a prop Iseds< miriat. Tl>isdis< tission lead to a»agrecmrnt, that studcrii srepresenting a wi le vitri>tercet to tlie comtnittee.Tl>e sturdcrnicrequirc- ri>entoof tlic ii>stit«tc,would also l>r<>vide it>eani»gfiil a»>tion. During the <:ourscof th '.studies, it wasagreed thtrt opportuniticswo«ld be providedfor disciissionsamong ilie parti ipatiiig st>>dentsand profes- sors,tlic < or»mittrestaN and, if possibl<',committee mernhers. ! On K'r rcmbcr 16, 1969,I wrotr to Fr, lire pr»wide,program for land usc plariiihig. Althh there w:ts irrsr

DKc EMITTER16, 1969 Prof. CARROI L L WILSONr 8&an <'cftoolof Manegemesd, MassachusettsIrrrrttlnte of 7'ecIwing summer,w «snatiorral land-«I e, policies.

' The te:t on>nitte<' hasa sfr<»!iinterest in !!a!i<»!>1 poli iesf<>r thc i resou>ccs, a»d, !f !ur.-the ', u;e of our li!ncf r 'so'!rccuudcrlies all resourced .velrutpliave>'!». very s >'>n>>s x<1!nple if a fail«rriu <8rcti e la»d-useplanning at >he F 1,it< t d lo< al. level iu conncctihr. < on!>!>itl.c!viH 1!<; consid",r ing altr>'na- tive.to improvlil-usL decisions arr.currc!!tfv being>I!>Ld<.. SVe!vi11 1>articularly b < u! ith dm asures1!i :I> be takrn to insurethat F la«ning, to r!« > !ragrotc<.tthe I'rderali>! vestment i» 1»!bli<: an<1 rrsour«. fro»! degrad»tio!> cause by l !u>s!undInc»t that tl!ere drcisions. wouhl be a>! axe< lie >top port«nit j for a group of s:udcntswith appropriate faculty parti< ipation to xplificant .ontributions, The !'esults of thrir studies mightbe of value to the corn!nittee andto others >vho will be partici- p»t:ngin I edcra1d cision ou 1andusmight contribute to these decisionsAnnotated are:bibliographic ' !f t7!r.recent lit< raturc on land-use policyor planning orportions ofs!>cl! Eit !raturc,f> u'ticularly with the alternativeideas an recommindations srt forth, Comn>entariesonthe b! os<1 probh u> of laru1-usc planning fra~vn fron>the vir>vf! »intsof various disv, f!offtical scien ; engineering,., architcc turi, r esour<.edrvr lop ment, and so<;iExaminationsology. of existing !!l and >tate plans which in- vo'Iv<.substantial lau l andrelated resour<: usc to spion>ented to sec what >najorare~s ol'land-use are»ot novi.re 1!yoxisting plans. !urveysof typicalexisting 8tate an llocal land-usc pla>>ning !!ly other kinds of sl utieswl!irh might E!e suggested ,>c nnlingtothe i>!tcrests andba< kgr iu idsoftl>e etude>! tswho wo»ld b ..f iuvy<»! >1!vith tl!e scn!iuar, I will bc pli.ased tnoffer «1'ateva»gcsuitable meetings forcons«its>i<>n to assist in ir>!tatiouof the»t of~t >dy th» results.st uliesprov<; to be useful,ir, i pos.iblethat the l!ape»sor sutable summari crl!c!ratedi» co»unittul he<>i>!«r<:cords to pr'ovi!dir!gs,it is possiblethat t1>ey!night, b<. presented at cg w itl! ,o!n>r!i! tee>ncn!bers. I a}>rcciat<;having tl>is opportunity to».ssist in your Ports,Please kr p meadvised of theprogress of y<»>rvvork. EVitl> best regards, !incerely yours, Hz!.-av KI. JA.cx.sov,CAe>'r»>nn.

LETTER OF II>fTRGDVCTION TheWMIT na,tional land-use policy project was created in thespring of lc70 as a vehicleto involvestudents an facultyat MIT and neighboringnniversiti<,s includiiig Bosto» University, Tufts Uiii- versi>,y,a>i<1 Woods Hole OceanographicInstitution in !! A broadinterdis]inary stiidy that,wouln many fic!note their interaction, and trv to in>egratetheir cxpertis<.ai theio!>[>s incliide<1. biologists, eco!ogis!., !>hy~icists, civil <,ngineer~, mecliai>icalengi>ieers, <'I>!ctr>cal eng>1>eery, i>ia>'iagement a>idents, political scientists,ani] Ia>i<~<'>'s.This inieraction was]>articularly valuab]e since ii, seemsio us thai i»teri,wi!I i» ih< f»ture!>lay a. greater rol< ii> th< form«latio» and so!u- tions of o»r Vation's,i»dec<] the wor1d's,incr< asingly co>np!ex prob!:n>s.There is a strongneed for usas a Natioiito robleiiis.W< ive]coin<.i!ie Nati'siniern resrogr:><» anil tirehopeful of its cnntrib>itioustowaid dcveIoping th>s capabi!ity. ! An 0!>1>iityio becoirie it>vit with me>n!>eraar>itnicethe developinenl;of n>itious]Ia»so I>olieiit;<1 crite!i<>ess in th»t thei~enate Interior 'oinmitteid introd»ced pre!ii»inary 1cal Land Us<. Po!icy Act, of !970<>n Ja»«a.ryZ9 1970 soi.ha t,oiir project. hrsc>ise nf>>rgency, We>il. o fi<] iiit< r«sti>ig iaci»te>'»r tion that v<.en the st»<]ent-fatt«'' an I,'tafl is iv>>»esse<]t!irou I>Ho i i'I visiis of ill 'OB>>»Itt«'' st»IIii>i tw<> sepaiate »is, thro«gh Washington visits by the stiiitst»i, arulthroiigh very freq»e» t ti. Iephoiie arid >»>i on both of theabove <'oiii>ts > I>e !ir'oj<'ci was «ri ezcel]ent !ear»i>>g< ipivolv«!. W< !iope >1»ii the 1>rojer>, wilt serve.>s >< >no><1<'d for !>ublicatio» >vit1>iii soiiic of t]ie I>apersi!iat werc'v>'it t e tiikenth<. liberty of freely e<.>,~ of Iaiid «se management proble ns, Thepapers by Alr. D<»nis W. 13i olitaiiied through theco irtesy of the >IITPress that will I>iiblisht!ie pi>pers in f»11 as art o!' the book "Projepearit! the fi<1!ol 1971. njecr,RECAP X<.wFng]and Coiistal Area P]ann!»g! i<>vo]ved ii» .=-! it! tcrlcdarticles app<.:iring«iithin. The fiic»lty membersinclude: From XIIT, Profc aors J. Clsrkeson, J. Devanncy III, Al. Driscoll, W. ''if at thews, Ii, 14odwin, J. Schaake, W. Seifert ri in<.li!des ci i o»< c>'»ing th '>il!pro- I!>i >te! !Ie of Stiliegovrr >rni» lii »-isti»~ >»»and >ci~ulati»g the dev<.loE»ncnt.riy, !»;»iy of tIiemost fre- qli >ltlv not>ad a>1 I>!< E!st u>'p<'!!t oi Is !i<1 is<'. ]!!' the' isc 1- v !IEl»nccs !t i>i!crlieiv1. Tlu, prsi>Ii»ir!i> inc i lr <.' a»be ricadilytranslated i»ti irs a»rE sc! ri :<- in a>iU!ba» setting. Many iilsE>l;m»i!>E. pr hlc»is c< nt<'1' al' E!isun>!v !l IE!Iul'E!!l>I .' ~~>',, Iisve in<'lu Ecdin H>is sc< tion. o>ily E!art of thep!>E!ers vv>'itt<'i> by ou' >>utltors.As I hcovervie!v st!>tet»>t i» cs,tlic o>igiui Ipl Ill>!i Iof inter st to stu Ieilts of the»ew rornmunity concept,

ETV 7h ii«''d for Rcctiv<'Stat<. i>>volv<»!~ i>tin ' I>e»rE»i»izati»>aE!rcir'ess E!asnever been n>orc critical. "o»s>i>iltiiliy, t3ie States ar<" i.he uli imate hoidersol' the p ilice I!'»!n 'nts ar: at 1 ltst, !nc stap rPmov ldfn! nt lieint< >'j»risdiotionicETs<>iimpede areaividc E!lan>!i»g fcirmetrrthc dcvchipmc>lt c~furE!a»izi»g Ia»ve>tisv r»>n<',nts. >icedtsur hale»t;ind ivl!at iyl!it!'iirtnccnlilofit r c rE>c>ril>inpowend t<»U E»irc. Ia>id a!ii< i<.81>s <>iild TI>cy»iii horiz psof itirCI>ai<', Ol'I r keby eliiiiiC>itdO»>;ii>1 !1«n- c.1»dfr!r !p » space,iran I!o>talion«»!iilitwI!uiE!<»cs rivatlii«>iiiy a» I »~ir pc»vers I!< .!ibjr ct I> the >1~!E!rnn I i>i < » d d<> CIc1 >Tag > i>ress in «E>i E>i.'I:< E!i>l!li E!as ; !i spc 'iaEil»< r'e<'.tIa»d »S '. ill I deV<'Irip»><'ntC !il>rVE!> ailr<' I tE>at futlil'<,' I '- v >lop»unt iv<>ldmeet St>>1 I- >f questi !l>s «re fiu!d<>nxc»t:>Iio th ' forlilillutlLITt' >il'E>an g>'0'6 ih E>lveivith ' tlis if iv<'al'<' T< '.st»bli.Ei a c<1'dlilat<'d,ovcf'!III »!it>!»»ll »I'bi< g>'u sir>< egy the»e>v s>rategy h t>isefor <'%ectivelan<] »tili>»>ti<>n«n»ectingthe pressi >g nc«ls of ti><>s<:prese»tly trappcyiug < i>ics.After inveighingtl>e ccono>nic,social, politi<;al,;»>d Iil>ysical.t«I>nologira] <.onsi<:.eratio»se>nbn<]ied in this al>p><»ut> to urh«n clcvclo]»nent, wc arc p>'cparcd to»dvocate this approad> i»stead any o>h<>'s that have bcc» s»ggrste<].'I'vro det<>i]ce pot<»',>»Irole of State govcr»>nents in plan»i>>g an<] devi I«pi»«>n w < o»>u>u>>iti<'~ as part, of »nified State la»d usc p];rts]»>ve be< n «:»t>l>letr', G>ud<'.]»les,fo>' Stale l>lvo]v<'ntit> tl>c Develop- >»cut of V<»> .,'on>»x»»iLies in Massa<:husr>,'s; T<»v>vl>hI'olicy," was ivritten by i%~]r.Laence I'', Sussk>»<],a >'<'.cent rad»at.c of thc BLITT Depart»>cut of Ur]>an Studies a«ungis pape>and dcveiopme»t is roncer»ed ofdavit]>new the co>nrn»nities. role of Statecsin< gov'<>mentM<>s. <>'x'o! se]ec>i»g sites 'or ne>v con>n>unity ]orv<.'o>ul»<vLI>cente>'s in me,ropo]i>anurban regions,Thc slv<»un>unity Dcvelopn>ns, and a Proposal" w.»s car>i«.1 out by 1>f>',R, Stephe» B>ow»i»g. %]r. Br<>wning is» lawye>'anti a recentg>'»<]»ate of the I!epart>nen~t of itv a»dBe~ona] Pla«»i«g at Harvard L'»iversity. Hi. p«pcr er«»»i»es tl>c signifi«n> legal and politica! issues>vhich unu>y ol' >1>eI»ese!» obstacles to puI>licdcve]op>ncnt n>n«!>iti«lditinn,I>e oA'ers a proJ!<>de<1u>ode] stat»tc 'ef<»'.«<>Iat«<««ci]e»«>»y of;,]>csc issues into a nnv political stru<.l!»e for > bn<»t of ncw unities at tl>e State govcrnn>en> l<,vcl. There is sl!>nvce»tbe two studies, but the political strategies ree»dc<] by the tv;o autl>ors differ >»arkeesetwo papersshould serve as a» into the,political, econo.nic,]egal, and sonsof new < omn>unitydevelopment. Th]shythat appc»r; as the end of b,1>at»-,THE DEVELOPMENT OF li Ew COMMnNTTIEs IN MAHSAOHUsETTs'.TowARD .4.STATE URBAN C, nowT1I PoL cY By I awrencekilliot t Srisskind, >>f.l.T.! Fditor's Note; This is au exc<.rptof vlr. S>usskind'spaper; from whi> h we i<>eludethe, introductioi<, Ch<>I>tcr>I, III and IV. This paper is coricerne corn>nunitirs in Massachu- s<.ttr rrban growth, specificallyState involvement iri the planning and development uf new <;omrnunitiesmust be undcr- tak> d interg<>ver»mental fr aniewoi'k.Stat<> policies an l plans cxl>ressediri thc fiiof resources,the rg powers, the I<;vel<>prnentof transportarioso> liiikagcs and tire sum t >t,al of iill ac >lls taken by various !t.r break" n<.w c<>nirri>i«ity evelof>rrrent iri the C<>rnm<>nwealthnf .' lassac1>rlsct ts. A. I>resentno State policv exists whi<.h g ir>tc-ratswhich plav a role in dirr<>tingurt» r>growth in rh< Cornmon- wcajth: il! the developersrvorri :il ab<>uttheir abr'Iity 4 >contr<>l, program, arid proflt frorri urbari devejot>ment;! the rtsof ui banizing areas concerned about State iritervciition in I >ciil decisions rclaiive to community and cnvir<>nrr>ei>taldevelopment, and ! the ivid r regionalinterests concernedabout, the qfdcv<;lrent. CIrapter I »6'ers a defiriition nf iiew nities andi establishes tlute he»retie>ri rationale for the development uf ncw cornmunitics i» iiietropolitari urbari areas as part <>I':i State»rban gr<»ter II measures the potential f<>rth<; development >f new conr- munities of approximately 50,000 perso»seach thro«gh<> itAfassa- <,husetts,and indicates those areasv hich are ripe t'or suc}>develop- men.. Chapter III examinesthree alterniitive»ew comnrunity devel- opm.nt stra,tcgiesindicating the politic»1and firiancial feasibility as Ivell as the.public benelitsof eachstrategy. Chapter IV conchntrolsystems for guiding urban growth, with an <>utlitiefor an inter'<>vernmentalp]annirrg- implsmentatiOnframewOrk fcr new COrniriunttydevelOpment and S, seriesof questionswhich need to be coiisideredby State officials and the I>ublic at large pri<>rto the in>pie»>rr>tatiorrof a, !tate pr'ogranr for riew coinmunity d vcloprnerrt. < i>! 10

INTRODUCTION

THE EtOLE OLr STATE GOVERN'MENT LN Gvtf!LN ; U>L>!Av GROLLND DEVELOPMENT KI!cE!uf us p Lysfof' Llu i!L fkici !'r>tat! i» ;i!I>t ilJIC!!aLLCL'll~ ut' nrbaii leV 'lO]!L!le!LttlL!lt '.LLLTtie ',!! BLar tl!i!!aL' ' is tbruuglLOLLLthe UL!it< l Stat<'s Coiiii»li< tii Evil>n!i.' tii ! cf>" srn! i xtrtmcly in!g>ort>int li<>lili<,:il f!!td i.over»!»t>- lcll! . 'I'lier i ls llo sin!l ' >vtiy of 'i li»< !<-'ra! of tei'hr>olocr!<'ILlr»l!l<1». tilt>1l! s l <>i»Cities LL»<1tO'Bl!s till t< f!d 1 > p>»lift r>L«. Wi»1 ff«e»l> Io tii issue. raised by I!n<.h < kcfl:infl iif!«ii!tr1»!i<»1: A; oiir poi>iiia!iiin >e ieciaiotia «ii>oi!hlic rnvnnne heco>ne inrr< aaingiv lrx The Irovr>T >ke these drcisinns and tt>e 11inft!!nares nn privnre rt pt>CeWith tlii. <.>iezi!<, Aa a r<,a !lt, We «re f!ceil with Ir Litio rontiCs ion, l!light in O ir e .iilr;il Citic-., unequal hardcria of 5 <<»sion, d !t>lid!< ion of publicf >cilitiu', n!!daii iI>effi iic»Luso of pui>lic Iuid ori'ate r ve5'! Ici' 'l uf guvcl'11»LCL!t. 11i i'1'c II'<' 1!niJ >I'Lilllt a .'Ilulls lO b<' 1itk li if LV ari t i Ci»!frO»tthea i. a I 3 hl! ci . fillli . Stuti it<>L lily ln >!firli'<'s.'il!g tlic l>ruble:ns if urba!LLzatfo!I;tu a.«at i.xtcL! 3 i lie alJ>hty uf 1<><>Il govc!.»- B> '»ts tfi ' il!<' iv>th LLI'b«»cr!'or<'tl! an l <1<'3<'li!i'inic»1 LLgLLCsSt > alh><>LL r "<>«r<>laILLLd deeiSiO»L!!akii>o t>u Jo!!<1 1 IV .IS if goi irl;n!enncy they sp<>i tcXL<'Llt Lletcl'fili>!ed by a. >vie}ncfit of stat co»stiti!tio!ii!l, . I;ii;itory. Lnltd a>i l I li<' lli lcpcClc!!c ,' ILff01' le loci>lit es liy s»cli i>rovisiofla as lioliii r«1<, Ii!e State ~~ov >>!Incr>thtill con'Iro,s f!» l <'lif»its lo 't!l gov '1LLL gr<>LVth t!<>lint 1!i«1 hei !Lfur!i»ilal«i1 at tlie reft ;rf.l 1 v<;l, i!la!tning fn!ent » <>lif!uifily th r S!!Onsibility Of State g<>vr»nlenl . Il i! LLL!fortLLL as!ll ii, WlLul haa'. >IOtestSte!!tp<>1>Cy XV>th reo to t,ho fna!LLLgclncntof the o!L>»ry'sl>RLn!e»t at th ' c>tat ', reoiol!LL1> >Ll! elil1.;Tel,,' ILLCreasingly therearC iiistaiices Lvh re1'Cderff prOp>LL»S are ill COL!dict arith each Other', Federiil age>L i s inVolzed i tl!r prcl>ILLL!><1fiir t!a»sport>!tio!! 1!',af!s,wv>Lt< r r sour ie dLe!!t t>r ograrns, aii l < ofn>I>L!iiitxfiicility i»!p>overncnt ]!I Ofrr!!ind> l!la 1!s t i re le%elO1! induct>'ltil ILT'et!s>Lll l let!O!li! te I iVC'IS I e Oft<» 1'Ou!!dtO l>Cno". %'fust of th< l>la!ls «IL l i 1 ll>3 '»3po!Ir I':o>nh' l!evelopii!rii<, I'JCC!, p, . ' Normari>Irrkr iau. "Oiir ei <1icai S>aev> Iopnieti<: TI> AriapOiirna! ir< the .Kmerioahineti XX. Augur«.!954, p, 5. > !iuar!!o, l, ee»anend io Ii c!ud»otova>oii fol' a >nit!i! >>vJ l u i i> nic! h> I n idc»ii>ail'r auor>iv of >la >rate,1<< ~>neet 'rune!Lit>ni>e Loni anll ll'' >i>scfil .liu!aiiia !ii MiiiO >Ii II<. !CC' I~v3<> 3:Ii!rv "io proviviiriil to rnrouragrind >, ef!>tie ecoiio>nic frow<3 a id ilevelop>nri>rof onr I'< ti 1 lark vrlol » cri of in n commun!ticea»d upo>i ir»ici cli! rlevrIoi>iiii i i. ' Iii lvcs& lorci i v 1!w vcrof !eewJina< ! nii> educed a ba! In o u!.r<. "! ! o ">>rovlda!encad uil>iiii Ii in la<>aria iuid 3 iow !iol t!ia I. <>j edstater." 11

E>rOgramSare neCOSSaryand EeSirable.H<»V >V<;r,tO date, theee pialtS E>av<:not been synchronizedi nor have thcv bec:II >!nalyz<. Etc> insiire t,liat they are consistentwith eachclaspirati<>ns. Thus, becauseIIuiiiy agciicie ' >iud.departfnciits at thc I"cdora1 level are purs>Iing separai l>rogidms tvithoilt a< qiiate co<». dint! tion, State govorninents are iii a cyanl foi its oivn l>r<>ivith itS OiVnn ;C ls;tjeet i i <1». Altl>oughseveral proposals hav< bc ii niadeto irn1!osea s E>>!i greater degree Of Organization on F Cli ra1 program» ad>!1agencies in- Vulied ili jilarinif>g fOi urbail gri!ii tii ai!d Ck .V qc>1!nlI' those Tncasures is far fnim assur«1 in lh near futur .' Et' a»atittli policy is not a l<>E!te!lt s«%clef!fly iv<11stf1> 'tiu io exert ont>'ol over and bring or<1rr t«<>nRi< !iiin privnf< itltegcsts; <>rif one of thc. Several uatio»;! k iirb»>i grotv>11 1!oliseelIs adopte l, itr!te gcial r<>lot<> play since >n<.t of the r i nt E!rot!os>>isrivilw ln Stale inv !lveine!it. Tn luiy case, it see>! tl»it. State gov ln>n !its ttiEE c<>inurto brfu Tn<>stof the responsiE>ility for g>iiclirlg encl dil'VCrnmentra1>Ossess seri ral 1i!i< aE <1i> ilifiiv theta to play a l!artiei>Early l tE>efilial>< ial i several front» sifn»ltaf>eously. Stat h 1!av< ha<1e> pericnceTvith Iitr'- I'iillgn>g [!I'Og»'inls l!lgk!ivays, 1' ' '1'<'llllol!, xtlite ' >' 's !ursus evtlo]!nl<'ll I > au l welf>t>eprograms, to name a fifica<>I, impa< I: «n the ci<'veloptnentof iirban ar as.a ' fo>xaove<,"the Stati; <>c<:upiesa unique vantage point, h!oaf dc vc1<>1!»>ent ivith!n Stat boi>11 kal'1 's as part Of an ifIterrekateCESyetern, Vet CE<>str ut urbfan problems indivi lualky ar>antto tvE>itl>ff'<7gg1h<'. ,<1State t'll ttssistanee for urban renewal, lilai>nine' and art lnlr- poses,suggestv n»!Tentshave b e» unabl«>r ur>willingto play a >Tiajorr<>h i» gi>i- Triitnt.' ]t ivou1lisht<»iiggest that all Slat . gov! rn- ilicnts lire presently oquil!p<> toE d al iiith tile complexities of the urki«g>d ;velopmcnt, E!rocess.Hinc>>t,«ui

' Faa>icy i» la <»ix»nC>rowi» c'».!, la70. r T>e impart»f talc agencies4! 1Ltaaxsehuvettvonur>an> <» 1regia»d 'lcvey !acauth<:.'!t!gu, FOr rr» i»!t!' 'lint> m,d><a xs,g voinntax. ' au» vvn>eCreapart>eipatOcirm>» pm varuxnrmuv< saut»a d. Si»!X t» aWr!!d .!st>a!f local government haa hev»t ofinorssana r»nrr«<> eraon on the part of . !at! goverr>»»»<apurn!>trad to 4>prlr c a!oual saver»aahnt'y < o»!mix>i»»u» 1!ti»!govern»lai>7-242 7 I 2 12 Inancv ii>stitiitioiial st>ver,equ:>1 to those atc yov<.n>mer>Is >po>tfintto seekways >n tvhi<'.h Llic !<;ai!ial >vhich SLI><.erov< riirne»ts already possessca» b<;>ea!iz<.

OPTIOVs 1OR STATK INTO>,YEMEN'I' rN TH>0 UR>>AV r!KVKr OPMKNT PRC!CESs i[>t]>yr«on»ncn reg.e.t<>i<»I ii> tlie,fie!d »crit." r>< r Iil hca !iiigrs'. 1 'I'h<'. St >Lcsha! gover»r»< >its with reine la! sei'vie<;sat«! assistancewhen <.S,!le<1 upon I!ni<>»>s iii the < xe>' >.-I!'vities of 1rner>ts Irn!t ;r>dentlyc auotlicr caiuict resgr<.<.I«c»L, or iii thosei<>staiices whuro !>rivate developers seein intci>t; on ! akir>gactions A%hi< h are I>ot in the "!»Ib!ic inti.rc 't," 4. 'I ho Sr.r>tesh<>uld Itssurne ai> itcI.ivo ri»gar>d in>- !!Iei»Brit it>of !n netv urban gr !wthand gpr <>1' public iii- vestmof riew iustru- I 1'IP>staiices it may be n>.ostappropriate ft of permissive powers to lv!irect assistance of a, techni .alor financialnature m>tybe warcar>ted.In sorueiristanccs, strii>gentState regulation or controlci!iled tvitl> the cxp;>»sionof Stateassista>ice pr<>grams in such areas as !iousingr ii>dustria] levclop- inent,,tra»sportatio», recreatioi> or opens!!ace !!reservarividely.In one . ensethe optioiis available to State governmentcar> be vie>vedon a co»!inuuui cxteiid.ng 1'romrelatively indi>'ectto n>arkei!!ydirect actiori, In an<>thersense, the rangeof Stateactions < t>ribe arrayeds available to Stategovernment ir> its dealingswiLh >»unici!!it!ities ai>d private developers are described below 1. TheState may enableexisting cities >tnd towns to plan,s!>end. money raisefunds, acquire!arrd, and t n»structprkecertain thaI,lo.alities have tlie basicpowers tvith which I «moveiuteigeiitly totvardsol»f istccs, localities have thesepowers, a!though authority to p]ari a. specific ' seothe advisory Co reporta, tees, >iier0 for a S>so see <>overnor's Con- fcronc,">'<00-M, iar>nding thospecial reports ofthe 'orurni068, published1 Ooverno<'s conference. chicago, ui. s Three9-30. 13 fun tion»>ay riot allvaysbe iiiclucalities to collaborate,joif> together thr<>ughe<>operative arrangerne>its, <>rconsolidate to provideservires that; are difficult for any one town tf> handle indepenii<1transfrr encompass offunrtions making fir<>mprovision cityforto special voluntarydistrictInufiicipal orvice rriergers, versa, the establishmeiitof metropissionsor tniillipurpose furiltion<>ldistricts; the rreation of rnctrop<>lit>atplanning agen<.ies, f'egior>al1>lannirig agenries, or inetropolitan «>1>lirilsof g<>vernlneiit. Th<;Stal,c's ailn is usually to foster the en1argelnentor eon>u>lif1<>< al govern<»entso that muiiicipalifies br«'>Diemore capable of cofltrolli>tgrfietropolit»ft arid regit 3, The S>latei>iay provin f IilfiH t heir developmeft t res]>nr! sibilit ies. An arrangarne i >t governirfei>tvlureby a Statetollelp plillniingprepare agCncyco>nl>re~hensive provides physical btaff serviceplans f,oor asprcia,l lola>tningstudies is <>nlyone of the inany ways in ivhirh s11chtechnical liid can 1>eutilized. Tile State usualIy i eneetmini- mliln standardsof performanceas a c<>nceto lo<>'alitiesin the f<>rli of ln>tt>s,grants-in-aid, or tax concessions,in ordc.rto broaden thc fiscal basetlie loc:llities >naydratv upo« iii their e8<>rtsto combat urbanproblems. I!'inancial assistance tiskes various forms. Nenetropolitan ol>er-space planning programs by auth<>rizing fulids ivhi<..1>.localities can use to purchase.the fee or an internal in the fee or> land. It> nlost casvernrnentperformance is a qui quo for Sttitefinancial aid. Grants-in->ud,therefore, provide Sta,!,egovernment with substantial bargaining posv<;r. 5 Th<' State may regulate or a't»ifi1oral activitii s tl>al. have areawide implications. The State >nay Jiu>s'edirectly' to r<;solvedisputes among local units of ternmrnt in a irietropotitan are<» especially dial>utes that ca»iu!t bc resolved at thnutualagreement, or are of such niolilent as to impedethe effec- t>Fir anexplanation ofthis sf>»stion relative to >dsmachuaom frora James Powers, prh!eipslresettrch ass>stat>e> O'Sullivan, Director of theLegislelive Research »urea», un "nevolu- tn>nof Powers:Fescurf-Rxeout>ng Const>tattoos> Hot, » F >ran explanation ofthis situation relative to Massachusettslsw, scereport relsuve to regional govern- mentol theMassachusetts Logislative Research co»»ca, tati 26,>470. snd reporl relative to voIuatary munl ipslxnrrger procedures oftits Afts>atlv< >l, 1970. t' a>rs hae respons>bility forthe administrstimi of statewide plan»i»g ald p.o>pants.Loca! plat»tirig groups co>>sborate with couunuuttyepie»»htg prognuns. 'fhrough lsl5 thesecooperative planning pm>octa lug> an aggregate.pro!ect cost0! about$6 <>dillon ofwhich I lieFederal Govert>met<< wsasupplying about two-<.birds, t' On redopt»eneetg far v hichCOS forFederal Capital gm»ts isIoedby the f'ederalcon! mgranted Iroin state taxes was Sfumilaon wable !>lategrat<<>»f 50 per«i< to hmited class. 14 tive p;rforrnanva of government,!tlfirn< ti<>!zi»g iil 1he ar >a."Another forln i!f direS!tate action invlu ] s thv <.st>tb1i~tr!rrerrtof rigorous stat«ti>ry stan far Is f«liicipal«!rporationa ~ nothinth<'. geographiettl boilndaries of !n<.tro~! >kita«areas,ar!d io provide f!«.ther for the administr>!tiveri vini appriipriat State unit." This form <.f Stats aetiorl is baslit,es io tak«A'ective mvas«resin th ili tif111!I t. v . 6. 'I'he State rn>ty expand th< 9<:n}!eof iis acti< ities >ii!dsubsume, marly of thv re porrsibikiti :s tra litio»alla beko«gi«g io io«a] gov«!<:haseof < aspleaOf thia fnrm <>f iir !«;it!itaieility <>fI<><:ali!ies to avt q!ri<'kl,- gl!in the; f>tcsof rapi f grou i !>'-' 7, Tll«Stat ' ri!ay !tsalf ozcrcrs : h> .!il f«!>et!o!!s--rt !rnght tt>Isi! tn dO S<>if 1<><:ttjrSSOurees are mad qiiate < r if ocr! rtiii fur!<;ti<>naCltnnfor«>nciitl aid. F<>rvxa!«t>le, tk!s State migk>t,a 't as >t«1<1g<> I< t!e«ds mi several fact!>rs. Onv Ea1>ste~t>crier!ce iri dealing witlr «rban dev<.joi!nre»t prnblits,for I>t!vl tradltr<>nt!ItvI< ft Iii>'«iyn <>f<.«unties ar>is been welk est>ibli~I!<,errl!>t!! asser!, n«>r < iri < i < o«irol over k!ighway devell>, So!ii<1 Staies have lo»g- Stanust k omvt, Si,at» control over local t!oliftarr ter!ceof cities arid i.t>wnsI««st, be t>tire» i!!to !Icr i!rrt in tb<' for»I«lation o ar!y pubh< policy in tt it has delegate l t<>lolrn desigr!ad to red«ow r anI!ositior!.

«A nriiqueexample of this in >rai Aiis of «>nc;ft s%!>wliivh r>rovldei for theconstructiori of lowor rnodcrate income housiug tn citte and ivhich local rei rtctto>nha>nprr rurhconstruct!o» Should a localsoning hoard of op!>vale ile» v aiwi;n>t to au>ideui>eallecd low or moderate l»oon>eh< us!i>g a»veomn»» iity hi i>imirnumqmu>tlt!es vetch!!shed 1>y1he gi I >era>co>ir >sing > <>pei>leet>urn!!i. I'Or a CO>npletrSunin>ary Cfihe >rig»!etiOnaSee Ck!nr tnnira Of ircni- munityaf'ah>< >ie »i»rand»in, en>rim:».y of 27 ,Bepte>»her !oao. » Hre!Ma!sschnsrttv Genera! Law, ch, 12!A,dre!ing with thv e'er»hrshmrir of >nun!c!pal devr!»pmmit rv>rporatrcce. i>Ses a>i ect esto«!teh!nga State!a>>d dave!opn>ent agency a»hi»><' afro!ratc tie gener»!n>i>rr in «k!!>ai>il 11>20, ' See pad»dinglegialatiOn re!aO>edrir>!are»ient hOueing a>id tcn»nun!t> dCvelcprneiit rorpcratloi>irthi r in ch.11i of tins thesis!, Attother key 4<:tor in determi»llig Ii!<' appr'01!rlat '.<.'ore;sur 'sof urban grolvth and dPYP101!inf'ntbl'oilgllt. «hograt»iiig cail be I»0IP PA<' 'tivelytritPgr'steel> itn l FP / il the url»i i prnelttpro< ess. !pecifically, criteria for St

CHAI TFR 1 Xzvr CohrMUNITIKsAs PARToF A STATEURBAN GR JKTHPoIIOY

INTROlit>CTIOV The objectivesof this chapterar<,-. t! to offer defi»itionsof the vari>»s types of newc !rnmunltinsabi»it the feasibilityand desira- bility of developingnew comniunities as i!art of a,Slate iirban growth pohcy. Exactlywhat are new communities? Planners and devc]opcrs JH'er di8erentdefinitions. Most seetn to agreetliat a "complete"rommiinity isirr plied,b»t, some projects, not i»tended to be cnmpl<,te communities, hav<'!als >been dubbed new communitiiis.To c4rify niattrrs, tlie :>>ttt,.onalAssociath>n of HomeBgr!ixe tlire. categories !f ilevelopment,:clihsrers, pl>tuned i»iits, an<1new « >mnIerty,is i!lassifiedas a cry!ape s<>me institurioiiiil uses, tire ter!r»d plaiilieil uuit developments.The simple d ;fir!iti>!nthen fmmunity iisilabh!balttf!ce of o»e tt»otl!er.' Thi re arc a varin.' This is usiiallya, s il!'s g! »r li ;k, !ill lit tenlpt I 0 capitalix<' o» rtr! Ill«l'i:iisl»gl1 piipill!LI' tt'1'»1 ir! older t >help si..llliousilig in a mentwhich s<>metimes is a plan» 'dresi l<'ntialr<>mrn»nity that is, a prne»twhi<.l! in<1 <11!s 1'or fo ><1and i>tliir ever>i. merity resi lentialsiib- ilivisioritvhirtt ir!clurhs no provisirnnr!iniry facili t,ies. 7'Jtd>g >lated"new tnwn" or "nrw r>'ty" No areairr M assachuset,ls is s»%rip!rtlyisn«enters for t!n isolaterland q!»t<.in<]el> nilrntn< iv toit n or ci.;y to be possiblr. ' i'riir VOi'en."NeW TOWneOf the r>»n,D, '. Net noelAiet>rii>tiOO OfHO>iii 'B>«!des r mirl 1 mand l>eve!nip«rotDepartment!, 1!>67, m>men, page 4. Ai>even mori>»p> rili>' ileniiitioii is 1»iivideilby the Advisoryre«oui»sion mi interaovernii«i«>1 clat>ms:Neiv oi«rmonities are la f>e- iivnled velopiiie«tsronsti uc odunder single or nuii!oii management,fo!lowfns a fairly precrrc,iiiclusive phu!ai«l includingditto>vnt typo» o hoi>si«g,conuuercial si«1 cultural rscllltleit ai«3 ament teis«flic!i ro»erv»thi re»iden'lndnttry OrSre S «eaiiblctO iiiduott V. oiri r o her type»o employmentopporii>nities snd niay eveiirunllyncii>evi,i eoriiiil!rohie u>insure i> se!t-suticionry, With rev.exroptioiut new oommuniiiesunder develoinnrnr. today are withlri con>n>urn>g diets«ceof exfsttofin>inavis, "A riinand < ,'o«struotir>Sa Vc» «>n>m«nity." ln NewTowiuu proceed f«<ou»«redby the Delea arestate plaii- ning »>neil!, J>tlv1, IS>S>,pr>. id S4. I i ! 18

<"hre!fr eu!nfnur» for a.variety of industries «I«»3oK< es, so that a lligh proportio» of >vagcearners livi»g in the t<>!<»woulport»»ity t<>ll<>rk thele, I» addition, this type cf new community in«l»lninelcialfaciliti< s; housing of various types anil prices; some l!e Ilort«ttio»syslcm, This lefinitionimplies that the populatiollsire of a rclativcly self- s»%,t! !fa»!lff<ewcumin<»»ty, also, would Inclul>of.port»nitietown. It, io<>,woul»si»gvarie type anil i» price,'some cultural fa1'i Ine With !i mOre diVf tl!« facililics of th«relatively, «lf-sufficie new t >wn, but lies atro»« ties h >pcf»lly i»cludi»g rapid transit! with a» <> isting <'ity. It d<]>endson thc existing city for governmental functions and acryrn »topportunitils needed by il! i !!!ahit«n>ts. 7'hez>lanned Pxpaas>'r>n of an exr'stingtold>n, or gro!ry of towns, Exl>aisi<»l « ro»I!dsnlall cities, towns, <>ra group of tolv»s ca» be l>la!1»cs for a »I» .1! larg I th«n! th > Ori I>< i!loll!lnnlunitis -sofnc suhulha» areas ' >'ul 1> reco»structcdI «Lssatellite cwal and tl>e res»lting eco:1 >»! I : Il» l social cosl s, 77ce"neto totf>nbin town,," thro!bart redeeelopme»t.Harvey Pe!lofl' app»i«cntlywas the first to «lrticulateethe conuilding '»elv own» it> t<>w»" !»tiler the» urban rc»ewal projects wllich have »a»all, produced<»lly o»e or a fe<rice<1h<>»si»g, f

REC SKT PROPOsALS OALI INQ Fon THE DEVELoPMENT oF NEW COMICUNITIKS IN THE NEW ENGLhED hREA carol!osalsfor the development of nelv coin!»unities in Massachusetts and the rest of tho New England area,have cotne from several sources,' ~The ".SewSouthwest" lu Wash!r!e Of pr!Vale pbmn«nembere of the generaloourt, State agencies, prlva>tify, develop, r mod<1di monslr;itious of »r»iiii- ti<. in Xcw Fngland. These demonstrations >iik! >n«t iioiising nio the selected areas and will enipl>a.dge >hniunities within the fabri» of existing mclropolich I<'ou»datiot>it was reported that. A new community a e e in a suburi>un ar< a of Spri>nikar cases could be r>iade for the Bridg< por>, New Haven and Worcrstrr arras, and perh>>ps, onc wo other..' Sevrf'al legislative resolves have recently been intri>- hers of the gf neral court calling for an i>ivrstigation by a special f - fiiissi<>n relative to the establishment of Iiew coiiiriiunities i>i I»fassi>- rh>isetts.' 'J'hus, tber< is a signif»cant a»tonl,ialrole new communities f:ould l!lay i» l»eeti!ig so>ne <>fthe cu!T<.it neefls as Well aS antiCipatif>g many of the future needs of th< Commons ral th. In the past several E ropos>ELSto develop new coni- >nilnilirs in Massachi>sctts have briin intninull, »iodern toivns in s a means of providing a,uperior urha>i infraslriictiire, facilitier, and gerndingael.il<- mentS too Sn>all, too dilapidated, toO di r>cient in servic< ~ tO provid<, s. ha. < ff and development, There are nev' resort co>n>n>n>iti<.s,with snc:, .pri>igiug up with the boo>n in N w Kng!and's gieatest export inciii- ry-- recr<.ation and tourism. There are large-scaie >irlpi>i deve!opn>e»t p>ojec>s, serving mi-incoinefainilies< under construction in the suhur'lian citic: and tow>is >i> some of the more rapidly growing metropolitan areas of the region. There are detaili.d p>oposals to create new E>ed land i>Ethe hsrhors of sn>ni part for i>rhan poverty neighbor- hood 'efidei>ts, There is au elaborate d. owii econon>ic hase, fashioiied to give urban !>overly f>eighbo>'k>oodresidenl an op!>or,uuity for better jobs and a superior environment in a, ncw city to i>e k»iil< on the outer fringes of ai> expanding >net>opolitan area.' The suburban cities and towns of Xcw Knglanpolitan iircss m>nunitleeaddreSS sOme Cf the prOblcE»izatio»co»!i»ues'?

NEsi<»!will occur, but rather how, where, and when. it tvill occur.' Alth<>ugh s«»i< i Neo EnglandRegional Commission, Reeus C ! Ju!y >Ql<>,p,sz. < A!essnderOonz, et al. n¹w England'sUrhiu< Development: Emerging Patterns snd >aucz.' o>. IX, "Penuufaud Economic Bii guu:>- datsun!Jauuar y 1>O>,p, Zg. > Bill>uum>sf, spy>»g session, !!>fo oi the Massaohuset>aGenera! Court. i Gauz.op, el<.,p. 2. i ih rnspo>ueal of NewEhg>sud'e States sre n>ready i>i volved iu somestage oi' pin>ming pro>nnton, and dove>npmculcu>'a iuterregioinag>am olines o >f el>emotivepa«erne of urbangrowth emphas>uscommun>ties wit h nhigh deg>aeof selfwufI!eieurv, and ao>mnmodetenpn pre five n!le>ve>aud-ens, luoiuding two wh>ohlend>hennaty development. Vermont is aeiiveiyengaged iu p!soningfor uewru>a>u>mmies resort.commun>ii >inhc Dcpartm of Anish>«touahx of !'lsuphig npd I'rug>amCoordination, has the questionof >ii is, oi i co!io>nically spe<:islized ncwcominiiniLies might be built in oullyingrd certain argii..r>ei>tshave been road« in suppoi'Iof it few sue overwhe]ming orientation of i>ewcommunities has beenarid pro]!al!]ywi]l coiitinueto bc tow>!rdn!ctropolitan locati<>ris TvlIere t]>c Inajo> po]!ulati«>k gai»s arid t]if' ]!rlII!slyeconofri>c growth are takingl!ltlce. Hex>colninunlt><'s st;ir>art. of the ometro- l!o]ittn r<;tropo]itar!soci<]cliltural striicturc,its econoiiiy,its Lrat>s]>ort>ttio>!.sys cm, its o]!ensptic<' Bikd ]an<1 developn>ei!I patt< n>s, and Ihe full rrrea nuinbcr of iinportaiit, c<>1>omi<;consider>itioiis that netd Io be considerediii selectingsites for ne ho]!<1 it wi]1 be po!sib]<', to identify growth ]!k!i>its i!! c<»>u»ui!ilies ai«l:,iilrriiblic funwtli in ordg abj!u se]f-sustainingn>onieutu>n for l'u.t,l!redevi lop>rien];. 4 ~row]i>poir>t may bf <]cfin<.<]nsthi »uc]<.iisof sustsi>ic<]grow th frliarsof min]. are l>'unsruitte<]to otlur ]!]1klly the if>irT>ediatesiirr'oii>!;iybe thfit irn]!il]sesok>]<]liave <.or >nor< <-'C<'el<.'tIV>t>PS I]Tat. ]!RVe ShO!! n S>giiSOf S<>st>!»!<'.dgrOWt ]! OV<'r!i ]!e!io l of tim<, that couldbf. rcinfi!rect]ter, ai><] t]uit. rnih! c!t t]i in thernfir< ']tate, or foi'ii mki of it.' '- A ]eading l"I'ri>< h i,y]>r>lh'e«ioial 'growtl>-pol<"kis "a s<'tof e~]!fknr ingi!ifliistrirs locatedin !»!»rbannrciI a<>d in< ]iu]iiig f«rth<'I' <]cv< lopiru;nt of ecru><>>r!i<:«ctivit 1 l.]>D!ugl>OutitS ZO>>Cof i!ts, it is n<'cDust be saIisli«], T]is sc<]1'ls a ni><'l<'1la, Accori ling l i a st -!flrzkt H<~>, t]k<'.se potential growth poi>kts shoii]<] satisfy iiiig to t! soikrcrs of stnbi]ity', ! source'. Gf rci>tfo>'ccincut;anil 8! pkt]»oug]t.u I! r!O!t r co!to!i!y ul' th<' "c!sc!a<]are:< aud tu thr I! t!'t!Color Curntrtun l tv. K!r!t!toy>ne>!t,should E!ufree u 1'l!ronou aced . ea..ut>al fliictu; t!uu . l.xau!ldts uf it!dustricaor iaetit age rat< lf devclo]!<tin. vicinity. s Ran rt Olaile!One,"NmV TOWne ROle in Vrnan GrOWthI," fr !n! R!nrnn!ni T>aueinr,XX.111 lynnrto inaa!,pp. 2'!-hx, renr!nn 6 in "I r>>sni!i! Tewel >seklnehsnr> hiurrsy >rsnekneaht.,p hhr. Ol'-'P>i!nn" Preli>enI< anr>snd Pra!fram Ans>yea <;OOrdinatlenhof RconornOI!er for Mawsahueette'>!%l,p. h>. lo!rr>nv!!>e,"Pron!ence nf Re!sie!nrte' r: Kr>in!iunfh Un>verekt! I'rwei. >'5, p. 11. «hf!raiAm>st! Ali nex,"Be!riorrsl Grmvth pointv in KeanomiaI!eve>nprnr nl," EconomicDevelopment Hor>etiVn, S ter !!e. 21 ~! hj'reinforce!»er>r. Tn jgrow hpoint thecorn- >»»nityor areashould possess additioi>al sources of sirength.Hulierior mcnris of conimiinication,a major highway p«ssii>gthrough the area, «n ii>tersectioi>of i>it rstst ' highway!,and toll road;, f>nancialinstituational and cul- >ural attractions,a good public schoolsysten<, freight, tcrmir>als, available land forindustrial parks, and many other factors provide reinforceirierit to the growth poi>t. Tiretradiiional locational cori. idcrations, such as avaib>E>ilityof raw»ra- >.erjals,»earn<>. s io markets,access tn skilhd labor,snd «ggb!rn sg.s d ahigher than averagepotential for gr < nf!fjir<'eeBhr< Therelb.-- .1>ould be sonicpote»rial in ihe area for a major breakrhro >ghinti iri the voliiiue of total opportiiniticsrniist occurif sshii> in the area>nay be the crucialvariable herc, Each growth poi!it n»ist be -stingpnsi ionnf rhc cor>i>»unity ai!dto attainmaxirbilityand imniedi itr poesibiiiriesfor expansion,i. rather important.Progr<, s at thc grosth poi>itmay inspireconf>dence within lie regin» and»i<>tivatcsiirrounding areas to hii!lic;i,i1initia'ceto>is>biolead '.rsin business,lii'ofea io>>i>i, >»nuriity circles seer iste hc rnr!lement >tie<>of programs of devclopmeiit. I i theory,a r<.gion»1cconornic gro«lp»rpnsr. Tt -lio ild crriitc thc i»fr»arr»et»refor on«olid:iti»gi>sr fron> whi h th .'pbiri for s»st»i>d idcv repiner>t;:>jse,ii, should i!c integr«rcd with sm!lj r ci i 's in h» r<'>,"iontii!ch th pj«>is for concrpt of a growtEic ;i>trr<>r a grovtlt to d .fine,of aii optirni>rusize I!ri> fu<:rior!a>i<1 1«ij»latiorrcent< r at >vhichmaxim»m are an< external <'conomies>vitlrout in »rring .orious disccononiicsof agglorrtcraii<»!.'4 Groivih points have a criti< >il mini>numsize whi h l>er:nitsscale c oirornics>tnment over thc growth area as u,n iE n t ies < cc.ir. ~newc<>mrnur>ities as gro!vth poinis;ir gue.fgoconotuic rearurces at certaitrkoy locationsratlier than sprea lingthem thinly over a !vholr. region. This caserests upon spatial difrcr<>irtiation in rree chttngothe lo»divisibilit>rodui.iio>i plants arid iri public invi stmei>i.projects, scale econ<>niies in >r>ar>ufacturing, "central sro- rnics of intcrir>d»stryliukrtgos. But tho gro!vti>lioirii, cor>rept, ]!arl.i<'»Earlyi.ts justa>cation as a, 1!olicy totlresisthat ccritersof agglo>nrralion havozoiies of indiHeret>ce aroundthen< an that incor>i wilt> be rriaximizerlir> the gro!vth areas as a tratir>gdevel<>pmcnt ut tire growtE> poi>it. This is t}>e argurni:iit, usx structur<,purposes at tE>i «ro!vth E>oii>titself. The exist ;iice «tE poiiil v-coinniunity rr»isl ii>volvo a certain degreeof structiircd inihalariceover th<',roiinityn>cans, am»rig oi,lier things, a, new in lustrial complex, the>i this ornplrx !vill bc hi>tratcdin or around the growth point, itself. The growth ln>int phil<>sop1!yis tin>i, s»ch areasare boiirnl ti> sii>g>i»tef>areeai<, rle. Sec«!idly, the key industries emphasized i i growtli l!«i!it lis- cr ssinns are, since.their fun tion is tn ai celerate grn!vth withi» th regior!, probably export industries i.c., in lustri s serving ir>.l,iori»Irr>« th point, will, in tir!!e>service its surrnu»di»g area 1!y providing tE>cpopulation of tliat sr s»1>pli<'s >f g nds <>rrart»ieiit stores nr spef la«yers a»d acco»>!tant~,or crertsinir!cnt an l leisiire facilities; puE>lic services tEiat len l tl.emselv noniicgrowtli. In regi n!s !vitE! a sl!w growtEirecor'<1, onc nf tire «bjo<..tivcsof in!porting aii advanc ' l 1clngi 'alin liistrial ;nmpl 'x to th<' mowth point is t« trans- fnrr» sA Iii .ur»iiiary, aggloiiieration ecriiifscale iri the s >pl!ly <>f urban s«E!»latintE>real»>ld ! for viability, and population cxparisio» itself «ill clust r ai »iid certaiii focal points. The operatini! nf »ai'ket fi!trai!sportablefa< ilirahletnl>nlogiciil features, Th< s< gr<>wthcenter~ hi v< in'» rr- tial off<',cts«ti activity in thc rcgi >n !vh !r' they are locat<'d. Their nmay livert a< tivity from peril>lioral><<< as which rnav lo..e popiili tion and fail to gain a proportionate share nf :spital a»efitis will iiiclud<: Provision of employment for the znr!~.'s pnpiilatio» i!»d mark ts 1'pr t-supplya»d primary ii!<1 rstri=. Th assurnptin»E!cliiiid g".orth point analysi'i ils a pl ' lining >i that, 1!r«v 's 2>r«fitablc for th private investor and «»trnpr ;ue rr a.sn r suits iii b<>n<'6tst«s<><;iety as i. wliol<; . 425. 23

!ei!se t]rat t]ie regin i is heir< r nfl' L]iaii if e<:unuiniciarse ]!.This assumpti<»>i! nloi rca!nnahl<. if we r . >gnize that t]iere are ]irnits to tti< biiil «1> > ui>>i>ill ill Sl/V bey»Hi] W]rivh il< t rom>os Vlllerge,

NK'Y GOMMLINiTJES AND THE PLA.XNED E!CPAXSION OF FiXLSTING TO>VXS 'I'his tlu>sis is :un ;crned Wil h»stri r !gies fur creatirig rulatiye]y s-s»Nvirr>t, new it]y SparSelydev 1Ope]ita>i iirban regiOn! ln ] Wr'ili Str'8Legle!ful' t]ie ',I'eil,'t,ioiiut II 'AVCo!i>>»lliirtlus thr !ligh flit; 1!]ernie } 'XpansiOI> >f ixist,ing t !Wns <>i»thvp >tin sis. In 3 Ia!sa<;hiisvits ihe two >piion! rriay in fact b«. >n an l t,tl<'.!>>>ni'. irl :v,a]1 la>ill ii> I h<'t. Orrlnio>1- lV< i]th is i»COrpOrrit One >f:351 rdtOW»S, than a r>V!r Curl>rr>>IIiity leye]OpVd anyW]u!re in rhe, 3LIari!i<>nof ari existing <>ity !r town. 'I'hvrv is aiioih<'r fiase where a ne>v cuinrnuiiity c>iri be 6<'v ',loped!iitlrirr or ar>g t AVI>S,] .LCrOssth<. %tat<. th ;rear<> Ov»r 15>0 tOWn! With a popiilatiOnOf li '!.">]iari 6,000 pe<>]>1<, Drily cities]i;ive ii ]Iuf 50,000or u«!re p oplv. So th«'. r >atior>of nvw ; <;<>1>1]y alt !r i,he, pu]!ulaiiun dis- tiil>I>ti<>nt]iroiighoiit ih State in a Sig>rifi >arriWI>y. 4 t»Wn that gr »VS 'I"«n>1 , s thai> f3,000p <>pl tn an I'stin>ai ' I 50,000 people Over a periud i>f ruiighly 15 y :areevil] urrduubted]ybe c]iar>qedsuhstantia]]y; !u ln< 'h s > that, t]r plalrnvf] vxpan!ron of exi!ting to>vris in .VIassa- ;hiisnOf mCtrOpu]itai> C«nu»iiC. aCtiyitifin iio th '! cent .rs will l>e]p t s s >]v ' IIiat>v»rbaii pr<>bleins. I']Ie ley '1 >prllerlt Of rieW Cur>i>>I»i>itis! Wi]1 nhan .< the « ' >rl >rlilv <1 ";viol!rrieiit,of eiitir< m ;iro]><>lii,anr'Iig rlleorll 's p 'I' 'apittr 1 !r >ntrle regiOI!,.', thi>S .'.>lhancrrlgLhe 1>u.!<]>ssirip]> thv, arose aud uli.ii»ai,elyof i.]>e>tate. execu>rv ' thr. level of 1>rudi>ciivity pv: worker 1!y fa ;ilitatiiig Lh< Ii < «f m !rv highly prod«ctivv nlei]>i d.' of ]!rod»it> >li. Thll'<1, Il w zrl n ;w «>rnrriimities w>11help cr<.atea mOre pOSitive attiti> !uLthC Coin- r» i>iwf higher wages arid a higher sta iidiir l of livi»g." 'I']re <1 !velol>mentof new communities as grorvth ca that ar< intr grat .<1With thv tranepOrtation and Coin»>unieatiO>ri>etW»rk of a nlctix>p<>]itanurea makes a great dea] of se»se," One I!roposal which " ibid., p.427, Md.,eh., >II, "The SirePolicy." '> vrrfvofor Zli area«nitie, r hr<»>g1> 1 heexpansio» of existir!gtowns on th<,fringes nf <»ir!netropolitar! an',as is base<>n the i ss >mption that: t'»hii!al or !>ol,!!i < e<>aor>!ice to prod«rer 1 xi i>i>tow»,:1 wilt> !!»»ir>«>roof <.>,terr!> !ecor>oruie< l of eo»goetior!.r' As1!art of Eho1!r'oig; iiit»tion bc drv .lol:ed thr<»igh iihich ii orkers living in epr11db . git!ir'ant<.'ed!iew vH1$>loy!I>p»iop}!or'ti! intr<'s. Ir! thc past< itypla»r!errs h >v te»El. I 1eril!heri. of a rieiicomer«nity in ordc!t >prtl>e fitt irgl!t of s«burban sprawl!. ' Tl!ish> s let neiv i <>rr!n!«r!ities»>ustbephysically div<>reedfr<>n< other set tk ments. As a. res«ilt, many develop havere lirnitoi! lund» or ni! t iralareas beiotu] the frir!ge of subirrbar!developmcrit. For several reasons, this appr<>a<1!has been «nnecessarily exp<»!siv< an<1 has pln ho«sing ai!d jobs in thei>ew comn>»nity ivould1>e available. Xeiv corz!muniiies <.O»eeived and consrru !iedas exter!si ofir!s existing set tlernents ar>d as integral parts of already well-i>centrute oii t1>oexpa>isior! of «xi!ting subnrbai! « »»»!i!r!itic, «r i.hucr'<>>lier th>!«I>ell- tir ily new,physically iso1ated r!ew « !r!!mii»iiies, Tl!c firet reasonhas t<>do with the fa< t that,lar!d I<>rated sr a dist!«tcf!om !d ii<»>t,i! us«ally >na 1th«!d is r«ores»ite for ncii c<>r»ro»!ity lev l !p»rent,becaiisc of its 1iv ,ver.,tl!e,ex- po!ier>c< of all 1>rrge-so!d<.deveh!per! to di sshi>r[i>1>i>rcih>>se pr'rcf>of la»drs >r$ri sr»«1!1!er< »tage <>f tlu final salepri e oncthe li>»d l!as been f»lly ur!pr<>ve !rr<'! I«,1 p>ir < lyin «'',on<9!ic terr»!!thai lar!<1.clos t<>' 01> cxbslrt>g settlc!»er>t w>ll be >r>ore caily s lvi tl !h>bl<' 1!lfr>r- str«ct u< .A!i<>ther 'c<>no!»i<; arg»m<»t siipl!<>ri in<> the loserloci>1 ion rests on th» fact that- la>«1valu< s ar> tlie <1her < lose t<>< xisting1>m r!rs.'1'h«s 4«ving la«d at a <1»ser l<><»!ion, it, ivill h possibl><> ' r»a!'lE, t thc lrousi!igle of d v ,lope<4laiid at a fast»r.rat ! t1!ar!woule 1><»sible <>t, a more r r«~ o '!atio».'I''hi. wo«l 1 helpt< .li>nir!r!$ !u> !!y!fth< lri l!fro«t- < nd«o! ts that curr<'ntlyplague privat«', h vclops r a«dr ducethe time >f<.,xp<>sur bcf<>re ' a p<>sitive<>ash fl nv i! achi v«.1."-' Anniher set of argume«tsfor scl cting!>eiv commrinity !ites that are cxte>sions of exislingsettlements is basedo» the l!elieftliat new corrunur.ities should be plannedivii bin a ! <.gion!>1fr>rrnc>< ork and m «stdi rect!i address t1!cmsclves to theopport «»itic>r for uplifting theecor omy of 4ggir>gareas. By locating«lose to anexisting area, .>1>or», Grecr> Ile! '! i>d>r»>>0. pp.Ric!;», e 12."r<-,ow Tow<>e neve!op!»e!>! o»d »e '1'bro" r<>Le»i! Zcoco>nice, a new con!rnurtity can offer r!etvjobs aud liousirig f<>irf existing to!pris >vill liell> tlio rl<'wc >ruin»nit@tleveh!pvr ov rvomemany of the "roblemsthat have.haiirited severlil dev< lopments in tirepast. Imi!alancvsin the initial attractionof eith r jobs or residentlv t > attract ho>»eh»yvrs»f!tiI thrro are jobs vill be some vh»s,a»tII~- mal>le io provic.ef !r the initial rrr>r»urrityarv alrviidy available.This tvi11help to cut tl!e dvse» iv institir- tiorls accordingto morc ir in vfrysthfr buildilig nett v<>mmuriitiin s ol>vn riiral are>ts1><'lirl oii the assumptioiithai ihv differvnr bvt» « » rriaigin!ridinargirial c great ,rtllari iii rxisrirlgurbari areas, I» fss ]!r<>is." Xev co»imuriii.ivsin nietropolitanareas can hv drsignvdto tak ' advantageof ! thcezistirig cmlo vmvnt ol!poroi< iil.ial, H! th< >tv>f existi»gpht-sicaI an l socialinfrastriictur<, ! tr'a»sportationaccess t >a v:triciv of irrblin arid siiburban ccriters,! tl>eobvious «cfscale ivliich a :vrrrniti conc< pt togr<>i .thceliters in metr >I!olitar!areas vhcre rieiv urban gainsi r<>likely t<> improve thc <>1 erall pattern of iirhari <1pm 'e irg.R»tlier thiii comI!vtirlg!t iili vvr!iral L]»>ref!, »v!v <;onlrlllrr>itivs!v »rid coniple»1cntan<1 rvlate t<>i,liv central citv."" The fviisihility <>f»»rid cornmi»iity lvI><.» onIs tlu'ee gen1measiii v,ol' thc legrvvt<> ivhicll thr proI! >s«'I rtatio»an<1 comrrr<>ni urtio»ncttvork <>fthe rrrelrol>olitaii regiori, Availability rellites to tl»; possibilitvnf assem- blinga sit<;it,a, c<>ml>vtitive prier ith friar!tlgeabl< fir!a>!cingr. Dp- iibilrti' deals!vrth the gpologrcalsurtirbrirty of a site aridw closvlyrvlaicd trr!d-fIII tech»i Iucs, bridge,l»rilding capabilitiAlo«vhatAre Nror Tofttee on urban KoonooT, r.a!, Table Vr: hyliotlie»oaleon riseg6 X>w tl are>ts tvould 2>r<>bably»ot st rv:. to htim1»i!i»i iity tvliich sreks to dchi .vr. a si!lc wi result in low'orcapital !>r uuctiori. ' Fror!r the !>oiiit of view of rrrakiftg >1successful pul>li<, ii>vestm>»!t it w<>u!d bc mod!, s<'»sible, to biiil l r>ctv cor»rriunities in n>!polit<1>r areas whir>iw <>nn<>iglibcuiiig anil sur- r<>uidirig settler!re!!ts f<>ra substaiitial !>ai't of their cc<>noniicbase, ttrrd i»fr>>structurecsprcially 1!fwofr!d the iriitial ctf]>it>diiiv stn!crit i» a»ew cornniuriity ir»trr oiitl ving r>frat locatioii have to b< m»ch greater sin<:etli< rc wouleaistirrg infrastructure anil job bitsc f <>dra!v orr!, but tlic opcrttting <."~>eriess XVOifld al!Vayu b<'. «roat<>rsinCe arrow COriirnuriity iri ari Outlying »n:i wo«!rtsipolitaii iiie«s an probably morc likely to sire<>td bccu»sc of thc. immediate >«cessibiliry of ezisLir>gsettlorncrits; sitlioiigh otl«r clitFicu!ties drier, ii' sf»g-rime rr ide»ts are resistant to new liirg>-scah devrlopnieiit which seems t<>threaten their style of lifo >iiid the pon.These political is ure fully iii < hapf i i Ill.

NEw coMMuNITIES As AN ALTEBNATIk E To Su»IIBBAN SPBAQ I. 1t is oft argued t!rat th<1r !frrg>-scale plan>red urban growth will li< lp to av<>ida rcpliolitislkaniaati<>ri, arid rnufri oripor't Uility f<>r t lic developrr!ent of coinpletr ly or gafrixed ciiviroiimciits tt ith thc m<>st,cKcient, least tvdsieful i SCs Of lar«l and th<1 1»Ost > suitable pruvidiOn Of publiC services arid fa!gained by plannirig for urban grou th include: 1. Lotvcr p<;r capita ststo th< rcsidrrrt becsu..e of the a rmics of scale!." 2. The optimum deva«r >t>r l»ster developmc»t within the ucdv coillfnrlliit V. '3. Maxim»In choice nf housirig for a fii!l range of incor >eand rfteCr>t«tices." 4. A comprehcrisrve transportation system i!ot only for internal circiilatio» but ft!so for travel to larger urban ceriters and outlying e<>fnf!runiliesthrough comprehensive plit»niri. -' AIsnso, ot>. oit. ' f!i>ns>d<.sn>y, ed. "'1'h»Ne» Cft>r"fThe Natio>esiCo>nnuttee on >'risen lrow>h, policy r>uhlfsf>ed Ur»s,>Anurit~, rnc., hy 1'rederickA. p>seger.vcw York!. 1!>6'>o> "N>e>rTowns A.Now nr>sanen>fan>" Int> r>s>tfo>ud CI>y Manag» S A»mclatfnu,Ch>S>to, IU>>ff. ' W 1nH. Wh>%e,"Cfuetei l!e>refapment"liamH Wh>M,"The Last Landscape' Vew York, V.V.. »oui>lcdak!,>M>. ">Ti>fa is not to eaythat newoon>emu>itf>u canf>ro>rfde a rsn>n of hou>lugop«ortunl tree without gocern- n.>n> -uhxi>iy,hecauea they c»» .»ot.See >!I,», sucker>nsn. "Rurhon Re»o>t,' »>ci>s>odg» Proeideu't >ol»>e»>'STa~k Furor>n> Vna <'on>n>unit}cc,for<>, fsr S full >I>C>un>On Ofmeoluu>ieo>e far financing 1OW- sn1 >»iddle-fnorukho>tefng in new>n>u>nunreheterogeneo development fs of ftuburbanareas." Existingpatterns of urbangrowth ILud development are conditioned by an interrelatedset of publicand privatedecisions. "While the privatf;market by andlarge sets the tone, scale and pace of develop- ment, publicactions directly or indirectlyaffect, influence, and struc- ture tile shapeof development,"Thus,' a, critique of presenturban lev 'lo.>mentpatterns must take into accoullt the full rangeof political anfI ec >nomic forces at work. Whatare the specificconsequences of urban sprawl or unplanned urbftn mowth? It has been shown that " 1, A sprawledor rliscontinuoussub trban levelopmentismore costly an lleis efficient than a morecomps.ct yne, each at thesame density tvithin settledareas. Many costsdepend on maximum distanceor maxi- mum area;if thesewere reduced, costs would be lower per capitaor per fan>ily served. 2. Sl>rawlwastes land sincethe interveninglands are typically not used for any purpose." 3. Sprawlencourages land speculationwhich is unproductive, absorb,scapital, mttnpowerand entrepreneurialskill without com- menamate public gains. It destroysor impairs economiccalculations titttt ideallylead to lnaximumgeneral welfare, 4. It is inpfIuitabl tox allowa systemin whichthe newland occupier is requiredto shouldersuch a heavvburden of capitalcharges and debt mainly for site costs costs whfchin largepart are unllecessary and unavoidable. Most of the problemsof sprawlrelate to density.Since there are fewerhouses per acre in thesuburbs than ill thecity, it followsthat, with respectto infrastucture,there are fewer requirements per family for infrastructurein the city thanin the subttrbs,Thus, if the suburbs coulxlb edeveloped a,thigher, more urban densities, less moneyjfamily would jtave to be devotedto infrastructure costs." This assertionwas recentlygiven some support in a studyundertaken for FairfaxCounty, Va., wIich demonstratedthat an expenditureof $20million for sewers couldsupport a newcommunity populati >nof 465,000people twice as manypeople as undersprawl conditions. These savings accrue for other i!tfrastructureitems, such as streets:For examplea Baltimore studyindicated that a newcommunity development mayrequire up to 200fewer miles of streets a savingsapproachiItg $800 million. ' » SeeHe bertQaue, People and Ptsue, "Homogeneity versus He~ity" NewYork, N.Y.: Bade Books!,l Nx. sxKsplao, op, clf, p. 3. n kfartouClswson "Urban Sprawl snd speculation in Suburban Land," Land Econox fevetopmeutHarvey eud atClark ]cw are densities. often cited Whiteto showsprawl that does»xeuxsprawl worksto have etfeotively tbte ef toectthe withhold wasteful laud sprsvrlfrom xneutpatterby« ismoaue h sphseto create lxnprovementeland banks or orXo channelby offering suburban incentives de veto taxp- Sbaiementx,eto.! tc privatedeVelcpere WOuld haVe the earns efIeet but WOuld be elally bold loudo5 the market!snd roturnlt to the publiceoaere. » Ctttete xtly at

57- 248 71 8 Ir! many cases a city dweller in his Sight to the suburbs may build his housem the middle of a vacant 1 acre lot, In doing this, he will hnv t untvittingly insured greater infr >structure costs for hiroself if the suburban development becomes sufficiently urban to require a central sewer system. %ilbur Thompson describes these hidden costs: Then, what was gracious living on ex-urban lots becomessub>trban sprawl, too c.cnscly populated to be rural and too sparsely populated to be efficiently urban, and property taxce riso to "confiscatory" l >vela. For example, an assessment of $2 000 per acre for a storm drain trunk line cornea to a st rggerirtg 14 p trcent of the value of a $1$>,000 home, with laterals u.nd catch basins still to come and eanit, try sewers to follow.» In sd lition to thc advantagos listed ubove, r>ew communities if Governmeirt controlled and subsidized to some extent hold out the pros:rectof I! increasingthe housing supply for low- sud moderate- inco-riepeople u hilo reducing the costsof infrasi.ructuro,services, arid facihties and ! maximizing the employment potentia'l of low- and moderate-income workers. It has beer> pointed out that new com- munities can provide rinique opportunities for the construction of larg . quttutitiCS Of noiv hOueing at mOderste priCee: Thc ecorromies of producing housing on a large scale in a single area reduce the cost considerably. Thc large-staged mark will errable brrfldms to organize their time ar>d work eKcierrtly... and perhal>s, of even greater signiiicun e, aru tire possibiiities of experimenting with new t chnology in housir>gproduction; technologiesthat many large and exceediu dycompetertt corpora4ionshave beer> irrvestigutir>g and which they are eagerto put into practice. it is also possiblethat, the volurr>c of housing production irr new communities could free runny existitag subul ban units for purchrnseby moderate inccernepeople.» In addition, new coll>munity develop>ra;ntmsy help to solve several other prohkms assoeiatodwith provi ling sufhcient housing for all groups of }>c >pie.ge First, new sourcesof investment funds so>treesoutside the traditional ct>piial market can be tapped. Second, new cornnuuti ,ics can solve the problenis of site assenrbly that so often frustrate housing errtrepreneurs iu alresdy deveioped areas. 'I'hird, they can provide land for hor>sir>gdevelop>pe>it at substantially lo~er costs per acre throrrgh targe lot acquisition! and if, is sharply rising cos s of land that has priced many builders out of thr market; this is especially trne of th . small builder, the characteristic unit of production in the industry. For new COnu»unliieeCan providO a continuing supply of hOusingSi egfOr Sr>tailererttre- preu urs at rates far below the $2$0,000por >sorepaid for slum buildings to be razed in renewal areas or far out land that has risen iu vsjue as much as 2,000 percent,ir> rs,pidly expanding urban cerrters.»e Atrothcr, and perhapsmore importairt, r>rgumcntmade in favor of new community developmentis that larg -scaleplanned urban ~vowll> can .nsurc iovv and moderato income fantili s especially black families which have been.conSned to the i incr r ity ghetto! a better opp tr- t«ni y o secure jobs and to arhi >ve lrpward econornir m >biliiy. Acc irdirrg to the U.8. GcnsusHtrrcau only 6 percent of black Ame!i- cans live in the suburbs. Yet> suburbia is where nearly 80 percerlt of tire Na.tion's rlew jobs are. During the 1960's,industries in increasillg r' Wllbur Thompson,"A prefaceto Urban Economtcs" Balttruore: Johns Hop>dns Press!, 1908, pp, zr j-3R:. w rr;Sv,oo. Oit.The basicdifriourtleSOf building lnduetrlslleed hOusing prcrnming the pmduetlonteola no!ogycan be nrasteved!ero "making a nmrkct"ror new apptiuuicuS, traueporting snd stockingstandard partsr nd ptecse,iu>d restrictive building regulations. » AIOertEa s, "LOWerRent COSt Vet SOCbuQatar Thrvugh NSW TOWne," "Land ECOnOndCS,"lee>. r>Ht rr, op, rlt., p. 5. 29 nsion outward refnain inacc>ssible to blackstrapped in th<"inner city,~ ,>neral solutions to the"core-ring" irtner city-suburban! disparity in joks a»dindustrial growth have beef< propos«d. Soma suburbanties advo ateiinproving the transportationsystem between iirban ghettos in th<.inn<.r city andsuburban if>due>trt. This strategy lifts failesitive rest>its.~ Some politt<:iaiis anil manyblacks favor movi»gindiistry backinto the inner city." This schemealso has its drawbacks,and although the prol>jem <>f providing jobs f<>r inner city resid ntscan possibly be handleJ>ercity propertyto makeit mora.attractive for indiistrialdevelopment, a prefeiable lnr>g-rim solution would involve, a majordispersal of tlie loulation,particularly blacks." Atte»ipts to "open" tlie siiburbsto iirbanblacks have been iinsuccessftil, First,, ven thouglt 200>000miden t<>blacks. But while the l<'ad<'ralGoverf>ment aiid 27 State» ininatioft laws <»t the b<><>ks, they are <>fief>unenforced.' Another ol>stacla to openingup tlie siiburosis thateach Jriunicipa.lily has f.k>< power to blockiuty increase in ils low->tttd rniddle-if>come l>opult.i,i<>r> blathroiiglt refraiiiifigfrofn taking the positive steps <>f public interest and siibsltly necessaryto producemoewh<>i sing.Altltough at- tempt' arecurrently being made to l>reakdown tha cxcliisionary tactics of existingsuburbs, the chancesof signific>tntbreakthroughs do iiot seemparticularly promising." The onestrategy, howev r,tvhich d<>cb soffer a greatdeal of promi;e is tha buildiiig of intilies.Jolui liain poi»ta out that Ever.in theface of continuingprasatiun<>f the Negrocan still continueapace. The 1>rrsc>tceof Negro sin th<.aui>urbs doesnct necessarilyimply Negrointegratiohite n sidentialncigi!borhoods. Subtony>overcome if they vanaugmented by smaller diapers<.dNegro cofnmunitiea.8 f>ioyn>entopportunit>es atiribu:able to the geugrat>hyof tho ghetto.Similarly, thc roducedpressure oti the central city housing <»arkuiawould itnl>rove<.he. prop>ecto for the reviddleincou>e neighborhoods through the operationsof the private market.+ " n'ith Ihcnew kinds ofgoods a«g produced in niw rowthii«lustriesand wia«t cribirla inoxin riar>cets are t>ooonii «aless impoan amenitiep-good wsstean,sciihxir- tant.Lan 1 costshave driven the ncw meehan>aces b» h ~s«1>nrl>s «mlelsewhere, but those «rc the very ndr ~triesoffering tbc greatestpotential source of '.olefor sr«i>s><11>edti r- statehig'i>ways vstc>u hss unarseu branarcs h omth» rf« i ofa circumferentialidge>vsv in an>orbn the conrcsted hub of a metmpouea. Sub>fc Pnlicicsservicesfsr~tief uru>ccities Orewth," scour«ac p.indr>st< fa.l y toreiocatc urharI arras, Ac>ft Crl>a«aud RuralAnes>c». winter»John to<'9.f sfnand a arri«perxty, "Alternative to theOui>dec iic interest," Vi>, 14, a <>aregJol: emir Review, .>senary-Fear«Oat>, pp. au4th <'ih e J. >w>a. A>so sw . fora summarynf io1>cn'ation strstr gtex. "proposal for TTrban Developgrading," Lalxn story for Environfaux., <1t»fcinterest." «>The <,'.a Justice t>efxuses vcwou iaaf rhosecases " P «><>ac h>%Vasrehcsuptb>sto testthe ieacnitga< dhcr>nunoesfor rise.'9 Tho three major goals of a new community' dovelopmont program shouhl be {1! to maximize regional productivity {by attracting pri vai e capital investment through increased e%ciency!; {2! to mininiize public expendituresfor capital improvementsand services, {3! to maximize advancement opportunIties for disadvantaged groups. Although the economicevidence is not conclusive,it would seeui that these three goals are potentially realizable through the dovohipmentof new communiticsbecause new communitiesallow for a p.ester degreeof public coordinationand control over the shape and pattern of urban development,allnw for economiesof scale in public expenditures,aud allow for increasedlabor mobility by aggre- sting new industrial and commercialdevelopment. 111 addition, ecausenew communities are typically built at a higher density thon typical sprawleddevelopments, they insure economiesof scalein housi.igsud infrastructuredevelopment,, thoy reducetho numberof milesot' public highways and roads neeIled to link settlements,and the o8er advantagesto now industry through agglomeration, lack new communities are only vaiiant of the new community idea. The basic point is ths.t new communities whether iritegrated or blltckrun o8er a widerange of opportunitiesfor low- and middle- inconiepeople because of the econonuesof scale,the possibilitiesof increased housing production, the linking of job possibilities with new urban development, and most, iinportant the potential for pohticallyfeasible direct actionand massivesubsidy by higherlevels of go adornment. .Vowcornmunitios, developed under the guidelinesof a Slate urban gro14.h policy, couldprovide the housingfor low- andmiddle-incoino peop.e withinclose range of jobscreated by industrialrolocation in tho suburbs.The State governmenthas a residueof as yet, undorutilized powersto inhuencetho growth and structureof urban areas.Pro- gramingand developmentof public facilitiescsn createan envelope within which more ofhciont and Inore equitable patterns of urban growth and developmentcan take place.The timing, location,and scopeof public investmentdecisions inliuence, if not control, the phvs.calform of the region.New communitydevelopment seems to hold out a veryreal alternativeto urbansprawl, an alternativewhich is de ected at helping to meet the critical housing shortage and, at ~ Pinto4 Oslanty,"Bleak NeW ToWne," Pregreeelye Arebiteoture, August 1999, pp. 196-131. Arneld Behuebter,"White POWer/BierkFreednru" Beaten,Beams PreSS!, l963, eh. VII, AIeOeee piannee FOrEqual OppOrturdty peeltteu paper On NeW Cernrnnnltlee, protested at the AmericanSOOiety ol Plsn1irut 001eisle Cou/erenoe, New Yerk, Aprll 1970. helpirigl<>w- aud rnidvorsimpfify tho irripact of new communitiesby disrogarding the development's effectson surrouridingareas. Strategically located»ew communities ran hr,vea significant impact on existing central city areasthrough tho filtorir>yprocess in housing,thc attraction of ricw employment opportunities to the r<>gion,and tho dovelopmont of lirototypical soluticns arid technologiesthat, can be applied ili the inner city. Crit OiomNO. 8: Pub>l>'Cfun& mOuldonly gO tO Adolf>finarroe poor r'9>oe9tricertts.--To thc privatedeveloper a "good"investment is ono tl>aL1>roduces a high rote of return in relation to the degr<.oof risk! during the developmer>tperiod which in the caseof new communiti<;s »lay be aliyWhere frcm 10 20 yearS. The suCCeSSOf tho prOjeCt after that point is of little concern except in .oii«rseof tho continual costs that must, be b<>mei» the provision of public sorvices and facilities. Frequently public invcstrnenis are made f<>r their long-riiugc or secondary effects rather than their short-lango viability. If a public commitmont to build new com- rnuliit.OSCari lead tO tho preVentionOf a iiiajOrt>'ar>sj>O<'taiiO» CriSiS in our central cities, thon the decision would be justihod iri the eyes of a public agoncy or aiiihority, even if the irivestrncni, would be viewed as a poor ono in the short run by a private dovelcifrm.Vo. 8: ¹I> comm«9ritalt'al objecti,es, Privately developed»ew cornniunii,ios there hav< riot beeii rnry publicly developed new cori>frviding low-iricoino h<>iisir.g,increasing the job base izir>gopen spsco! only in so far us these goals coincide v ith the private de- veloper's objective of making as 1>igha profit as possible on his inv< stmont. Several new communities have been able tublic<>peii space thr<>ilgh careful plan«in<, to incroasetb» cniploy- roent base in the area, as well as t<>in>prove she educatiorial arid ciili«ral facilities. But these aro <>ftonir»proved liy sacr»finingother eq«eho»sirrg, greiiter incdinnovations in h<>L>sir>gand triir>sport tech- riologi . Clearly the privoto dovelopcris «nil,io provide only tvhat, ttif1 be tnarketable rrtrr>unitiesas bc<>I>ableof achievir>g social goals. On dr«corrtrary, it ruerely indi- cate; that the private market as it is c»rronily structured is not cap<>hieof niaximizing the broad rarigo of social go<>isthai, could be achietcd through increasedpublic irivolvemerlt,. Th< private comrmrnity buihlers hsve traditior>ally begun their irrvoh el»crit with tho purchase or prior ownershil>!of large parcelsof land. Theti they have c<>ntinuedto plan their riew eomniunity giveti t.he cor>strltints of thc market, their finar>rial <:>tpabihtios,and local p'oter> unental regulstio>ls on landu e.There are two critical probl< nrs inheryt, 1>e<;atrscthe devel<>perfails to clarify the goals of now ot>mrr>unitydov<3opmcnt a The<>rasa>ftlss i<isa r>sva>apmsat Csthe a>ss. ovr< atssvr< srp<>b>re efforts ia tbsU<>itsd states ia b<»rdasw satamuhitiss ass Mary M<>r>srroh <>f a Newcsmmaar sf Ls«troa, May 1969,pp, r<5-495. through careful plarniingbefore he purchasesthe land, he is frequently' forced to make many sacrifices to meet the political, financial, and social! constraints imposod on his site," '1'he developer frequently' fiinds that the final purchase price for the land is the critical factor in deternuning what types of uses and what types of densities will be possib.e regardless of what he might think is most appropriate. '1'he second problem with the land-first approach is its failure to compl<:ment the needs and growth potential of the entire region, The rivat> developer is, essentially, given the right to determine the uture growth pattern for the region in which he selects his site. His decision to build is based primarily on tile anticipated rr»trketability of the site and the ability of the surrounding area to service his project and p.'ovide the lovel of faci!ities he requires. He is genorally not conymeut and valuable cultural activities it will attract away frOm areaS of greater riced within the regiOn; and 8. The changes in priorities in regi<>naland State, appropria- ti<>nsof funds that will be required to provide the cr>mmuriity w.th the drsircd level of facilities, The major criticism of rior< comr»unities bliilt thus far in the United Stairs and in Englandf<>r that niatter! restsoii the argumentthat they a.c n<>tc<>nccrved as part of a rcgi<>nslanalysis and rarely occupy a cobe er>t place or role as part of the regi<»ial plans or, indeed, of any rogi<>rialpla,nning framework. '1'he key factors in the success of a r><,wconimu»ity dcati<>r>wlrich is devrlo >able,accessible, a»d available, owilership of the land prior t<> stal tirig, as few legal restrictions as p<>ssiblc,arid a c>r<:hphase, of the new com- murlit1»rrerii,prceeSS regicnal anrlr«»ts, fiiisneing, site arralysis, site pla>inmg, ir>tergover»mental rrhitluatiOrr! inv<>ives certain requirernenta that c<.nbest b<>hltndb:<] by a different lev<1 of g<>cornme»tor by the privat<. sector," The purchase of land mi«ht be lntncrit do>»air>..At oach stage a variety of public peme of the devolo.>irient. DiBerer>t levels of goverr>m<»L agei>cies,ir>strur»eirtali- ties! ir>ighi. perform diffrrent fii»<;iio»s at each stage of th<>process: Tlio Fll Governnient HUD, HEW, I»i.crior! might provide oxcoss Id subsidies fr>r larid acquisition, h<>iisir>gdev< loprn<'»t, open ipit<.c and transportation, anil infrastructure plaruii»g, State agersthai rrbsiiit. A State corporation with broad powers erich a,' local override! might haridle the irVSovelOplnaNeW TOWnS," harvard >«jS>ate CessCleadn,PR 8L. iOn Oft6aOne Seetbe Oeseprepare<1 by MOIlr City, the «en>pnay bein<< planned a<>d develaped in NOAhCarOline hy F>OydMeKSSS. nnnfty2 Isnnfnadssonlstss< op, olt, An mdependentdevelopment district with powerto sct in a particular area 'like the MassachusettsPort or TurnpikeAuthority! might hand:e a difFerent aspect of the developmentprocess. Regional plsnringcommissions, municipal agencies, municipal corporations such as local planning agencies,or muniwmany newcommunitics should be built, where,at what size!; what kind of intergovernmentalplanning framework can be estab- lished.;what financia resourcesare availableand what moneyscan be obtained from difFerent sources such as the Federal Oovernment; what kinds of instrumentalities presently exist and what kinds can be developedin the legal,political, and socialcontext of State govern- ment, These and other questions will bc considered in the next two chapters. CHAPTER III

NEW CGMMUNITY DEVEI OPMENT STRATEGIEs

INTRODUCTION Collstitutionally, the States are the ultimate holders of the police powel and "are the legal masters of local governments and far superior to lof:ahties in their ability to raise revenues,"' Politically, State governments are at least one step rolnoved from tho intorjurisdictional conflicts which so often impede areawide planning for metropolitan growth. For these and numerous other rc:ssons, any rational policy allocating responsibility for the development of new communities would more. than likely assign a wide range of powers to the State goverlInent. Un: ortunstely, diroct State involvement in land-use planning, devehxpment control, snd the creation of new communitios has tended to bo minimal,' On occasion there have been recommendations made for greater State action in promoting local dovolopment; part of a recent report to the National Governor's Conferenco contains a sectio.Jentitled, "The Challengeof Orderly Growth," which spells out tl. c kinds of State policies needed in thi areas of roning, land use, lannod unit development, snd new communitv development.' arioils States have already taken steps to insure a greater degree of State involvement in overall planning for urban growth,' inc..easing dissatisfaction with the pattern of metropolitan develop- ment ~asgenerated still moreproposals for modify~figexisting arrafige- ments and creatifig new concepts and instnunefitalities. This chapter docs r ot deal with proposals that call for the abolition of local govern- mellts, but rather with various supplement,s to local action on issues of urban developmentproposed; arul in particular with the issue of riew community development.' Proposal to ! facilitate ntetropolitan area planning for regional development, ! create new Bgoncies,short of metropo!itan government, ! generate private development incen- tives ,'all of which would provide for grettter state control over the nettciImmunity development process! have been suggesteil in a report for th: National Commission on Urban Problems.' ' Edward Bs»field snd MortonGrodhine, "Government snd ffonhfngi» Motxopoffta»Axeee" New York: M craw HU1! 1958,p. fsx, ' Thee Xceptientat4e statement ihOf CO»res, Nem Yorli Where the NeW Yerk State Urban DeVelepment Corp.le >crymncix invOlved ln the heVefepmentSnd plannf»g Of new Cemmfmftleo. xThe Ifstional Governor'sConference, "The Statesnd UrbanProhlexne: Staff Study for theCommittee on State-UrbanRelations Of the NatfofxafGOvern»r'e COnference," October logT, pp. ffg-7'9, ' SomeStates have already taken steps to xx>ntxofcertain typic of h>nd.Wfeoonxln for examplefn togt begana x>afar opennnectfcnt,and Cafffoxxdahave alSO adopted lowe fs preserverecreational areas. In COlOradO,a eoixnii' »>>xete>ibm I»lyt plx>p08edzoxdx>g oxdflisTloe to tlie Stateplan»i»g ~ for advicesnd recom- menmenitixdeonntiee sreSttentian reqntred hssto referbeen sn give»pa adopted CO»nastiestordinance toto thethe Michigandevelopmopt depart- Of regionalplan»tag etc»dec covering the entireSlate and to thc l»iegrstionof Stateand local deveiopxhent sct}vftfex. "Iixsgmentstfonf» Land UeeP~ and Control," tnnpsredfor tho oonxddexstfonof the NationalCommhrdon on UrbanProblems, ~ Report No. 1$,by JamesCoke and John Gergan, Wsehingfon,D.C., logo,p. f3 i Fore dleeneeionof propoesle easing for enbetsntial~tfon of metxopefftanpyerntnent See, ACr Z ".tlteanaxtveJtp~ to as~tel Reorgsnfesttonin Metropolitan Areas, ytms tfxgf, 4 "Fxsfmantatiou ln I and Uso~" op.oft. En! A 1!roposal to intcgra.tc the planniii ~:Ind regional dcvcIoplnent, process<>shas beenoffered by F. 'stuart Chal>in.'For eachnr<- tropolitar> area2 eprol>oscs that a l»etropolitanarea g<>»eral plar> bc dcvclopcupi»'9scher»e, the generalpjar< and a, develalthrough a. mctropolitg regulatior>s. This progrftfn wo»lrl take i»to acco»nt the fact, hftt: * * * The provisioi>s of public services iri strategic locatio»s c6n bc used to divert growth into certain [>redetunedareas, aud thc tvithho1diiig of public scrvicts.Thc 1>rograulrningof public works arul ilnprovernents and the budgeting and building of public facilities in particular locatiorls, of course,is a related and a very furulamcntal lever in the followtltrough o».plans and pOliCieSfOr Shapirlg grOWth.' His p.an would provir different rnixei of reg<>httior>sand p»blir, investments in areas at diHcrrncnt. In MassriIWealtlris Ch>SCtO $1 bijtion per year and the caref»lly pla»ried irive a, substantial impact on the pattCI rl of urbarl groWtlr,' A. s<,condproposal calli for the estab]ishment of metr<1politar>sl>ccial distri<.ts that coul l plar< and irlstall cerfai» critical cor»l><»«»fsof the urban infrastr»ct»re. These wolrlrl facilii.ies, Open >Space,and utilities. This prCS>urlCS ]»tt Inetr<>p<>litaneXpaneicn is largeLy deterrnirttio««of <.><1>italfa<;iliries, b<>tlrpublic and private. By controlling the critical i»vestme»ts>growth could be diverted without the need for s,ncw agency ro assumethe responsibility for trftditional zoning and subdivision controls." In!.960 a suggestion was made that a ncw type of special district- a subgranted." Anot2er similar proposal designed primarily to preserve open space in metropolitan areas was proposed in 1961 by Jarr Krasno!viecki and James Pa»l.'9 They proposed that "metropolita» development com- inissicns"bc established which would operate through an adaptation of the British systein of nationalization of development rights, ' > P.St>apingUrban Orowth" ln n VrbenRxpsn>don Prob- lemeand Needs,"op, Cit.,p, <99. ~Ibid. ~ nddp. Z!4, «Prop>cedStudy: "A Public InvestmentPlan for the Commonwes!thof MassaC>nfree!, 1964. <' MargmClawsou, "Suburban DeveIcpment Dfstrfcb>," Journal of the AmericanInsiitutc of Planners, Msy 1960. Sltyofr>Jan Fe>m~svardsI~wfeoh< I4>w andReview,Jamee Paul,vof, lrc, "Tbe No,g, PreservationDeC, 19,1961. of OpenSpace fn MetropolitanPresa," Unussnd within S gOvernmentalstruoture whish bett Sruuremaximum bcoef>t to tbe Ocmmunfty, theproperties in theares sre valued, ! The valuatlcnfs batedOn the sameprfncr pfes snd lr scen>npllehed under the earnsprcredure se it thevs!us>ron Or property for purposesof just compensationfn o>ndemnstion; c! Thevalues thus established fur eachproperty in the areaare guaranteed to the ownerby the gov- snunantauthority; d! The ax>frogs>eOfthOSe gusmnteee for thewhole ares is sonarto the compensationwhich would be payableif the wholearea were condemned in feeon the datewhen the openspace progeny goes into effec>;the fee,of course,is nOtcondemned; >ox- goiiigguidance~ of development but ala<>tll< incl»sionof a nliKof socitt! clftsses and commercial-industriti1 activities would jec !U, the require- ment that new communitieshouse low income people and confor!n to n!etropolitandevelopment plans," Iment agency? Should the State through the Department of Commurrity Affairs, Commerce and Developmentand/or the Department of Natural Resources!designate land areas in which the State has a special interest? Could the State plannuig agencies prepare and administer ido up of comm> riity rcprescntatives.

STRATEGY NO. I Presiding regional planning agencies with thc power to act as indrrstrial »nd economic development autlioritics, Descrig >timentof cities and towns through tlie estsblishrrrorrt ofirrdirs- trial dit of uriomployment exists in the niunioip»lily or ! security agairrstfuture unemploymentaiid lack ol' businessopportunity is requiricr'palityor by substantiallyexpanding existing indristry, it is a»sumrmore contiguous municipalities xnay»greo to consolid»te thoir respective industrial devolopxu<,nt fiirarrciirg authorities irito a single awerof eminent do- mani. The generallaws <>fM'assachusetts 1>rovide for the creation of s, State i~rdustrial fixranceboard which on the request of any city or town c»n establish a local ind»i>ra»»e rh<>eett» Ger>arel Le>re, ee». re, Ob.4<>D. »>Ibid. 39 developmentauthorities." In otherwords, the ieof regionalplanning areas in Massachusetts.!Thc proposed legisation failed to receivethe necessarysupport and ultimately it failedto pass. However, in 1969 one rogioiial piang!ing agency, the SoutheasternMassachusetts Regional Pl<>risibilitiesof a title IV redevelopn>ef!tarea designatedpi!rsuant, to the Public Works aud Ecof!otic DevelopmentAct of 1965. If 'nabliiig legislationsuch as that proposedby the Dilpartmentof Crimuerr<. and Development col!Id be passed, m<>st of the Statewould be silbsumritv,,'bi7i ]y Pastexpcrier!ce seems to indicatethat thereis not muchsupport for th» stablishmentof regionalplanning >iudeconomic dovclopmeilt alit h iritics. However, the experience of the Southeastern < Iass- achu:,ettsRegional Plan!ling Agency indicates that givilig suchpow ers t,o regionalI>lanning agi!»cies is pi!litically feasible,Thc passag<,of enablinglegtslation as opposedto the s1!eciallrgislatio!> which was passedin the caseof solitheastern1t<.husetts! would bc possible !I an cBort was made t<>eubJic.Thu department <>fi <>ln- merci:and developmellthas no laf!!!tioni>f why the prop<>se eriablinglegislstion failed to rcccivothc wide-spreadsupport, in the past, Firl>i~i<- chuset!s seeapp. E f«r a discussionof ! l!elegal basisfiir rcgii>nsl pl inning ili Massachus<>n rsch memb!!wl!icl! would «ltiir existing redo!illregiolial planning%<.velopmcnt agencies f!uthorityanil wouldbestow notut>on i;iiipower tt!em these the powers agcncirs of to!t issue, bo!id>. At pr<',sent the State does»<>t. <>ffertax incentiv< s ti> i!!f the terfn, n<>rd1goveriiitlefits are !tot, authorized ti> issue;ithsesin 1[assachusctts."It is il<.itproposed as piirt Ut' this strategy to <.ntpi>welregional plaiuu!tg a!«l ilevelopmcnt a!!! lioritirs ti> isslie bonds.'I'hus, this strategy wou]d < oatnn fnorf! and lt« i>ll>lish slightly m >rcthan the presentapproit<;h t<> regio!!al planiiing. P!fili. "be>>~fit .'Vr.i! onmllinity developmentunder tlie 'ontgolof regiol!al plamling and dcvclot!fneutalithoritics would at least bii co<>rdif!atedto a greater n nenis !>a!NO. 48, isere. !toonoinioDere!opnient Adm!nia!rst!on!, prepared h> iiie New kng!andEoonomio iteeesie!> i"ousdsilori, 196a,p. K-5!>. exteuf Llrrtuat present,Th , selccti ruof sites for new commrfuity developmentwould be the responsibility of the developmuldbe coordinated so ths,t new coiniriuriity development would strengtlien the entire regionalfabric. Tlu: strategy does not provide for direct State subsidy for new coinmanity developmentnor even for a pledgeof State credit behmd tlic is=uanccof bonds to support industrial development.Thc regional pl»i«iing development authority vjould bc responsiblefor insurirrg flexibl' enoughzoning arrangementsto ning cununission on all lowth objec- tives. Stategovernment could msintain sninedegree of contr<>lover thc new community developmentprocess by eontributhig funds undercertain conditions! to the work of the regional»gerrcies. This str»tegywould probably be politically feasible and financirilly possible since

8TRA.'rZGY HO. 2 Prcvidingfor the creationof a Stftte-chartered,nonprofit n< w comrirporations hsv» beenproposed.'r Recently the Governorirf Mrscd th» e:tablishmcnt of a replacenienth usinfr demolished bv pulrlii actionaiul it wouldalso have the pn<>micgrow ,h would bc cosed corporation wc>rid be Ptfrpoweredto promote induitrial developmentprojects relating to resider8tialexpansion for F<.d ,:>rl'tax benefrts urravailable rrotv to <'.xp- mg su<;h a designation> th> corporatioii i self with the Governornsapprp>val coul>1 make such a dla>sedwould bo p at rc]stivcly low interest rates through thc sale of tax- cxiy back the loans fr<>m in«>Hietliey madeon property. Political jdasibility Th. corporationwould put togethersil c ',insure developrrriPdiR'erenor'81!roposcd corporation ae Vctv York !tat<., Dcvclopnicrrt orl>oratiori, tvhich serves as th<. I!!ilv ode1of a, Sta e development 1<>rporatiori, is that there arc m<>reClieoks and b;41anCCSOn the pOiVcrsOf emiueilt dOtchusettsmodel. No proIeci,area can bc lessthsri 100acres, arul no pr >ject erhttpsdelt,hat should be considered at this p aint in time. It is not yet clear whether or not thc proposal will be accep.ed, but the careful system of checks and balances certainly <.Hhtti> ces its l>olitioal accepts,bility. Fiyebilliori. That does r! Onevf the pro>!leznafacing the Man>eth>rtr place>n»nt Housing .!nd Co!n!nnr>itvDevelopment <'orr!ora>ion bill ie ita dirertactcetthe challenge ol' II RA 8. I'i!et to secureIte reading ns a generallsw, ar«i!>oi Just ea s aper!aih.w,thol!ill etrceeeeI he siatcwidc breadth of the Commonwealth'eurban probiro!e, and n>nd for ar, I»setseve>nr commnnity development efforts lo m»etthe pr !bi«ns Beroml,the emphaticon stateside aepr«e > nonweaith'aurban problems enticdpangr that dev»ioinncntwithin a singlemnn!an!tdty or lo!!-!,m>d therefore ie »oi lnoperectivity for the corporation "A. supe>rorproposal baa been prep!>rod hy a groupof student!at the rlarvard Law Bcl>ool,Deu!r»bcr >960:"I'-OpOe>d LrgalatiOn to EstablishS 8eve>apse>it COg Herherman,snd Busskindh " Rareerin> made by Iovee. 8, I968. not includeaB the costsof developingcomplete new communities e.g.,infrastructure, industrial development, commercial develop- ment, recreation and open space!wkuch would probablytotal an additional$5 billion,The initial costto the Commonwealthof the Governor'sproposal is estimatedat $2 millionyearly mostof that moneywould go to financethe agencyitself." Additionalmoney would be availablefor housingloans if the legislatureagreed to raisethe $50 millio» borrowinglimit on the MassachusettsHousing and Finance Agency at least25 percentof the housiiig built throughthe housing ency must be low income and it has so far coxnmitted$22 million!,~ Kle naw corporationrp would be in a good position to push for the fuH utiLizationof existingState and Federalsubsidy programs, New com- munitieswould be developedby the State developmentcorporation, although residential and commercial development could be subcon- tracted out to privatedevelopers. Ultimately the new communities would be subsumedby the existing niui>icrpalitiesin which they were located. .'cordi«>ated State investment iii capital improvements could reduce the actual costs of a iiew corm»unity i.e., transportation planning could be coordinated with new community development to elirr«iniblic t>e>tekt8 Alo»g with the problems of fi>ia>ice «»>dland assembly, existi»g building codes, development staiidards siul ]a»d use controls kiose substantial barriers ta a, program that has as its general goal thc successful development of new cornriiunities with «i full range of housing, fscilitics, and jobs. Short of cur»piete, ncw, st>ttewide en- abling acts, the creation of a development corporation with local override powers is the best way of insuring that loca! standards will n<>timpede the development of balanced new commur>ities,The develop»tent corporation strategy insures coordination of plaii»ing af>d ir>vestrf>ent decisions at the State levc1. It insures a wide range of housing types and as coinpare<1with strategy No. 1! gives the State government a greater measure of control over comprehensive plarining for urban growth in the Commonwealth.

STRATEGY NO. 8 Providing foi' the establishment of new con>rr>unity development dist ric ts. Des«iri.;>t>cn Thi,: third strategy is deriveddire« tlv from a propos>«1fnsde by M«lr'loi 1;iwsonto establish "suburbafi develok>r>>e«>tnily devcloprncr>tdistrict would be an authorization froin thp St«>.teto acquire f>11land. within its boiindariosthrough purchase or optior>. However, the power of t'rr>if>e»tdomain would orily be grsriteii once the deveh>pmcntdistrict h«>dacquired ?0 percent of the laud if »ceded by direct purchase or by purchase of o]itious, » «W»oWill >toplessHO>te>ng The state>u3ostan Globe, by 1euetRiddell, Deo. 1>>, 1>>ee. » 8r >>fo>t>fa>«e LoanFinancing ofMu>ti-Dwel>ing Housln«> end New Cou- sbus>>ou,">dBFA, Ju/y 19«>9. u Clew,.on,op, oit. The governing board of the new community development district would be composed of mclnbers from several interest groups: munici- palities, other special districts, real estate developers,present land owners, citizens, State government and regional p1sxtning agencies, Each of these groups would be permitted to purchasestock in the development dtstrict. The new community development district would be empowered to plan, to acquire and control land, to contract with private developersfor the developmentof the area,and to supply necessary governlnenta,l services. The. imInediate objective of the new coInmunity developmentdis- trict would be to channel and coordinateprivate and public develop- mentactivities to insurethe development of compactnew communities. A further objectivewould, be to assistin the preservationof open space by providing an ample supply of. well-located land that is ready for development, thereby accommodating development pressures that might otherwise overwhelm the defenses erected to protect the open space The new community dcvelopnlent district, is a means of carryiiig out, a, staged developnient process in which developineiit occurs in a limitcgl number of areas itt a given. time, and most of the unbuilt land is reserved for later development or perInanently retained as open space. Each new community development district would cover an area large enough for a new community, but small etlough t,o permit detailed design of the whole commuiiity,

fly-242 Ti 4 P<>li r'cal feasi bijou ty A State agency possibly the department,of community «ffairs! xvould establish all cleveloprnent districts with the approval of the Governorand perh«psthe GeneralCourt. This agencywould designate the bourid«ries of ihc dcvelopznent district and elections would, be held for the board of directors. The district wouM bc established as «, serui- ublic corporatiozi ivhieh would be irrdcpenderrt b«t manned by a oard of directors directly responsibleio the Siatc goverrunerit.The developirientdistrict, woulLid.Irriiially, only orie or a feiv erienccwas gairredi,hrough tire rise of this instrcntality tire biiildin< of neiv construction might be conceritraied ir»uch districts.' Tlris 1>roposalwo«ld 1>rovideeach ncw cominunity development district, with a«ihority over xonirrg and siibdivision control in thc develol>«rent,district durirrg ihe initial planning stoges. Since ncw communitieswill bc plannediiriiially in those areaswhere ncw growth is most,likely to occur, r<,sistanceshould be rrrirrirnalLo iliis strategy. That, is, neo comznunitirswill bo plannedin areasivhere the pressures ere«tcd by high grrlcities and towns. Since the development district would not have the power to eminent domain it would be less offensive to the localities involved. It is likely that, political resistance to this proposal will come from the undeveloped areas of the Commonwealth, while highlv urbarriaedareas wouM probably support this strategy as a,way of buiMing more low and middle income housing outside thc centr>rl city. Fr'narrcz,aEfear>a'bi79y Fach new community developznent district would constitute a separate fiscal unit: The developmerrt district can help to achieve four important financial objectives. First, it can provide the large amount,of capital that is neccled for public facilities early in the development process, and for acsuch facilities iv!ien money is available l'rom their iisual sourcesof filnds. The payment might come i» a lunip sufn lrorn au agency capitol bu

ni»d.,p. w 1 ihi w "I'hreer.'oseiy reislcil iieviee are now etnployed in viulr iis Clroums&neesin lbe iwc counties.Special a «ieiment,',iri iisvd to fiusnrvithe oxtonsion oflociessiewed on en ad valorembmLs. In somecases, the mSt of faelIIOesserviiig reside»ti»1»r~ might be irljrl bv iliv esw same»t of euusl«uiou»ts agaiiist sll dwerd»g units, but this basis would have a regrerive ie:idi »cythat wo»ldprobably be unacceptable in uxet cave<. Tli i ueeof special 'aaessme»a wcu'ld iiecessitstee careful estimate of thecmt of sil hctlitles to beprovldetl in th newcoiiiinimlty. siid determinemmuiutyDevelop- ment! as well as for State subveritions. MHFA could beconie involved as easily under this strategy as under strategy No, 2. Public befte~ The benefits accruing under this strategy are the seine ae those that would accrueunder strategy No, 2. The comprehensivenature of the planning for future growth is sacrificed somewhat, siiice the develooinent corporation would be responsiblef<>r plsnniiig for the entire State at all times. But, perhaps, this third strategy is more realistic and more politically acceptable, The State wo«hl still be responsible for formgramand it would be the State government that immiinity flevelopment districts should be established,

CONGLIJBIoNS In Massachusetts it is fa>rly obvious that the»>ulid p<>liti- cal fragmentation. A strong county systeni or metrop<>litan council of governmentsmight provide a more scient govcrnineni. These possibilitieshave been discussedelsewhere." Given the stroiig tradi- tion of local gover»n>e»t ir> Massachusetts, however, it, see»» u<>likely that g over<»Dent>tlreorganization will <>«curii< the nt ar future. Urban expansion, th<>ugh,is occurring i>ow and will co»ti<»ie at a vigororeposed ii> thi.. chapter offer possibilities f<>r channeling and ors most desirat le. Tile Stat»iso for meeting public developme»t <>bje<:tivg»>or< le housi»g i» locations which <;<>rresp<>n j<>b opportmmu»iiy dev<'i»p- m<,nt districts are a reasonably good second choice, Empowering regiontd planning agencies to act as industrial and ecoiioniic develop- ment authoritiesis a third possibility although regionalplan»i»g as it is c irrently structured m Massachusetts is less eIIicieut tl>a» it, ml ht oe 'he two most critical problems facing a»y att<>npt to r~ts of a n<>wc<>rnmi»>ity d>p>u<»tpi riot 1 assuming that capital construction can b< paid for by State buntle and State agency programs!, and ! overcoming the poli<,ic«l opposi- tion ofi'ered by longtime residents to the creation of a»e~ comm»<.'l.'he erst problem can be

"For mample, see MassachusettsLegis>ative Research Bureau report on re>na- tlOn MassacbueettsDepartment of Xd>ng, e>See 'ReglOnal Planning in MaeeaehueetteReenemined," a repOrt prepared for the Maseachrows>ng and La. ~4 'a zoca 4P-N pter

a c« D I!me>f=B5g a cc inc« c 'ckc clcco g +z8 -5JCX« Ndg I a I« Zsa a« a I OI - $--'28 a 9!e -«! Q c«4 ZE 'R4R o ~ Hk a~ C a eg I!ca~ XcJ-c o ola g +a a sscTc y f og 0 Cc 5!Ica y'% Kl eked.= cocc I o SC!.J cc a X K Ic Cc s = e«ga ~o 5 j dccc ecats ~ oog cc«ka EK IE Rf c|aaaaa o mcs ass~g ~go c o cs. o «cg g I, a D a ~ aCg e s I I« a~ c g oa«Q j o a E «J ac ws ~'O I!IC'4! C Pjj 5 ~8 =~-F"-O a a g os%RE o.a a,o

CC8 oc Vg n a «o ai o a '!ca Q o os "K Cc ~~a 8 e CCCacP CI %4 I gm I No IC e$ ~ ec r/I IOI a«a D o'oa ge c«~ ;9 C scg CD ee De a 48 cash How from the sale of ho ising and land, a»d the r<>ntalof c»m- ercial and industrial property. Some services caii be purchas <1fr orn the existi]ig municipaliti<>s e,g., school a>1dhealth! ew comm»nity reaches a size sufficient tn, taxes can be collected front tli» ncw c<>m- mu»it< residents as they move in j>Lstas in any other <»iii>i tlm new co»ii»uiuty devel<>pr»entdistrict agency and some will bo iis id I<>pay the siir- rounding n>unieipalities for services purchased. Il' ne<:ossa 'y,Fed r>il loans ierest rates to cover costs diiiing the e u ly stage,<>f prnent. Tho scconn,is iniich r»<>r«lilriltto deal with. O ~e principle that ought to b<;observinv >lve l >ng tiiue r<;sid '>itsin the planningand de~elopment of any neiv< ommimitv. Present residents of any area tliat is in<;luded ii> a iieiv ee>n>»>unity develop»>e>udistrict sliould be give» represe<>tati< r> o» tlie l>oaril of tll ' ag .'ncy as '%ell as optloiis to bily stock iil tlic en>ado is ihai th « >v <,' >n>rn>»ity, oiice <;ornpleiteresent re~idei>ts that tli< y could n<>tpossibly provide E<>rth in> «lves--- inil re~ed scliools, iiripr >remn>idfai.ilities. In a<1f a. new i<>mincetlie value of their investmniei!i tlie area. l,o»gtir<>eresider>ts are obwio >sly going t<>be afraid of beiiig taxi>el to pmcrs'services and afraid of being politically sie devel<>1>- mderal Goveri>nsts <>1'w 1- far p>»grams, property owners would be less resists»t, to»< u d ! v >p- mi:iit, in aiiy f<>rm! since property taxes would iiot lnivc to bc ..o scvi;rc to pay fwevit't in fiscal responsibilities is made, the third siratcgy ss. CHAPTER f5' CovcLUsioNs AND REcoMMENDATIQN8

INTR 0 i!UCTI ON An essentialcharacteristic of »ew large-scjtleurban development shouldchance of beingetfectivo, the evidence available seems to indica,t

' In lightof ace with, andin furtheranceof, the state'surban!cation plan. Theseactivities could be financed as appropriate, through direct appropriations, chsrgco and route, grants, ss!eeo 'land, and borrowing, if authorised. Borrowing suthortty should be granted ou a revenuebeeje ln antjcjpztjonof landsales snd rents. Revenue from land esiee snd renrscould provide a majorsource of inoomesnd s ejgnliicsntpart of theoperations ofstate land development instrumentslltha could be m

INCENTIVE CONTBOii SY8TEMs FOB LA.ND USE GUII?ANCE view techruques and new ways of using existing tochrriques for guiding ulban growth are neededto insure more equitable and more efficien patterns of urban developmeii. Guiding tho use of land in urbanizingareas to achievethe plannedexpansion of existingtowns or the development of relatively self-su5cient new commumties in- volves the following major problems: ! shaping reponal and com- munity growth; ! curbingurban sprawl; ! assuri»gan adequate supl?lyof land for certain kinds of private developments;! acqurrirrg land for public purposes;! protecting land with unique character- istics; ,'6!lowering the cost of public improvements,'and ! regulating the relationships hotween landowners. The processof now community developmentspans a period of at least frftoori yosrs. During that time effectiv controls and techniques for guiiling land usein a newcommunity as well asin areassurrounding a I?e?v:ommrrnityare required. Zoning, subdivisioii control, the usoof emi»ert domain, the purchaseof devolopmentrights and scenicoase- merits, taxation and economic incentives, the use of ho41iiig zones arid plar?nestunit developmentare land use guidancetechniques that vary in effectiveness. l. Lp~ctii?enessof zoning?Is a control I-i?cr,lzonirig reg

1 +tti, ~Marshal Kapb?n,"rmpre?t?eatatioa Of tbe BalttlaareRetd?par praa hltena?IIVea" Sat? ~ I acetatei et P?anoingand I?evelopmeat!,1966, pp. da-ir. f! Becausezoning generally docs not, emanate out of a plan- ningframework and almost alwa~ is unrelatedto marketbehavior, it crea,tesat times"artificial" hmita.tionson suprlusesin certain use categoriesrestricting private choiceswhich, if made, ivoldd be in the publicinterest, and result in publicbenefits. 9. lQfeefit!enessof subdirrisiortcontrol Likez<>»frig, subdivision regula,tions are directed more at c~rg expenditureof public funds a,nduse of the police power. < rh«'.,p. 27. ~Me Scott,Err~ si

b! Difficulties in determining the value of the rights taken a iliminished title is still left in tho hands of the private individual! b t the public entity. c! Public costs associated Tvith acquisition of development rights approach costs associated with "taking" land through eiiiinent dOmain pi'ocedureS. d! S«curing of development rights does not usually permit uincstricted public.use of land.o 8'. E~p!ctif!enettsof taxation and eeonomtcitieentif!ett ae land tttte controIs Maiupulation of tax policy, credit programs and subventions are rather iinportsnt tnechanismspublic decisionmakers hs.ve to @Rect basic 1 tnfl devclopinent. Effectuation of a coordinated strategy relative to the iise of these economic incontivos is a diBicult task. "i'o achieve fine gcain effects by economic controls requires highl v sensitive maiiagenwnt and close attention to relative shifts in the magnitude of e8etatetiix stru«ture,'" Flexible use of ibis tax as a strategic, tool fci' affot.ting laiid usO, iS iinpedeil by legal rcquirementS neCeS- i ating utiiforfriity Of taXatiOn Within specifi«areas aiid asSeas- nients of property at market vain«." b! Prafereaftal aasefterttentindicat«s a break with a iigid legal criterion for assessingat market value. A prefereiitisl assessinont ls.w is designed to preserve open space and agricultiiral lanil. A.uicitltitral assessmentsmay be valuable, too, in implementing «erts,inpublic policies for structuring growth, if combined~ith a sl,atc anil regional development plan aiitl prograni of imple- mcntiithin to g!tide the urbaniZation prOCess." «! ,'a@ital qaine tax. "Perhaps tbe tax l!rovisions with the inost influenceon the land developmentpattern in suburbaii arid ex-urbaii aroas is the federal capita! gains fax and tho deduct- ibility features with respect to property taxes of tbo Federal income tax. Both these provisions seemingly uurela.ted to any nf.tiontil lant1 policy oncourtigesthe Tvithholdifigof land froTn dt vololunent on the part of those playing the optiinization of income game." " The, treatmerit of land areas ss capital gains alloTvs owners especially those with large flnsnci«l resources!to retain land Tt-,th relatively little holding costs. No mcome tax is collected uiitil the land is sold. Upon. sale the i'eturn from the transaction is taxed up to -5/o rather than at ordinary incoine tax rates. E iiniiiaiion of capital gains benefits might cause large land

' fatt. 'iersto revert to long-term leases,thus freezing land in its present use," t>. '14' egectitrenessof Aofdingzones Severalrecent reports on land usepolicy suggestthe possibilityof authoriziiig local or state government to designateholding zonesin which dcvelopmerit,would have to be dolayedfor severalyears," Hok ing zonesare a formof policepow<.r regulation. They differ from land banksin that they do not irrvolvcgovcrrirnental acquisition. of land, although they might entail the payment of compensationunder som< «ir curnstances." Tlic Douglas Cornrnissionsuggest,s making provision for the- os: abiishm< nt of holding zones in order to postpone dcvclopinent in areas that are inapt ropri«tefor dcvclopdevelopment wl>crifr»ar>cial or other legitimate considerationsmade it impossible t,o l» ovide services for more intensive use of arr area. 7. Ti>eegectttreness of planned Mnit det>clogs>rtent Tlic plat>neddevelopment of land, espneddcvclop- men', as disti»ct from ncw communities, can b<'.applied to small. scale development. The Do»glassComruission rc«or»mends that i>tate governments enact enabling legislation for, and local governments adopt rovisions establishing regulatory processfor planned imit; developments. >uch eifpingplaniie<1 uiiit dcvclop- ni<.i»,distiicts u»til a pruject is al>l>roved,a, in<>re <.tfective technique w<»ild b< tiirrium s<;a,lc,If rt commur>ity w»n~lling tmer>t,provision cot<]d be mpedsections of Corn- rnnn.chealth,tire burden of proof nat>irally lies upon those who would restrict the usc of land by its owner, That burden can rarely be over liesan Bee,rse<>, e iba . 1<'>'hbss>on On Urban problems r!onalsSCon>sslonh is<<><< <> C<.C., u.s, OovernroentPrint>os O>r>eo!, >968, 1<. 246. » Ibic. i<>. s46, as long as the long-runpublic interestiII preservinga givenarcs, as- open pacefor example,must undergoreevaluation time after.time, iu conipetitionwith immediatopressures generated by eachproposal for pr..vatedevelopment. This scattei'eddevelopment i» turn setsthe prececientfor znore development by destroying some of the open space values which have helped to justify public control, and by siphoningofF developmentthat would otherwisecreate coiupact centersin moreappropriate locations.st The most efFectivetechmque for dealingtvith this problemis "land banking." The land bank provides a community with an eirective means of controlling the character and thning of urban developntent. Fundamentally, thc local govern- ment acquires land and holds it until conditions are appropriate for public use or saic on the private market for purposes that are included in the comnsunity's comprehensiveplan. This idea has not been used widely, although it seemsas if it wculd work quite effectively.w In tirder to achievethe sevenobjectives mentioned at the beginni»g of thi, discussionof incentive-controlsystems for land use guidance, the State goverm»entneeds to enact,legislation e»IIbli»g State, regioual, a»d/or local development authorities or agencies to acquire land in advanceof the developmentfor the following purposes: a! assuriig the continuing availability of sitt s needed for dcvelopme»t; b! ccntroliing the timing, location, type and scale of dfvelopinent; c! preventi»purban spry;1, d! reservingfor thc publicgams in land value: resulting frOm the aCtion of government in promotion aiid securi ig development. At euoh time aS the dCVelcpment of' SIICh 1alul is deemed to be appro-triste and in the i»tcrests of the region, such land co»hi bc sold.o. lensedat iio lessthan its fair Itiarket value for private develop- ment or public development iti accords»ce with approvetl state ai«l regional urban growth plans. Wherever feasible, long terni leases should. be the preferred iuethod of tlisl>osing of any public la»d, ai«1 leases should, be set so as to permit reassembly of properties for future planning and levelopment. Legislation should specify maxi- rnum fteriod that such land inay be held by the public before lease or sale." hN fN'VERGOVERNMENThL PLhNNINQ FRAMEWORK FOR NKW COAIMUNITV D EV EL OPM E N 'f Implicit in any decisionto providefor state control over the de- velopzaent of new communities Is a coordiiiated public decision.making and planning process.To implementthe developmentof newfconi- munities requires the full and coordinated use of existing and pro- posedpublic yowers to guideand, structure the urban developt»e»t process. Any nnplementation strategy should be based on a statewide developmentplan and planning process as well as an at;cepted,ordered set of goals. In essence,consistency aud confonuity with area-wide plans will be the most unportant criteria in evaluating the desirability of expendingpublic as well as private resources.s' > Bain,sp. ss.g. 48. I Ksphcs,sp. > DottglssConnnttsion, sp. ctt.,p. RO. sIHss4 r, sp.stt., pp. Bwi&. Resporisibility for planning and implement«tion bas to be shared an!nng all i@vela Of gOvernrnerit. Pl inning wculd include t! the c<>mpletionof a state wi le urban development, plan, ! completion of area-wide development plans by regional planning agencies, g! accepts»ceof regional plans by stat,e and. local public bodies, ! wid< spread dissemination of the plari throughout the region. Imple- n>e!!taticr! Of a,neW Ccmmur!ity deVelOp»rentprOgrai» iVOuld require: !. Review of all public and private actioris of regional un- portance for consistency with are>I;wifpublic «.orks! i>ublic facility and transporta- ti<>nplanriing to structure and dir<;ct growth, 3, Complementary use of land use cor!trois and regulatory !i!eel!anis!ns ivith public worN an<1facility l>rogrsmmIng and developI»ent, 4. Coorilination of tax arul assess»rentl>olicies with area-wide plans, 5. Regional review of those federiil progriinrs implemented by the l>ublicand private sectors!affect,iiig thc regionaldevelopment p«t tor». 6. Creatiori by the state of a st«te devmeritoweredto coordir!ate «nughthc selected i»i!pli<;ati<>n<>f laird rise <;oi'It!'ols,f!lit t se ver fa ilities, tts ivel1 «! tranSjrnrtatinn. >. Intmcte»ti«l groivtl! r!re«s by existing state agencies<>r ne w ins!!'»mentalities. 9. Rcscrv«tio» of la!id ir!tend<.nient tlirt>ugh the cori!L>i!reduse of h>wiiitensiiy z<>»irig,coritrol s!id devel<>t!mentrights, cornperisatoryx<>ning, and th< progr«mring >f l>!!brie f«cilities and improver»eiits. Th< presentland us<.planning an<1Ivg!!latory systemfails to l>r<>tect <>vernxnerital bou id«ries. Jii ttddition, in most iiistai!ces t'liev are»ot suHi<.ier!tly s!rr sr!ffile to per!!iit anrl si!stain the 1>J>tnnr!d d<'vr'lupi!i<»t of a neiv large scale cornrrrunity. To rectify tl!i~, it has herr>s»«rg< sted that a state planning and rev!ew agency be created to pro»iot ii»d protect extra;locs.linterests ar!d resolve disputes." T'ne !! «1' should assur»ear! active role in applying la!id uscgttidatr e >r»d cr»!irol tecli»iquesin an effort to ins»re.the siif »eiv co!»r»uriitics. The state age!icy sh<>uldliave the t!uthority to I.! prel>a!eand effectuate state and regional land us» policies ai!d plars,!" r2! review local plans anliancewith s!ai - le«is1atioiiarid state piar!san<1 policies," arid ! directly regul«te the rise of land anPi. " H r tonn>.. e<<,, p. 46, rr Jord. o Hr r >rcArserioss Law rriati trite, A grodciLand Dcccto!rvrrcnt Code, Tentative Dealt No. 1 !osgo. rtn>ot!san rstllirlts oi Planrring Or%etubli<,ly.This thesisconcludes with a seriesof questionswhich need to I,e co»sidercdby publicofBcials and private citizens slik< prior to the implenentation of s,state new community devel9 urban growth and initiated the m >der!>new to!vn concept,' Early notions of modern planning originated with social theorists an<1utopian planners who were essentially reacting to the effects wrought by industrializationon the cities, The rapid changofrom agrarian to urban living, resulted in crushing populsti<>n influxes which so pressllrized rxisting urban infrastrurtures that governmcrated st s.rois tivcly relaxed pace snd primi- tive level, was unable to provide basic urban services. Perhaps more signifi!antly, government was legally and politically unprepared to controlurban growth patterns.' Th se conditions suggested that s >mothing moro than "natliral forces' was needed to s1iapefuturo lirbali growth. The ac<;onipanying notior. was that city plalining in an industrial age requir id far more than It]annilig for grand boulevarWn .;on<;eptemerged frOm theSe nOtiOnS, S<>c,al theorists and planners had recogliizsd the offccts of iiidustrial- izaiioll, b it Howard was the first to order the c »np<>nentsof the city int<>a c<>hcrcntform and formulate a coral>letsstrategy for alternative ilcveliii crowd«d elts,were to combinetlie virtues of intense urban living with those of the more rural life style. Th< garden city c »icept was importe l and introduced to this count."y by ClarenceStein during the 1920'sand 1930's.' Although far sl.ort of the isolated, self-sufficient English garden city, Stein plain:d several residential developments,including Rsdburn, N.J,, one cf th

t Z. Hindward,Tonmrrow: "4 peaeefnlpath io Real Refornv'898!, Labsp >bi shedtte 'Garden Cities of Ternotrolv" !9 Q!. t !tor i;lnetratiotteand anal>teOf a > Op>ansnd eOneeptns>new n t>tln UrbanP anttin<>"9M! s A. otto>an"The UrbanPattern" 999!. < z.Httwml!. s h. G till>on,op, eit, pursiutGf a predetermineend. Despite, these efforts, most of Stein'8 cour ilmitics werenot entirelysuccessful, The large initial uivestirients andthc high cost of capitalcarryiiig charges pushed the price of their housingiiliits abovethe reachof low-inc<>meworkers. Thelarge scale f>lanning efforts of St >itiand others depended to a greatextelit oli l<'ederalfiliancial aid, The <>arlyFederal e9orts at, new coinniunitydevelopinent were typified by colitpletegovernlnental ownc >hipof landcoiitrol of 1>la»ningttnd initial financingwith the re ub,that t,heprojects werc both > -elldesigned physically and r1>idlyevelopcd. How iver,the coinmunitieslater suff<.redbecause of poi>rplariiiing for the transitioriof administrationfrom the Federat agenryto local governmentand as a,result of the adverseeconoruic isn>ai t accompanyingtlie terrninati<>nof Funeral subsidies, in contrast to the rather minor and inconclusiverli .yto the developmentof new towns,The Ncw TowrisAct of 193t>' authorizes the Minister of Housif>gand Local Governmentto selcnof prominent citizens, to carryout planliing and develop- ment.Tile development corporations then acquire land, by compulsory piifrmally provided hy local authoritiesare not, «n>]er,akPI>.The corporationsare fuii ledby publicloans and exercise t i tushy cnpletPcolitrol over development,bitt are not conceived ot as1, substitute kol' lo 'ill govPI'nine it,l»il tally, town bo llident withexisting lines of jurisdiction and upon c impletion, of lev',lopment,thecorporation isdissolve and administration passes t,oa n,ttionalcommission which assumes <>wnership snd control of tl>e nesst:>tvn, Although, upon transferralto the ,.commissionfor the VewTow!is, further local controlis permitted, the ncw ton nsren»iili ess intiaHyiilider the c<»itrolof the National Governlnent.' Oneof themost significant concepts ul>dawhilethe British new town progr>Im l»is been the most extensive, it hasriot beenexclusive. Stockholm, Sweden, has undertakeii to build saie1lit:new towns as part of its Inunici]>growth tl policy." Tapiola r O eillili> Gee.6, e. 66, > Fora historyofthe Xn> ffshnew towns, eee F. Osborne and A. Whfttfek, "The New Towns" 988!; seeelm L. Rodwlu."The >>rft>shNew TownsFolioyo <1<>66!. 4 Foran >aeelleol diseussiou ofthe history anil develop>neiit o new oommunitfas with reeoinmendations forgoveroinental notion, eee Advisory Commis>ii ooInti>nental Relations, y Orson i:nd Rural A>nerinmunitiiis arid Thea Ohjee6 » hereinafter eiuida.' t<'Irt; train anil RuralAmerica! at i>7. "' ibid., SeeaL<. 1>uekworth andI>, Kerta>nan, "Development Corporations," Thi>Maryland-Na- tionall<".sp lal Park andPlanning Corri>nfssfon 466!. f--242 71 5 is a Tvellpublicized Finnish netv tovtm»ndertaken in responseto the est wsr housingshortage and is often cited for its excellenceof esigTTand ability to achievean effectivesocioeconomic balance of pop T 1atmn." U >until 2 yearsago, conteTT!porary new town development,in tile United States has been exclusively a creature of privs,te enterprise, and its originswere in the post-WorldWar l.l period,Although a, housingshortage followed World War II, the economiccondition was one >fgrowth rather thanrecession ar!d large-settle T!!erchar!t-builders moved into this favorable market. Tjiesc merchant-buildersdiffered from the earlier developerswlro had initiated the suburban movement primarily in terrf!s of scale oF operation.The mergt!rof land acquisitionand improvemeritwith standardization and merchandisingof rcsiflential construction per- mitted more e@cientproduction of housing units and greater returns on investedcapital. The resultof the merchttr!t-buildersoperations duringt,he late 1940'sand 1950'swas the full maturizationof the slib«rban movementwhich had begun decadesbefore." Durir!g thc late 1950'sanil ]960's the contemporarycommunity dev loperemerged with a newproduct tot;al cnvironrnent which wasdcsignefl to answerthe criticismswhich have been directed at subiirbia while, retaining profitability." Co!!temporary r!ew coin- rnur.itieshave bee!! developed by a,varlet,ty of developers.Both Hcston andColumbia were initiated by indi~idualswho believed that a,better quaity environmentcould be profitabl. Corpora,tions suchas Gxef!- eral Electric,WT stinghouse, ttnd Boise-Case!tdehave beconie iii- vob ed in new communitydevelopment, primarily to stimulatesales of theirproducts and to providea testinarke ."Other corporations sucli as Guà Oil and Sunocohave becomeinvolved probably because of t.,txsavings. Corpora.tions with large landholdings and families with exttnsiveholdings, primarily in California,}!ttvc also begun to de- velcp newcommunitics. However, the common thread of alldevelopers to lateis the probleniof returninga substantialprofit on invested capital. I!r 1968 the Federal Government made its first significant gesture to l".Slp the private ncw community developer. Seeking to reducethe rc!sure of the heavy "front end investment"which fharacterizes Ttrgc-settledevelol!lncnt, Congress offered a Governmentguarantee for the loonsof new communitydevelopers. The novelaspect ol' the newlegislation is that,it permitsthe developer to issut;"cash How debontures"which requireno repaymentuntil the nerwcon!munity procct begins to generatea positive cash flowus ln spiteof thetheo- retical advttntagesof the Goverrunentguarttntee, it, has beenneither ent]iusiaslicallyreceived by the private srctor" n<>r adequtttely » AC!R: TirbanSnd Rural America,Op. Cit., at 67;See S!ea dieeneeiOn in Tr. Elderidge,"Taming sieg- e »lopc See1 is"die,!>efore ihe Tro»M coininittee on T!snrdng snit .'urr» 1'rois ney,conversation idsrch 1 t66.with Wiiasin Fin!ay, executive din cWr for the new cornni»nity of co!urn'1>hi,hid., f i!1 16. 61 fi!ndedby Congress,'"Themajor faults are trac< able to thepre- requisitesforissuance of the giiarantee, which inclu lesuch things as a socililly and econo!f!icaHy niixcd dmsare clearly desi!'able from a publicintir«st stalidpoint, it is qu stionablcwhetlier lliey can be provided ivithn»t s»bstai!lially morsidy than that crea,tedby thc

A. THE PVBL!c PURPosE D1LKAroblel» i» ital and finances are elhi reallr> >»likiind lesig»i!!giic> corn»ere< with ih<1groin!d. Ther< are. !>Ooko and k>ooka < !lec<>uot»i ev<'ry 's,«c ek a ne>vbstcli. In hotvms Chest rton :onil>lain« correctly whenhe foundthat tlie lnar!is> Bert. r<>ns inf An!cri .",' n gover.lmentsin new communitydeveh>l>!rient, there seemsto bi iu!pli<:itassumption that not only is it a goo<1id<'ii for government t c be!na olvccl in co»trolling,acquiri!!g, or ermissible aswell. Such»B asslimption, without reference tospf cific laws, intuitively seems accclpt- abl;, >articularlyin a. country like the U»ited State», where, i» li s.- tvocenturies, govill!nnacres ofpublic la!id either by gifts nr by sales atre<1 ucelief s." Th»s,it docssee»i implausible toassi» l!iat i a f this cnn- clusioilnotwitl!st !ndinga.elusory survey OE the relevant 1». Pcrl aps his p >il!ti: iiibo madre hi i l1>y ex t!nif!ingclc>eely sonicst tt 'Die!itsfroln tlie new c<>!Urn<»!it@ literallire, I» pr >bablythf. OJIclSac'cklcSee et:.lomeiincl Cof I>lyellc;!',Char!oa Oel..M. 22,!!ause :Onacme>!I;s«;! b>1< >Ofor Isle IV, FebruarylurO. '-'For sr ides o «hict litle 1 co>I!oral>dtu»!'.>6L preparedfol the Pra-!dent e :" K>lc R.alioloted geiger, from ' "f'he daisTheory lu sakoleki,oftbe Land op. elk, SMao>n3!!, p.6. mosti ritica]lyacclaimed work on iltfnericannew communiiies to date, the fol?owingconclusions about public limd acquisitionwere made:~ By i>urchasingstrategically located land, States and largelocal jurisdictions cangi~.e direction snd forfn to futiire urbangrowth. They can encourage lnrge- scal»urban development hy assemblingparcels of land whichmight not otherwise be available and without which costly bypassing would be required, Lfjt seefns i;leart'>at for Statehurd dcvelopfnentagencies" to acconiplishtheir objectiveof carrtof the quotedconclusions, XCIR offersa numberof verycot»pc]ling reasons why advance L»f?>Lie acquisitiofi of lalid is tfeedeil,b»i asto whethersuch act,ions are legally permissible, virtu- allyr oihingis sahL.There are a least11vo possible explaliations for thi.'lick f>fthe rcports emphasison the legalissues. It, is possible that. ts authorsfelt that the law, as an institution, is completely ratif>ral stfd,since presiunably their report is rational,tile twofnust coilfcide.A morerealistic interpretation is that the authorsrecognized the wii/edivergence in the lawsof the vfiriousStates, and yet felt their case,could only be efkctive?ymade by presentingthe fnost favf>rableinterpretations of State law. If thclatter explanation is true,;hena serfousproblem will conceivably arise in thos»cases when their conclusionsare appliedto a State which subsi,:ribesto a very natro.v view of perfnissiblegovernment i«volvcment. !t?ierauthors, whet l consitlering the subject of publicLuffd acqui~- tion,treat it lnoreas a politicalor ideologicalprobletn rather than a legalproblefn. Charles Abratns> the noted attorfiey anil planner, cxem]slifictlthis positiol1whet 1 hcm'ote; Notthe l»sst of theobstacles is that new town programs have been too often associf.tcdwith the romanticised conceptions ofthe "city ideal" instead of resting onthe realistic need for assefnbling fragmented land and pros iding well-balanced school;,streets, and ut]lities in advanceofhofnebuilding rather than after the facy.'l'be notion that it is 'socialism" derived from foreign programs where the statei of>tii>ucsowning the land! is absurd it isanything but that when implicit, inthe plan is the withdrawal oftbe public from land ownersbip sndthe reservation input lic ownership only of the schools, streets, and other traditional public serv- ices.I ' anything,its fnslnpremise is "desocialinstion."sii Thepoint is, in short, that ~ henscholars consider both land control andiecquisition aspects ofncw i,ommunity devoir>pment, theydevote veryLittle time to the underlying legal problems. Tomake this point is not,to denigratethe qudity and scope of theirwork; on thc contrary, it onlyserves toindicate the vast complexity ofthe Lani?-acquisitiof1 1ssucTl.e principallegal problem normally overlooked in these studies is theextent to which government involvement in these types of activi- tiessatisfies the requnements of the legal "public purpose doctrine." Thepffblie purpose doctrirfe Thel>ublic purpose doctrine originateil in i>arly Knghsh law v ith the llagnaCarta, ivanich imposed a duc process litnitslion ou the Kin~s inherentpower. of eminentdontain, The duc process restric- >iXilo: IR en elebnreaen Urbanend On n oratwbet Xinerlee! KCIR meane 'p 152br "stere land development egenep' see "n.CLR Stere Leifieh7'Cl uVearies PrOgram:Abrerne, NeW"a tend Prnperele f>evefop>neat fOr1969 Progcuneee. 697 ee foreeq. Uelifcrnie" f966!, in Eldredge'6 edlllen of "Te>ninif Wfegeapolla"DOubleday, Garden Car fesfhPP. 660-661. tion and the further restrictions thiit takings lnust be compeiisate his rightsof property,wbri.her by cssctingcontrlbutione tc the general means; cr by seqiieatrstionof spec6 a nttill l,hefactors must be present iir eachcase.. As the court lists them, th<.fact,<>rs relevant to newcommiinitics 1rrrrs to Eheeiil,ire publici i thelocalitv aÃer orilv r<:- irrot,«ly,on the public welfare; ! whether the nature of the treedto be rr!et r<'qiiireslririted 0 f<>r'tEiiidcl' lirirti'< ce>lrirol,<>." <'aii !c s<'.".ed.. well l>yiridivi! whetlur, insofaras be!remits accrue to iridivis might bi rrefit as individr!Erisfrom thc legislation,the entire l>ublicis benefited,for without,sonre finaricial ai., v. HstyoheHossiny Antharto2 thef J'astWs, 334 hissy. 760, 764, 135 ES.E. 2d 663, 667 <5%!. ss>ehn setreo>~toner Marsha>de6'stn, 1969 hism. Adv. si>eets'>87, 996, 249 N.E, '2d699, 606 <1%!!. n 364Ms<6, St 293, 28 N.E. 2d st 667-66, ieeer>ra<>a:ed !esty<ran Beahp A>rt>. v. IIatya><>l. 294, 23 NW 2d 665, 666 <1'>3<1! . 65 desiriibleplace to buihl themis in. the urbaiuzingareas of the Com- moznvealth,where thoro currently exists such enorniousgrowth, Moreover, thc appropriate sites within these i!rbaiiiziiig areas are prim,arity vacant and uliblighted, Thus, for thegovernment to acquire the ft!e,or partsof the fcc, for the dt!sirablelaiul, its actionsmust be prn unblighted vaca,at land do nreineCourt uphold a takingunder the 1945District of Columbia RedevelopmentAct whichauthorized thc clearanceof siibstandard horrsiirgin blightedareas. The plairrti8 <>wned porperty ivhich itself wasnot blighted,but theCourt rrpbcM the taking of hisproperty becau«e,it wiis part, of artarea which could be redeveloped asa whole in ordir toi>roinote a blice poiver whi< h Congress possessedin its jurisdictionover the Distri<>t,of Coluinbia arid stated: We< eal,in otherwords, with what traditionally has b<;cn k»owu as the police power.An attempt to dofi cruiinaiions neither abstractly nor historically capable of completedciioi- tion.Ht bject to speciiic constitutional lirnitatio»s, when the legislst»ro hasspoken, the l'>ut.lio ir>tercethas bcc» declared in termsweli-ni h cr>rsr>eh c«s is the mair> gr!sr rieeds to be served,~ysocial legislation * * s Thisl>rincipie ad<»its of noexception urcrcl< be- caus<.t!rv po>< erof eroinent domain is involved.The role of th<>judiciary i» dair>. isiurposc is an extr<'mriynarrow one s ++ Wedo not sit to deter>»inewhether >r particular hous- ingpro,ect, is or is notdesirable + s s [t is with>nthe power of thei gislatisa», well balanced aswoll as carefully pal.rolled. Tfthose wl.o govcrr< the Districtof Cohrrnbiadecide that tho Nation's Csl>it<rtifnentthat star>is to tbc rnguage, l»is orie in>- portentimplication for newcommunity d< vclopm< nt: it is a casethat bonar>yleg!nity site lighted, irrespectiveof its condition. Thedubious nature of thc"blighted" strsi< gy wa recentlyirrdicated in tire!tate of Washingtonwhen an indusirial commission so»girt to acqriirrindus- trial prirkarid port facility.~Ironically, ali,hough thc tract consisted of oper, vacant,and choioe farin. ls,nd, the <.nmmissiondcs«ribed it as "marginal" i,e.,bli< htcd!. The SupremeCourt of the .estateof 9 ash- ingtonrefused to acceptsuch a tortureddescription and thus dis- allowoc.the acquisition, However, a lone,dissenting judge i» tliat case recognizedthe unfortunate consequen<.es produced by thrider tbe auspicesof tho "public purpose" doctrine. Ins>tead of directing his attoritir>nto thecondition of theland, he fociised on theplaimeto crowdinto largecities. Such a takingas hereproposed oonld riot ~ s4ss>. f<>««ar P<>, x<1 p. z!. 67

possiblyhave beenthough a taking for public useat the time oiir constitution waadi afted wheses of the act." sil!Y!tTheisaf as allostlp factor i» th it <e> i<2!tertt l c >2!tmttrttttC4! !nlyin thesense of preventingthc growth of slums,however, is thegovernment spoiisorship of new coiiirnunities the kind of action whIeh 1<'gitirnately dealswith the issue of blighted land. iaaf<>reovcr, the verv intent of the proposedstatute is to establishcommu»itics in urbanizingareas of substantialopen space, space which is probably r>otblighted under ever> the most liberal definitinn of the,term. I!espitethc apparent, unavailability ofthe blighted lanati»g exisi.ingslums snd blighted areas that tend. t<> produce shuns, <>A'ers tidefunctional justificution for the taking of ut! offonding trticts of law>terafter owner were permitted toresist these rcdevelnpinent programs on tl:etrouud that his particular property was not being used, agni<>st thepublic interest>integrated plans for redevelpoment woiildsuffer greatly 59 Ir..Massachusetts, too,the courts have deferred tosoine proventivo legislation.The 1<3 high court broadly suggest<',d tliateveurpose in the elimi»rrtion <>f o>Mr>o>< v, Porker, 348 U.S. 26, 35 954! . wCo»mo>ti, 52M. E. 2d 555, 5 9943!, 70 bhghtfd operi area that lay in the path of, and interfcrcd with, thc sound growth of the city.~ hf nraking that finding, the court said "considerationmay properly begivf n to tire preveritionof the developmentof slumsadjacent to the blight." 62And in 19t>9,the court deferrefl to a legislative prograni ol'pres entive actiori whose purpose was the "permanentelimination of sliinis n tlie project areasby preventing thou' initial growth." Yak Jn together thcsolast two casessuggost an approachto drafting »ew ccrnrnunities l<:gisla!.iorr to ass«rothat rhe corporation'8 activities are i»terpretedas public purpos<;s jiistifying emin<,ntdomain powers. Beesf the land to be usedfor the rr<>wcomrnufiity and shou!d diflities,by pr<>vidinga mix of living aiid occupational op- portiinities,will prevent,the growth of slumcoridifi<>ns witliiii thc new nntity itself and,by relin a continuingrefi of projecs bv a,public body.m Although the casesd<> not makeclear the exterit,to which control by a public body must bc maintaiifcfl to pro- tect tl e publicp«rpose status of theproject, the regulation ot a nefv cornrn~fnrtysit<, a.t least during its flovelopmeiithseems sfffficiontly thmo«phgoing in the pr<>posedstatute to makeuse of this factor. Finfit vasethat, even a lftrge nrultipurl><>sostac!i»m for piiblicevents could bo for a publicpirrj>oso, if the oriditure of piibli« fui«!s and tho extensionof pubhc privilegns,l>owers and exerrrjtiorfs riffc»lessct o«t in th< legislati<>nitselt." But, tlie c<>iirfcoiitiniies, provisioiiof suchfacilitics is not,as "cl< arly anusiiig, tunnogls, slumeducational clearance, farilitirs,fffass andtrafisport>ttiorr, otl>cr neces- sities.As to suchessential offtorprisos tlie public objectivesare well ll no finmr»unities are arondang t <0 tahe, homes1mpmVe, for c!tfseus.' hufid On t>yand only rOSell a laudslight' extension0 fits reamnfng,the COnde>unationof rand by a COrporatfonfor developmentOf new communities >nreirmn <>pi>'urfhrrfon o< the ]uetfaeatfan. Justices, 341 Mass. 760, 168 N.E. 2d 856 <1960!, Opinion of theJustices, 354 Mass. 760, 135N.E gd865 956h ,250 N.E. 2<1lail takings. .5.1thoiticslegislatioii has come bcf<>roth<1 court, as yet, the direction irr svhich the colirt has been moving in the area of elrlinent iirt"csinpow»r to a piiblic licw c<>nununiticscorporation under «trrenabling act containing caret';e. P..feargre «gee 7'ke nabapnsof government involvern~ i>t iri acquisition of land for riev comrniiniti!ecessary1!e- for ihc arlalySISprOCeedS. lt, is obvious that in almost cvrnnliinily, th d lahnr for«, m«tn«tgc>ncnttalent, ma>'keti»g st«tff, etc. T > c<>i!firn«tEie 1<.iigtll <>Etiilie needed for de- velopmer>t,onc, <>rilyneed look at tl«pmcnt,strategies t'<>r exi. ti»g;icw cornnluniiics to discov»r tluit the sl agirlg peril!ds gerler«illy rani»>froln l0 t<>20 ycitr's.The 1'<~cogiliti<>li <>f l,ll«se exteilded dev» 'l >p- meiit prtllo pr'eseilt alialvsls. I cl'lisps 811 !xarllllliltlo of tile subject of g<>vcrnmt' a llew c<»»i»unity. P.ltilotrgh. the distinction betw<;r !scni,alrd future use iu tllis parlicular context may' seem arbitrary and ill-defllrecl, it is cralysis <>f lhc < »lire issue of I«t>rdaequi.itic' and coiiirol, because it is conceivable that a giv priatc for a prese»l »se, 1>lttiiivalic' VC<>lntnunity lii < c;1- tur coi>ceriiedWith thc legality of g ! e'I'nlil<'illi>«volvo«Ger>t lil rile scqiiisiiiori a»i>icritral l implicitly nrr Ilri s- tior.s ol' present usc. IIowever, t1ie is. «OI' fcarl cori>pic ly< ncglcctcd, as a great, spa<»." lite.'at»re hss dealt, witli questi<>rlscoil«, ming it," The issue of new commiillity dcvclopr»elit iil Af«ot gone uniiotic«1 by I gal scholars.I» fact o»ly last: pring a p«ilier wa. prepared ori tho questions of tlic ttsc <>fcluincnt werc<>i tr >isapplioable, to rieWc«nlrll«nity levelopnleni <>n vac tilt, > rrblig2!tc Ian T in M«rssaclt rs tie.'5 Althougl> h<>i<f>tssaclluscttslt«v, its en!phasiswas primarily iq»>nprese!!i, !is<. Iri or<1 i l > comp'.et<, rather than cluplicat these «Sort,:;,tlicfocus <>f.«iris pitri <>fthe p;lpios!. e>>> orgen, "ocr r.egel pro>i>oons s>rgg>etre by the c'reeio< hew. Towns ir> vosseoh nw ts,"'r> ~- serb set sr!er>er«nen o ,'oi>nnnn! r>n peges. 72 Wv/ beconcerned ah ruttAe fr tcuef' Tlreleare a, rrulllher of reasons wk yState g<>vernments shouldbe concernedabout acquiring and/or controlling larrd that will not be immed..atelyaffected bvthe present development ofan rw«rtant ofthese isto <.apturc illcrenlents in value createdby publicinvestment. The Birtish Oov<;rnment r ognized thiswt.orr Parliament enacted the roco»lmcndatioils of the Uthivaitt Coml»issio»report, which callod for the acquisition ofthe develop- mentr;ghts for all tholand in England.This, in effect,entitled tho govern neatto receiveany i»creasosin privateland that are due to the eff<:rts rl, Therearo reasons for allowingthis system to « rntinue,Erut th< ir validityshouhl not boallowed to pass rncheckcd, For xarnplo, althol ghit is frequentlyassorted that there is no substalrceto the "donothing" labol, that in factthe landovwer is <]Ging something by riskil ghis capital, there is somoempirical evidence to sugg<'.st that in manyareas of the UnitedStates that risk is in fact minimal,'" .'f'hefafo of future use Consder for a momentthe distinction between the legality of the two foljowir ghypothetical conditions: l!, acquiringa, tract of land andwi hin 1 or 2 yearsconstructing a i given<., thenature of thed ,velopmentprocess. Yol, as pointed out 'arlior, mostof thelegal studies in this areahave tended to ass»rue either consciolislyor unconsciously onthe part of thewriters! tlrat develop- ment is an act in the presentter so. Ass rl»irlgthat the disti»ction bctweeirthe tivo conditionsis a valid u e,why is it significarlt?To beginwith, it lroi»tsuf> two sep- arate, k ut related,legal iss iesthat must both bo overcolu<.if new corn »i»iitiosareto bo b liltin thiscountry's rapidly expanding»rhan- izingareas. Both of theseissues are dime»sions of the concept of "public purpose,"tile doediatelyrdoes it makeany differencetlrat the newc<>mmunity will not ae,built on the land for a few year ? T!re previoussection'8 historic<<1 exanrinatior> of public usc as it relatesto presentuse iridicatrd that th< roncepthas continually been expandedby the rourts for over 8, century. Irrtercstingly,as far as futiire uscis concerned,the jurliriary's irrterpretationsliavc beenal- mos. as exparisive.The issuehas acti>>tlkybern fared only oricein Mtt.sac!rusettswhcri, in 1952,the court ruled positively on the ques- tion, therebyallowing a futureuse t<> bc called a publicuse even though it was not even certain that the government'8planned iise for the L tnr, woulrl over materialize." Earlier easesin other States show a i>i<>rer< strictivc view toward f«ture use. The focus used to be o» tliree things: the ultimate use, the sr>r ifirity<>f ho«a»d whenit. wasto be iised,aiid the ne<'.cssityof the »se.T1»tt is to say, if the ultirnat .use «ras specific, actually pu'l>lic, and,ne essrtrv,tkrefr it would E>epi rmitt<>d." In spit !of the liberalizationof the C»riireuse aspect of the pubLic uscco>is<,pt, it sti re xp>r>sip<.,b 'caus«>nly in thr lattercase have the co«rts talked ab >ut 1>eriiiissibleactivity beyondtlrorizrd hv a <.<>iirtthrtt kli<;«there wo«ld be i;o r1crit of tlie k>ligk>ted>tr<, i>itb t rr ,wdcvelo1>rrrcnt until sorre distantdate. Th»s, a showirrgof fiitiire Li»l>licpurp<>se is probably not su%cierit to substantiate a. prcsciit acquisition. Iromcallv, it seetnsthat siich a conclusionniay represe»ta distort<;dperspective, drawn,as it «cre,Crom an examinatioiiof thr.issue «bile weari»gthe blirders <>fthe case Ialv. Because,if iristead of xarning jurte <:asrs, an empirical study lvere conducted for thesul>jects of thesecases, a, different conclusion might be dralvn.I»der<>jectshave remained vacant f<>r nearly 20 y<»trs. Certainly iri these tyl><'sof casesit is dificult to arguethat the proposedreplaccrnerit use is a present use. r'in importantissue raised by thesei mpiricalfirrdirigs has t<> f the blight?Is it the r<:ernentboilsholvn earlier, it, is clear that tEiefirst »ct remov:dof bligrlrt!by itself providespublic benefi,.79 It is lessclear th;lt the se ;ond.act subsequentdevelopn>clrt! by itself servesa p»E>licpur- po:e; in fact,, it, carr be convincinglyargiic nots servethe public purpose,an that the legitimacyof the rr,wfrsrsv. Torsoof Qrasorrf,107 N.Lr. 2d 784, Mass. 962> r»'so@frv. Eisfrsr, 99 N.Y. 498 477, 88 N.Lr, 49> .1908!. I'irsa was a VowYork esse wr>ore tire state tooL ar>sne;a>sr>v. Parker, 348 U,S, 28, 76 Sup. Cl. 98,39 L. r<,r,", 954>. eniir<.process restsexclusively onthe first act. Such anarguinent bywouldgovernment, assort thatbecausethe secondblight actisbeing is only zefzzoved,permitted b»tonifland there acquiredwere no place.blightHowthe ever,acquisition anequally wouldcompellingnot, have arg»meni,been permittedcan ber»id answerdevel<>pmcntcle>Lrlywere is"bio." replaced According by another toihe blightedlogic develop>z>tent>'ofthis argument, The thesc.ond actmust also constitute atleast tosome degree! a public purposeevrn though it is, in most, cases, iii>essentially private»se. tlieI uzbftni .ummary, renewal therecasesare as twothey significant relate i.opointsJze>5 community tobo made develop-about ment,:blight,' andI! there there isais apresent secondactffctwhicl! which is public isalso thatpublic is, the thatremoval is, new of dcveloi>mentonthe previously blighted land!; !, th<'proposed andusefoiof,en the is land posi.poned isa future.indefinitel. useinthai, it does notoccur izizniediat .ly FJOtf aticases inwliich;1< quiiiion t!allyofuiib private,ighie Inland lthused 'ref tz<.' prol>osuses ar<>useclearly wfisd pulilic,<',.s< fi- ihf;arid'sl><;citiciiy"fio! private, tliuandpcrniissibiliiy ihc "necessity" <>ftheof acquisiti<>nth< use." Someisdeter r!ourts,f iiffelo,sucli clursfisc<[ nec be too k>ng to show that tl><> l>reposed school zfwhetlier theCy<>vcr!in!<'nt iscofidiictif>g itselfiua mannerthatis con!p 'titivcwithprii sie inter- servedd:est.,fof.nBy<:kman captured theessetable forthose govrrnin<.nis. frowAndnban too profitable iandtoforleave poasiblc togoverffmof>t.>' saleto future dlvemcritlikethose inas many deali>rg oth made it clear that real estate isnoi a permissibleactiv- ityfor tho r'3 f>tegovcrninent. Theleading cas<> foriliis p<>siiio» was decidLt a stai>iic ]a!>dwasun<:af duistiiiiiionalthe» Jai,er sellbecause it for a it profit.~ allowed a p»blic corporatioii tobuy Altlioiighthn8alraging, inii. thecour . made s.series of<>bscrvations thatoffer sorz!e pron>is< toil«. currei!iIssu<. of Govcrnmc!zt lan!ni>nities. r,. r a<yeruror,J>oarifo/ 'fJrrfueofio» ouofug fuofColfforufo," oeeereeRI, 340Mfoh. 205,65V,W. M,r>>0 I054!. Seo»or r>rlfeoury0 "I>rrJ,oorf OPfufrrri Jro>rroeeoror>ofthe Juotforo," Co.v.Coorroo>>roeoffh0> 0>.Zt. 578910!. of !>faeeorsuee<foso. 371, 102N.K. 619 9>3! . Tho:ourt,began its opirrioir witli thenow-traditional observation tha,t the <3ovornmentcould only piirchase property for a publicuse." Secoiidly,it made a morenovel and certairily more progressive obsoivatiorithat the property could be purchased to hold in reserve fora, future public usc. Thr'rdly, it observed thata saleofthe acquired prop<;rtyispermissible solong as it isaccompanied bya showingthat circu'nstanceshavechanged considerably since the pr<>perty wasfirst acquired.These three observations dosound promising, bitt thenthe courtlowered. tho boom. wheri it observermissible forGovernment or,more specifically irit Jiis case, ar< ii»trer>tttlity creat!>dby Government!to speculaft;,' that is, to buyproJ>crty for the sole1 urposoofsellii>g it later at a pr<>fit.This, of course,idthe fiindiri« of "i.!alestate" involvement which»ltiniately proved frrtal for tire Goverrrmentlaird acquisitionin tJiat J>arti<.i>Jarcase.. !r>baJarrcc, the 8ah,sf>mrrg caseis notsrgirrg, everi witli its fiindingsoii "speculation."Tire court iii that< aseivouJr rti' to createa profit in a f«rt>8iii other States have used:peculation in a muchbroader senhor, k'or < xarnpl<,the cour'tiii the,"!>Jrt'cfrJifie« whceded, ir! or tire ad« ir at ariinflated viiluc, whcr! it roaly wasneeds is l, speculation, arr t f Jrereforted rbis l>roadvie>v of speculation.For example,ii I!'lorida court ruled tliat it is pcirnissibl<>to buy land that will b! usediii the fiiturc for >tn airport,.'AlthougJ> tltere have bccii no crvior!sin '!a~a J>!isetts liketJ>at in theFlorrw acq J<>rtg asthe proposed iJ»siv<. purpose of sellirigil, later at a profit, Kxced2 E Anol;hcraspect of the future usequestirises under tlie rubricof " s.question relate Jalmost exclusively with highwayor' stre< t corrstructi<>n.kor example,in 1910, tho Massachusetts Legislature pr<>posed buying land in dowrrtownBoston to helpimprove the transportatioriflow for the businesscommunity there. The idea was to purchaseeriough lan J lo iinprovoaccessibility vastly to andfrom the variousbusinesses, In sn advisoryopiniori, the MassachusettsSuprem Judicial ! Court ruledtaat these proposed purchases would be excessive and not. puhJic uses ar d therefore shor>Idbo disallowed." Thc followingyear saw tho ratifi<>atioitof an arrurulrr>critto the. Mtrssacded for tho actual constrtclion of suchbigl>ways or streets.""' An l by 195;3the excess condeninationdoctrine was expan ie3oven furth< i. Iri that year,in oc0uisi!!' Sires<.405 <1010!. !! Art. 80 ldll.

e 76 another aclr arly wou!d not have been allowed at, the turn of the century. The, court was able to do this by alterir>g its interpretation of what acts constitute a public use. In the case before ther», the State legislature had empower'ed the Massachtlst>ttsTurnpike Authority to I>urcltasesubstantially i»ore land thar> was needed tobuild a highwa~. Pbis exress! land was to be used for garages, service stations, snd resta tr ants on thc restricted accessturnl>iko. Th< Court lrcld that the 1arul ives not, "excess," tliat thc land was necessaryfor the operation of th» lilrnpike, artd that thc acquisition lvrts therublicpurpose. ' Interestingly, the court > mph»sizedthat iis decision to>rlci have been made without the bent'fit of the 1911 ro»stitutional anteri dmcr it." Ttis decisionporrrtilted tl>e turrlpikc «uthority to buy lulblightetl land that was ultimately lease<1to private businessessuch as Howarrl John. on Restaurrtnts a»d Citgo Sorvrc. Stations. In doinngthis, the roirri took >1big step forward in the law relevant to ncw community c taken by e»iiticnt do>»sit> for tiic i>ttrl>osc of rentiz g and sale * * ~ this principle is inspplic»ble where, ns here, the property rente>i and sold is thereby devoted to a public pi>rposci« Pl blic use, as a legrd concept, has rn»uy din>i nsi<>ns.It serves as a restrictive for'ce in Government exercise of the t>owcrs of cutlrltnt dcmirin and spending,and, apparently iri Massachusetts,thc extcrrt, of this slrirture is equalfor the exerciseof both powers.Moreover, in exercisingthese powers, public use displays another of its dimer>s>oils and .hat is the treatment of present uses >mdfuturo uses. B»t what significancedo thesestatements have for r>ewcommunity developnlc>jt?For onc thirrg, acquisition of land, although originally lirzited to actual public uses,I>as historit ally been expartdedl.o cases where oven though the uses sro ir> fact private, tbe courts have per- mittedt.llern by iabelirrgtheir purposes aspublic. Furthermore not- withstanding thc fact that most of thesepublic purposecases have been confined tr> urban renewal projects, where tho public nature of their urposewas determirledby' the blighted condition of thc larrd! tht re ave been sorrlecases e.g,, the Tr6rnpt'keAzfh.orify! where the acquisi- tior>of unblightetl land was allowed to bc used for purposesthat the courts calledpublic oven thoughit canbc persuasivelya,rgued that they were more private uses than public uses. Tjlus, the permissabilityof acquiring uliblighted laud for rlew corn- rnunity developmentvill probablydepertd on whothrr the purpose can >edemonstrated to be public. Furthermore, thc favorable disposi- tion of the new commirnity corlceptwill alsodepend o» a demonstra- tion that, the proposethspecific anrlneccssary. At least somedegree of advanceplanning for future use must be shown, but the court in Parlor found that- It s not necessarythat a political subdivision of the Bte,tc have >noneyon hand, pla» and specification prepared and all other preparations »ceo~saryfor im- O !ill>oni 0 r't t>8 J CstlGISi1 12 N .S 4 462I46&48 'i>253! u r>>td.,4o>. s I»it>r>.46s, citrt>g t»c ssrr>b»>r>case. toed!ateconstruction before lt candetermine the necessityfor fakingprivate proper y for n. public pttrpose.t' Th»tp<»e,hti1if thennly purpose is to gcncrttterevenue, court.s would be ut!likuphold acquisition. However, where rcvcntte rt>ising isonly iricid ntalto the pttblic piirpose, then the taking is morc likely to be !i pl>ehl." Isle ibiliLyisalso an important 1>art, ofan advance acq»isition pro- gratn,parti<;ulsrly so wihere new rojted .'ace ! heGnverrunent agency obtains title i nfce in goodfaith, it, !nay dispo..<:ofland or shift rts uses if changedconditions dictate. It may »iser!o prohibited advance con- dt!,>ti<>n perse, Asid<, from fraud and b>1<1 faitlt, >iud assuming the pro ecj ted useis for a valid public p urf >os<',co111'! s its ve focusedt heir >rtton the reasonableness of the titne period involved. 3. ruajor <>bjec!ion! o aland bank is app>tretttlyfear of "socialism" andof 1 ofland, iind that individuals inay 1>epl>i<'ed in a tenurialrclationshif> with Goverrimcrii,,Tho fact tet!»tij>s,however, that Govern!»entis! helarges! <» ncrof land in the Ut!iteI St»!< ands is increasingits acquisition <>flan<1 doily for public 1»irksand otlier us<>s. The fact, tliat, in. nett cotnttr>rttity de ret,itriied to privat ..owriirship nftns. !Vitlr tet comniunitydevel<>prtient,, !bet'e may he a problemin det<>niiiii»g whether or notland is beingtaken in tidvance.If, for < xttmllc, ! hcprojected size of thcrretv coiiiiriuniiy tvcr e 100,000popu- latii>nutt 10,000>tcres, initial developnient might require only 500 aedin stagesafter the land tvas irnprorn ofthe mrnunity niight.ho!sever, require a substantiiilperi<> of tinte l 10 to 15years or urore.Son!>. land would riot bedevelol>cd until years >tfter original devi.lnptu<.»Li>adbegun. If con>me<1 for later devclnpment >tas invttlidated itsbeing tt takitigtoo fur in ament coukl be 1>revcr>L«l.Ovrners of landcould develop tt< cording to t}ierrown plans andrc>1p»pprcciatcd values caused by thc iiew count!unity developers i»vest,uc»t,<>f resources. Regulation might be construedas 1>nreason- iibl<, bitt i,he developerwould be povcrless t.o <2 erciseeminent d<>niaii. L»ter conrovements, ttould be proliibitivelyexpensive and new comtnunily devcloprncnt rniild i effectively prevented. C'asrrlruunity developrrt<;nt, tn mean in advan!eof thenrmunity h git!sand not the date of ultitnatecotnpletion. elcssuring Lite period 'Corof >rior«LS2 So. 2d. j>97 Fln.!, <«ri, denied 34j> U B,821933!. SeeC terr 1 ort.4>rton id >re evi>!, S. Deportment«j r>ote9. o<>ton«jns «nd Urben Development, "Adv«neo Aonthe latter date could have the irnMaesacA>>setto Tlirnughouttldspart of the paper, a riumbvr of«bserx «itious have «er>made aboiit the.tfmau«ett«case l« relates to the v«irioii: aspe'tsoftho complex issue ofpublic iise. P< rlialis it willbe l>clpfi>1 nciwto surnmariz.ti«ns «dv«nips>c thc»r wi li the<:riteria established earlier in thop >per, Pi,blicrisc, as a legalconcept, has rnariy dim<»siii»s. lt serves ad spcndi>ig, >md,apparentlv iii %4ssa<.1>usotts, tlievxte»> iif this:.tricture isoilual for the, exvrciiowvrc. 'AI«rc<«ver, i>L exhatis Ll>etrcatriri.»t of prescirtus< s;ird fut«rv,us<;~. Butwhat significanro dothese staterr><»ts havefor new <,'orn>»unity development.For ono thing, «<< quisitioii iif lan«>lb. limiti.dto actiial1>iiblic uses, h«Ls hist«ric«illv be< n i.xliand vs whereeven though the usesare in fact priv«t<.thc court hatore rr<>t<>dthstandingthv fact that m«st<>f thes<> public p»ri>osc cas confined to cwal proJ<', wli< 'ts,re thv publi< i>at<:I-c of 9><.irpurpose was dvterininod bytl>e blighted r«aditie lan<1!, therehave been some cases v,.g., tho T~irt

'ke;1««ses that the courtscalled public even th«ugh it, < at>be p<.rsuas>vn piiblic uss,the permissibilityof acquiring«nblighternew < om- munitydevelopment will probably<,the favor«>1>leenew conimunity concept will als«dependunn- str<'cific «>t>d necessary. If this is do»c the rvquirementsof fu<.iirepublic use «ill also b< satisfied. If thesevarious demn»r>ur>ity y iii aequi>ingthe land for the newcommunity. But it will:>isens to say,if it is starioi. «nd I><>l>lic expenilitures,the>i it is clear that the piirpose»-ill not h«achic«il, becaurt,siblefor Gover>rrr>cntto recoup s<>r»o ol' it.sir>v<.stments, if it doess> without emphasizingthat the reroupm<.ntitself >snot onv nf its spe:ificpiirposr s forbecoming inv<>lverl in new community develop- mer«t?Answers to questionsof this typ< will b<.dvtermiuar>norin»which Governmentchooses t«jusiify its involvement. Th»s,it shtcan be justified. 79

8. L:g 'slativefinfhngs for yncMic@@roose Thelegal significanc of legislativefinChngs Tliroughoutthis part of the paperthere have been, on balance, probablymore negative than positive commenis made about the legal- itv and constitutiiinality of G ivernment involvement in new comrou- nity levelopment,EInwever, in spite of the iicgativeremarks, tlie feasiuilitv of the Governmentsponsored new c immimity conceptwill ultimately ihipendon how well thc Gov irnmcfit'sposition is docu- mem.cdby the legislatureand advoiaiedbefore the courts.Tlie Ailvisory Commissionon IntergovernmentalRelatioiis sensedthe gravity of this requirement wheii it sLahed: I'aiticular care should be taken in drafting state legislation authorising the es rc seof cniincnt domain powersby land development agenciesto include a clear a id detinit iindingby the legislaturethat the acquisitionof land for future devcl- oi>ment to assurethe best possible use of nat,ural resourcesis a public purpose. Cioir s increasiiigly defer so legislative findings cf public purpose.ss In this sectionof the paperan effort will be rusdefirst to determine how muc'liweight the X'[assachusettscoiirts ~i~Uplace on thesetypes of fiiidiiigs, and second,to examine fh i various claims ivhich might cons:,itutean appropriatelist if findingsfiir stateenab!ing legislation. The 1;iiv is well established in ! fassa :husetts that the findings of the legisliiiureare to lie givengreat weightby iho courts cMyndon decision!,Thc uiiwillingnessof the co iris to pierccthe "legislative thicj:et" was exemplified in 19f12when the siiprcme judicial court d cia red; ar.Th;nell principlesessabiisbeZ applical>le Everywhenever presuniption thi. constitutionalityisiiiduiged in favor of a statuteof the isvalidity attackedof the statute..., There is a very wide discrctiiin in the legislature. If tho question is fairly dibatshle, courts cannot substitute their judgementfor that of the lcgisl itur ." 0» some questions it appears i,hat the 1cgislniive findings sre j»i i ltd by the courtsss conclusivepresiimpiiiins. Oii ; suchquestion is ihc issue of "necessity" iv! ich was i.liscussedearlier under t,lie headin< of fut»re iise. Alth »igh the iosc law on fuiiire use p»scs soni probleinsfor new corninunityanil acquisitionpolici is,it seems that mostof theseproblems have been created by a,jack. of firm.sud specfic!cpisjative findings of necessity.Consiiler, for example,the caseof "sty of Bostonv. Talbot,where the siiprcmeju licial couit, w hil ~ rulingfavorah'4 on the permissabiliiyof a conde nnationsuit, d m a>strafedits deferenceto a, clear lcgisiative statement of ne 'aseity.' Thc iue.tion whetherthe usefor whichland i, takenunder the right of eniincnt doins,inis;> public useis a judicial q cation,and the determinationof the legis- larur: may be revisedby tlic court. But if theuse for iehiehthe okiagis madeis pi bti., hc tuestioau>hether the tahi igof a partioutarpiece of realestate ie r ecessary or er.,>e tieris ta legislativeguestion, upon iohichthe tecis 'orof the tegisfature,as a tr b>u a oj fact, is coaclusise.oo 1'he content of the legislativefi'ndings It has been stressedthroughout i,his paper that the public niecha- nisn. neededfor new community developmentis one that would be

0 + ii R, op.elk., p. 162. < H>U-OroorBok scCo. v. Coo o iso mscrof rokor as tI@dos rs,244 Mss L604, 184 N K. 2d344, 348 i62! '4 C: 8of Boo osv, Ta so N, N.E, 1016,1016 010!, emphasisadded. capableof acquiringand/or controlling large tracts of land iri ur- b«nizingareas for thedevelopment of new communities. Since there airer.dyexist several ofthese mcchanisru» established in other States, <,'rhapstheir enabling legislation would »6'er a guideas to howthe egislativefindings should 'bbe phrased forMassacirusetts. Theenabliiig legislationforthe recentlv established Xeav York Urban Development Cori«offerswhat is probablythe most copious set of findings.The statiitebegins by emphasizing a long list of problems, including persis- tentuncrlrployment forthe State, the problem that unemployment in turn ere«i,es,and the irrefFicient and obsolete facilities i.e., iridustri«I, commercial,and community facilities, the existence of blight «rid the tren<1totvard blight in ruanyareas!. The various liroblerns just li:t<'d arethen liriked with caiises, suclr as lack <>f adequate plarriring und tire inabilityof theprivate sector to solvethe so-calleI "iirban crisis." Finally,the legislation states, as a matterof piiblicpolicy, that Xeiv Yorl:can begin addressing theso problems by cretttirig a- Statcurban development corporation which, through the issuance of bondsat«l notesto the private, investing public, by encoIrraging rnaxiruum participation hy thepi'ivatc sector of theeconomy, including the sale or leaseof thecorporal.iotir~ intcrcstin projectsat theearliest time drctned feasible. and through participa< iun in prr constri urbanizing are«s away frorri th< urbn» core, Yet, nearlyall of ihe legislativefi»dings for the,ULCC werc focuseiiientni rapt!.'y gro',~ing ii ban,ueas. 2, frtficid suitable for building site,:,the diHiculty of ai;,ractiug private capital at ressonabie cost to finance develol>ment,and the ditfic>rtty of private enterprise alone to plan, fi>isnce, s,>idcoord>nate iudusr,rial and:ommercial development with residential developments for persons aud fa>r>itIesof low incomeend with adequatepublic services 1 oserve new development. 5. State acquisition of land, site improvement, and disposition of land arouiid the fringe of urban growth areas aad at other points ia anticipation of future grow .h, provide a major method for imple>nmiiiiig sts.t,esnd loc«l urban growth policies for «ssisting private developers.» The proposedlegislation bv Erasnowiecki and Paul complements tl>e ACtR flndurgs by providing elaboration, particularly for the clairas of eKciency arid economy. Siilectcd passagesfrom their l>ropos>rd legislatiori spell out the following purposes: e " e To secure open spaces, within metropolitan «ress. which will promote the ecoaonuc uso of lsrul sad the cconoinic dcveloprueut uf f«ciliiies, service,, sud i-nprovemcnts necessaryfor urban communiry living in mciropolilan areasby: Restrictinrr or preventing riew»rbsn development in arras where it >>ill i>»pose unre«sonable costs foi' required public f>tcihties or services; Retarding development * e " iu arcs whereit is uot yet ti>aely because of ts>,tr of «dcquate public facilities " e e sari because the costs v hich thc cxtcn- si»u, construction, operation> or improvemi>nt of erich facilities e e e would irupose o>i the area are unreasonable by comparison with its present resources', e " * Preserving less congested land areas in the rcetropolitan areas which coulc be used, in part to achieve econo>nice in planning and locating transpor- t«tio t facilities.+ The legislative findirlgs could co>rtinue, but it seemsr»orc important now to ask whether tlie dozen or more already listebscrver I: If data cannot bc marshaled to shovr that the preservation of sa open space ares wiH reduce costs and promote long term economies in the public sector, then the c esirsbility of >a«ay projects snd perhaps, too, the r>httoeophrfnf fke underly>sf> chub>t'r>rfferft'slut>O>t »>i>if be Ope>StO eerier>Sgt>ear>O>t.s' ff wiH be rerallerl how Justice Finley, in liis disseriting opinion in i7ogtrev. Portof Seattlejudicially recognizeil some "statistic J flict'" " which demonstrated to him that, it wus in thc l>ublic interest of t,'ie people of Sca.t,tieto buy oper>lan>I for an industrial park. One is lift to ponder horv convincing these "facts" werc anrl v;hy the niaj arity of the court, did not, flnd them srrfficienl.ly c<>ml>ailingto corn- mit the city to buy thc lanrl in qrrestion. One possible explanation is tliat the statistics werc not examined as a part of the legislative liis tory whicl> authorized the taking in the first place. Whatever the case, it is clear that the data supporting legisliitive findings for Governrnelr t irivclveinerit in large-scale development, shouhl be made public arid fornr>illy recorded as u part of thc legislative process, Trrrr>arde critical ezrtmiftat>'r>rtof f>i>hHcher>efif~ and costs l:rr exarrrirrirqthc f~cts wluch >.or detractfrorri the various let<:>lative flinchngs listed thus far, it is helpful to divide them into beni.;fits and costs. On the bcnefit side of the ledger, there are at least four sigliiflicantbirt somewhatinterrel»ted assertioI>s.~ » acrrr, "StateLe>risrstrve Prosmm; New Pmpossls for r>>69,»pp. 501-2-2 roes!. n 1m>s>Mn>leer>rsnd Psnl, op. cit., pp. 21S-21a >Sadded!. >SS>ie »Ote Sl, Supra, >eMost or thesefour assertionshave been developed from material lu Shnupaud Macr>, ">tdvsuoed Laud AC»uleft>en l>p LOCel OOvernment," Op. Cseite nOte 37, Snp>n. a, Benegta i! Attire 6'OffernmentauppOrt far neercOmmifnit Jea tfrdl OC4eae lelopment coats per <ernmentservice, There are severpedoutput, while tbe costof the land remainsconstant.~ Also theredlictiofi may be created over time, because the acquisition may pruses will bc abliiornentis intended more as a reb.ittal, demonstratingmitigating circumstancesto the charge that aivanc<,dland acquisition wi11 be to<> costly f<>r t1al]enyotfu Algsof llew catesill his crifica1 article entitled: "The Mirage«f New Towns."" En his linalysi<,ho ofrered twe a>liblicownership of land to recapt»reincrc- mpf!fs in vallie is a problembecause a! it forgoesthe cybernetic market.JJ>cc1>auism ao and ! it may inhibit the entrepreneurial seanh for llew uses,'~He considersthe last reasonmost important because"if Jrdvahie are oiie «f the prunary incentives f<>rpr! vat<' i>artiripr>." He arguessecoughland tnay ba chc>tper its 1>ricebeing establishedprimarily by il,s locational valxpensiveoverall. In fact he believesotherwise: " .:1>oaoland will probablybe inconvenientland and inight prove t<>be 1 cryexpensive in the end" p. 28!. This arguxneilthas less force tjiall his first st leastfor the purposesof this paper!,because Alonso appears to be speaking more about, the land economies of new towns iri rliral, rather than urbanizing areas. i!'! ernrltentaponaoraItip of neto commanitiea trtant.B«th are conc<.rnew the privatesector has woiked against Government cost op tiinization. The first has to do v ith the selection of sites for the developmentof "actualpublic uses." Today, governments delay ac- ' JbnL, p. 26, n alonoh "The i><>os ofthe Conrrntt5!, rn i>orna op.rneat that generatedthe demandin the first place.>a< Tliose«ond part of theabove assertion has to do with the manner by whicl privatedevelopers currently acqliiro sites for. »ew comrnm>ity devel>pmcnt, a, manner that n>igl>tbe cliaracte>iycd as the "land first appr<:«tcfi,bec«>»sr! asit. Us>!ally 1>appens, tile fi>'st action be, priv«>te developerI akes is tive acql>isition of the lit»d, His <:rit< ria 1'orpur< 1>as«> no>m.dlyarc based on such things «>s the «>nticif««lteding area,to sfrvi< < hisprojc<.'t with I,helevel of faciliticsit requires.Although tl>ese c<»isither items vvllich, fr»ra I> regional public p«licy standI!oint, are crucial. Theseinclude su<,t>«;»isiclerations as: I. 'I.'lieimpart his aveon the si>rrounding< omrn»nitiesto meer, tlie inorc.asecldrlr>ands of new residentsiii tho I>r<'Ii. ;3. Thc employment arid valuable «.>it»r:>1activitigill attract. awayfroru «»'rasof greaterneed within thr region. 4. Thechariges in prioritiosin regional«t,r. «ippropriatioii! of furidsthaI, will beroq»irecl Lo provi<]e the «.«rnrniinity with thedesired level of facilities.' ' lt is just th<.sefour kinds of regiorialcwt<>wn developers have recently r e<:ogf>i«edas«rucial to theliiibli« inter'est,of thenow devrlopinent af>« t 1>cs»>To>>»ding area. AVhilesome priva,tc iicw community d<>clop«is prepare analyses of regionalgrowth patter>ha and de>nog>af!hic anderonomic tranr!.cial sales arnl Ieasi>ig brochiircs! or for el«ter- ri>i»int;wh«tI, share ot' a particularlocal rriark<.t they ca!>esp<'ct to capture. If govcrnmcrital agenciescould b« involved in the si<.escler.;- tio»p' ocess,hopefully they would have the nocessary motivation f>f>d expertiseto encourageregional corn!nunity strategies that s«ttisfythe regionti needsand plaris and to discourage.I,hose that do not. i6! t7offe~nznents ponsorski p ofne>J coznzf>zf nit!ed wi ff meanan improve- mentLie both, the patterzts of land>fee azior. the quality of plannincf.Tliis particularassertion serves as a potpourri <«f srcondary be»sf>ts asso- ciated,in onesense, ivith advancedpubli< aequi!itionof land. Tlie value,cfitis easyto uni be better and more realistic witli tlie toolof advanceacquisitaol> be«a»se there will beless impedi- mcrits and obstaclesto deal with, In this sense,the thrust of this as«rin>izethequahty and utility of a newurban environment while seeking t<> minimize its cost. However,in quite anothersense the assertioiiis social;that, is, seekingto create.urban communities tliat can "intermeshthe lives of peoplewho l>ve in them,by concentratingon integrating their work, » Shou»,op. slt t«.4 eeenote 3Z, Supra!. rrnfv~ft>«Hobbs,'"New ., <,otree; ig!. aPubpo oreFr>veto Venturet" u>shed manuscript,p.>2, Harvard seNotes from speech given by ProfessorRose of the Universityof Birmingham,Eogieud, et Harvard Un>vs9<>g!. plity, education and accessto each!, int<11<.ctual and artistic develop- Inent8, social contacts, person<>3as well ss community facilities and seivi es." I~ To a large extent thesephases constitute the platitudes of f>1>ted and socio- ocon<>mirallymixed, intentional coinmuniticshas not yct beenforth- COIIUilg, !o>nesociological studies have beendonr, how~One thing is clear; it is difficnaboiit tlie va1ucof such comniunity developments.However, thoseare the types of opinions sinl studies which must, be reconciled if the legislative findings are to hiive s»Ri<;ientsubstance to withstand judicial s<.rutiny. i>.! 1>7<>n77ip oj 77ei ties m'll pro77>otea>id pe~ t e more e.te7>bl>'cfacilities ait that most of th.; emphasishere is on the outputof tEiedevciopnient. This includes s»chtlgs iis lowerdevelopmmt costs, E>oth because of economiesof sc;ilc a>id bfservices e.g., higher deiisity riii aiis sinallcr sewer length allotments 1>ercapita!. Tl"e dot only brcausccosts rsn be reduced but <.lsobecause some of the benefits cttn bc increased. The fact that 1<<<.getracts of openspace can be lireserv<.dfor recrcstioiia1an<1 ron- sei'vitional usc under plsnncd unit devclopmeritis but one example of tlicse benefits. A1:o l<>wprdevelopment costs tvould ultimately help reI costs atte>Iid fticilities for 1c><>1lyplaced oii the costs or marginalcosts!. This is a.conceptual iv<;IL'ii< ss Iiteve>i though new toi> ns rnsy have a lo>tlthg,they are probably mor nonetheless, much less important to thelegislative fiiidingsthan the benefits.In fact, if any costsare to be emphasized, they shouls s<>t!>at th< legislature< snshow'f>ow three costs wnuld he ehminste aeSltoup, op. oit., p. 101, » 7<<>sihrtotto, "Boo}ei Beeeerch to New Cororott>dt>ee"JhlP, p. 387,Novet>thor 1007. ~eA ieoeo,op. eit., pp. 7-8 >etS'.soup. op. oit., pp. 47-02. 85 or relvenses for demolition and r «>t!s>ruction e,g., consider the social c<>sts to the people being r<.rn<>vf 6! may be sufficient to tip thescales in favorof a 'preventive develol>rncil t policy. S>tr>>5rrj Thepurpose of thissection was to entphasizethe significance of legislativefindings, to indicatethe types <>f legislative flrndi»gs that haveb> en ill< lude« in <.liabliriglegislsiior> f<>ilniblic land corporations i 8 States,ai«l, flirislly, to exarnirte l>ritrospect, it seems fair to concludethat the significance of legislativefindings, provided they are accur«tcly ttndcomprehensibly formttlt>t<.dluiddocutnented, isstrfllci<.tttly pow rfulto permitGovern- rnenttt.tio>t, that, in manyagape 5tole ur>drrI ast lIvv. Thus, the directioir isif this iype of legislation isto be s«ccroposed ttnd implerrietiied, VY/tat is notvrequired is a ri«ori'and critical ex«mination of the types of findingsnecessary. In sl«>tt, if 1!ublicsponsorship ofnew methingthat, in fact,beneflits the public, b<>th economi- c«lly<,ially, arulif thesebeneflits csr1»ot be rnatche«by other types<>f p«hlic. or l>rivat,eproblem-solving mechanisms, iheri these factsshould be dc>mortstrable. If it cttrrtror. l>eso <1crnonstrated, then the utopiatinoti<>ns of new community <3eveloprnent must be cast zsi«earid more practicftble solutions should be so«"lit. In anyeveirt,, tigrisi, clearly the direction for futurere sear

B. HOME RULE l>ILE5iMAs One<>f the most striking features of thl, politicalgeography of .>f>tss>tclrusett~isthat it contains noterrit<» y that is n<>t incorporated into otr>of tlie C<>min<>rtwealth's312tow»s and 39 cities."' The l>recess;>firirporaiing towns in Massachtisettshit its peakbetween they erfnitte«by Constitutional amendment, in 1821, ceasetortly h«s there been little tendencvr<> diminish the nurriber of tnunicipilitiesin Massachusetts,'"but the general court, w}rer! pe- titior>edfor theconsolidat.ion of two or more< iticsor townsin recent vparsht s refusedeven to considerthc possibility,na » r>urrsuof GovernmentalResearab, ffntrersftrr OfMessaehusett<, rntermuuiOipsl Relations fu llfsa- sarbuse<>e3> ia55! hereinafter sited as rater Relations! . »Legnletlre Rososroh Council, <'o>e>uoowesltb ofMssssohuseted COnatttuflOnal Amendment! 88 t<>55! hereinafter sitedSS Monter>nNat>ona> League ofCities, Department OfUrban Susa» J Pres77 i f065! hereinafter Oitod so Ad!noting Municipal Boundaries!. Despitethe doferencc of the generkd court totvard maintenance of tho ex>stingand historical number of municipalitieswithin theCorn- monweallh,no strongtradition of n>unicipalautonomy existed at a»y timf,up to thopassage of thehome rule amenfhnent in 1966.On the contrary,Legislative control of eventhe most t>catling Le!ail ot local govf;r>imentwas the rule.'" The sourcesof that col>trolmay be found, first, in an early a,l>d repeatedassertio>i by tl!ecourts of 3>tfass>tchusettsof thcdoctrine notv kf> yvn as Dillon's R»le '" anrl, sfconil, in tk>eright of free petilii!i> written into the Com>nonwcalth'scons! itution,'" '1'hegeneral attitude of' tl>esupreme judiciaL court, toward lliwns arid cities has remained Cin!itant into the.20t!> !elltury. For exl>nlpke,in 1941th i court st>tted its i.t titu !e Like this: 'ities >tlirttowns arc political subdivisionsrrfia e I foi' th convenienr,a tmiriis- tralion of government,arid they possessonly suchpoivfrs as are conferredilPon theiii in trrms or by necessaryirnpticittion of enabtirignels, [Cital,irma omit.ted. Ther areSeparate unite, pOSSeSeing Onlythe Ituthnrny thux «ntrnS ed,anil aCiiiig its ir.strumeiitalitics of local self-government.»7 S >ck>a jullicial interpretation if mluiicipaldepe>idencv was rein- for ,edprior to 1966by the actuall>raci >r of t!«generalcoiirt iii deal- i»g with petitions>u»de t4> it, unflerarticle XLX of the constituiie practice had been to receiv»and c.respectiveof its worth,tlie res>litwas to en oiiragc"the fi!ing of reqi!estsfor legislationon localaffair> which are >tlready within tlie con'ipetc»ccof locallegislative or ad>niiiistrativebodiis, an<1 tvh>ll> !nioht better be resolved Locally," "' Althoughthe initiative of petitioningthe legislature wus that of themunicipality, each time it exerciseis rateits l debility,alit its strength.The paralysis of effectiv Local. clf-gt!ve!»- r !e!!tand the !claysInherent in Icg>slafivepetition miglit, have been tolerable100 y ala ago,or perhapseve» 50. But with tlie growt» <>f largeurban cefiters, with theirmany >>lid urgelit nee ls,the silliation kiackgro>vn too burdensome both fiir tlie urbailn>unici!!a!ities;t»rL f»r the legislatureitself. The formerif>creasing!y required the abilitv to assi!ssa!id attack th ir own proble>nsas tliey arose,ivithout first hasing to goto a,legislature, where a. pi!tition n!izh t bl el»as»later l !iy log-rolliiiganil dilatorytactics, or tlefeatedoui,riglil becitiisc of li »- tilil,yfron> rural Legislators or a bi>ron sper.ial legislatifin."9 The legis- latiue its .lf, on thc other hand increasinglyburd inc !with its o«n growingfunctions, no]onger ha theI tifne necessary toconsider prop- erlv sll the pertitions f»adeto it,. In a State,such as Massachuset ts,where Dillon's Rule ivas iic ep ted doctrine, two 1>roblems had to beovercome both by muliicipalitiesand '" >Innfripal>Inme Rnle, supra note 147, at 37,doser>bm thr graduallysuhcrdi«ation ofroirirnuoiti.: io thegr nr ra> court arid concludes: "Ry thecud of the19th century there rmtid he no uic at>cncf inuiilcipci homerule bv the >eg>s!ature because there was no horne rule left to "violate." This is s >ntbc rase tin ><>%!," i« IbM, 33-90. iii >gassachusetts Const>tut>on, pt, 1,ai t. 19.The people have a right,in anorderly it ii i! prsrralur manner, io aswmb>elo consult upon the < omrnongood; g>ve instrurilon ro their rrprrseatetivrs, arid tc rrilur~i cf the !egestivebody, by theway of arl:!ress petitions. a, or remcnstranrra redress ofthe ti~ong dc,ir them. and of th~ wrOngs done theta, and of the grievancesthey suffer. ear,«i B«ra>erabefore >rtssagev, mayer oftheaarf home efdcrraea rule amendment,of Beeer>V, 309theMass. court 3CS, cited390 thc33 NR. then 2dsrt. 242, 2 243oftlic 941!. arne«dmssy Iii 1934,ouihr i;hev 2 lai i COnstiiutlonas the bas>sfar thc "sett!eddoctrine thol the tOwiisof tlii OOminonwcaithpot essno municipalinheent right corporationstc self-secernment isin the "!eglslature" and ibr the '.proposit ' Podifotk v. thatonTcwa '>he ofBrcokffae,power to create,347Mass.change x4,233,and 197dretroy N.E. sd ic1, 323 l 964!. '» MunicipalHome Rule, supra note 147, at 94. "' is IbM.48; Sanda>ow, "The Limits of Mun>c>pa> Pawer Under HOme Rule: 4 Rolefor theCOurts." 48gl inn. L. Rev.043. 833- >>$934!. by the legis ature.Not oniy did both require someafFirmative assurance th»t mu»icipalitics could enact measuresfor their own governance with«ut seeking prior legislation or eve» prior legislative approval, but they alsorcq»ired the establishmentof somerci.ativeiy clear limits <>nthe ability of the legislatureto interfere with and annul localgovern- mental action. The soliition to thesetivo problemsrequir< d someform of hcme rulc cnactmeiit. Because of the <'xistenceof Dillon's Ru]e in its cfhouie rule eiia<-tnieutin AIass><- eh»sr tts < ouid be an amendment Eo the State c<>n.tif»tioii. Tle curistitutioii was so amended in 1966,"c Thc ac>ual efFect of that amendment, on the status of cities and towns in the Co>r>mon- wm the dual functions of a hoirie rulc a>nendrnei>t: as a grant of ir>rai power and as a limitation «n Stat<;legislative power. In bothits aspectsthe homerule snicndment bears upon the efficacy and'egiti>nscy of s newcomznuniti<,s statute drawn to operatethrough s public <«rporationon a statewidebasis. Ini~ rul! grant, or any ordinanceor byl»>vpa;scd under that grant, n>igi't»»ilify statewidenew cominunities legislation in a particuliir iuu>u!cip»lily,the cfBcacyof such an ai>proachto neiv coznmuI>ity creationhss found inost "clearly and direcily" to be public purposes- the '-erv facilities the new communities< «rporstionwas designedto provide.Further»>ore, the pr<>posedstatute in part III clearly sets or!t in section8 thevery kindsof principlesand standardsiiecessariiy precrdent to land acquisitionthat wouldquiet piiblic snd judicial iuicsseat thepossibility of uncontrolledeininent domain takings. .SI>ho»~huo raseprecisely analogous to that posedbv new c«m- mu»itic=legislation has come before the court asyet., the dircti>,'>f tile courtrcf the ger>eral court's er!iirent domainiiower to s publicnew co>nmunities corporation under aii cn>ibiing>>ct containing carefully drawn guidehnesarid a strong lezi=lative findi»g of public purpose. 1. Eioundareat The secondho>no rule liinitatinn on the power of the legislature l.osr t i.iir«ugha statewidenew coinmunities cori>oration concerns the i»at er «f bou»d>Lryadjustment. Unlikii1»nd se- a«nil>iy,which required a detcrlninationof thosegeneral isw powers "iii reliilioii to cities and tohvI>s the legislature couhl delegatesud thos! >vluchit couldnot, the homerule amendmentis <'xplicitabout tlie . peunicipal corporation E>oundaries; it is >hr:gener»i court that mayenact a speciallaw- r'+'olel> for the incorporation,or dissolutionof cities si>dto>vno as corporate eritit.e.-,>rlter stion of city or town >>o>>ndariesa>rdmerger or consolidatio>rof cities a«natters.'"' Altli«!igh tlii» lang!>aged<>cs r>ot exclude s, <4.1< ga efr«iu excrciing ti>c:ry fuucti!>ns for the legislature,l,he res. o»s rebiitliiig »cii n.dele»»ti«n «ire persuasive. As a rnatter of logic ii w!>ulcibe >ihsiirllfr> Jh>'>v oric inc!>rporat<nimu!iilydcvcioI>ment corporalinn -t<> alter th<;stat>is nf a»ofhiicii>sl <;r>rporalion of thc State,As a rr 1~Sissis:Iruse<lot>on, rrm. sr<. 8!>. 'r 5>sioslrlrse

  • >9, eccl,lorl 8'27 Andfii»tlly, >is a siatlitory fr!atter,the exisih!g s<;hemc of pi'tition for m»ni<:ipal incorporation, alinixation, or <:urt. S :ctioff8 ! ofthe h unerlile ant<',f!dment> <>fcourse, ilnes iiot pi 2- hibi;the legislativr enactment t t<> enact, su<:li <.'ielatiili..To tlien oii any individuals or ori»ip oiits.dcitself, thc gei!erul court, lias given that gi'oup oiily tlie right tn> petitio!ffor, lloi, i occur only by specialact of thc legis ai,uri;.'" Tlieimplications for a newcommuiiity devclopnicnt <:orporatioii arever»nfefi thec evclopmentcorp»ratio!i would have to ~ecure siich adjustmelit, or allfrationby special art fromihe general coiirt. The most ftppttrer!f obstftcles tg> this aspect ofnew ciirninunity devel»1!ment, therefore, are p<>lit,cal andpractical: how to getthe necessary specirationsothat potentialprivate and other developers at best, will bea1tracted to,and at worstnoi, be discouraged from, participation in thenew commumty development project. Uf!dcrthc envisionedoperation of the fiewcomm»nitips statute in part[II, thereare several situations inwhich the devfloprnef!t corpora- tion woiilddesire. the gef!crf!Ici>uit, to exerciseone or n!oreof th< pow it by section!. As liasbee!! d<'scrilied, tl«p»r- poseof thestatute is to cstf!blisl!a priigram of f!ctvcnmn»ifiity developmint that will complcnieni,arid s existingprograms of urbanrenewal and redevelopme»i, 'I'hc commlifii- tiesti> be d<'veloped, therefore, are tn be large, reliitivcly self-suffi«i<,»t, responsiveto arealneeds, divcrsifienomicbase, ft»d located in url>ar.izingregions containing substantif!I «ress f»ft statewideplanning, may necessitate the rf f ne,14Msaa hi>i 1574!; Rene v C e .F>sir rree, 55 Mass. oush.!578 851! . ss ofmimici pal 85. f>asp!!e oueroading ofthe amendment thatwrnrld hrvslldale such !nfstricter4funfeipof read iofigFAmehfassschusetts Rs r' !952!courts!t!h 25is 32. not groat. See geiierally »:das:achusetts geneea! laws annotated n. 3 sec,5; <'.4? src. 7. »r Eveswere ageinrral procedural lawtoextst, thesis-cls! actwould still hc the more important fool ln newoomunity, !w rcr!uirsd.thegrr ster !f!fe!fhoor! lst!u>t corn»ulsfon reinthe general cour in the for u 1»hee >pro!s>sod statute, pt. Tf1,infra, sec.8 li!. murricipnfinenew communities dogmatically within the borders of a. single muricipslity, ono is fseod with a choice among a set of alternatives whose value must be assessedby balarici»g political feasibility against, devii,the contiguous municipal corporations will be designatecl A and 8 rcsprctivcly, itnd the over- !apfirrg nett community site will bc designated C.! 8, dtlterrtatit>eapproach to dealing rf>rtA,local goee>nmerelngr- ynent.of new cornvnunitt'ea 1naotion The least politically controversial ahernative avails,ble is to do notliing, to allow, urrder section 35 of the proposed statute, the return to the control of municipalities A and 8 those portions of C falling ttithirr their respective boundaries,'" Because ilasstime will this laissez faire appr<>ach leave part of a, completed new cornmuiiily our,sido the protection of some lociil governmental unit. This very fact, creates probl<:nrs, how<.vor, 1'rom a ptafining poirrt of view. Ainorig tire ress<>nsfor <.mphasizirigin {,he1<;qislati<>n d<.vol<>p- nier t, of large oommurrities was tho desire to at,tract, mhabitants from all iiicotrre levels, to accommodate c<>fnln<..rcisl,iiial,as well as rosideritial, dovel<>pmcrrt,and t<>take advantage of the ecoriorrtiesof scale inhoront in their constructiori. To plan such a com- rrdfortune of s, solomon. Mur>icipality A woukl riot sit irother dct;loprnont, to fall within municipality t3, Nor, for example, would A visit to includet,he greater part of the E<>winc<>rtn<1B likely'wouhl des, air<1 sorvo as a disincentive to investmerit froin prit ate developers,"' lirespectivo nf tho problemsof planiiiiig and roblom<>f governing C is itself adequate cause f<>rrojoctiorr of this laissez faire alterirrulary lirto might bisect, C alof!g physicallyunderstorrd ablo but politically incomf>rohonsible lines,creat- »ig arbitarily separ>tteunits of goverrrinent,a functionalentity ths.t mill be developing, as it, grows in size, rieeds and it>tercetn if oiie werc: t<>draw tire dubious concliisioli fr<>rn these fa<,ts t ha thc ut tor simplicity of seekingno b<»intffffrunity,niunicipalities A s»d Br as a practical matter, still would Eiave to eHectuat<;some rat.her rrs" «t «ny time durf«gthe developrnont process. No privatedeveloper could prnsfbry be attracted in such«sfr oontro! over l>ts unified plnonifc dnplic«ties would prob«bi> be Suflic.'Snt<«defer private mvestment. A. furti>cr disincentive, however, is the likelihoodthat suchsn in«fir- »<»unityprop- erjy.Rlelf>enbs of a cooperativeprogram might i»elude simple informal agreementsor moreformal i»term» »cip tlcontracts.'" Thc possibility <>facopti»g either or both of thoseclem»»ts c >»stitul,esthe second alter»ativ for, deuli»gwith tile bo»ndaryproblems created by an >wBI'l 1pplilg»ew co»1fY1unity. Intef7nitnictpalcooperation Pr s»nlably the healihy growt.h of thenew e»It<> e»ter i»io voluntaryagreements, Despite any in e»iiv ., h »vever,the agrealso has the advantage of lou clingthe unit costsof providinga s rvice,of not interferingwith citizencontrol a»d partic patio»,an»slik .ly i» Massachusetts, Iuuni<,ipalibyA is s,relatively ls,ige city;»>d municipality 8 is a mor i rural town.or smallcity. ln that situation,thc bargaitii»gpower of thc t1comuiucipalities would be unequaland the ability to provid» »cede.lservices would lie alnlostexclusively with A. A ;o»scq»entl> couldchoose either to exacthigh rates for tile services,or to ignore8>s requestsfor cooperation.Furthermore> because the Y>ewcommunity probably was located as it wasin order to relieve urban center A from the excessivedemands already being made on its servicesby its core city population,A. might not be in a positionto providethe needenediate local interest of each p trticipating unit is not liitely to he in confhct with the broader areawide interest, Since the agreefnentearc voluntary, when such convicts appear likely, governinental units proi>ablywould not chooseto participatein an agreementorif alreadypsrtici- p ting, would withdraw."' Kvenif thedichotomy between area-wide and local interests Bct up iu thisquotation were not a seriousobstacle to therncchanical pro1~- siori of basicservices to the new community,it would be a serious obstaent because o the vottfgn ty of all Ineorporntedn>un e politicsthroughout the eaton onoeaith. Advisory Comn>nsslou on In ersovorn>nentalRelations, "A!tsrnative Approachesto Governments!Reorganlsotion in Netro- l>of tsnA en<,"a 22-22 >62! here no tedasACIR: Aitornative Approaches!. Beegeners>>y F. Bergs noh, ' Kt tab»ritoriai PowersIn tbo MetropoHtonAres" ilg2!. saInto man o paiRelations, supra note 14 at> <-6, >»AOI <: Alien at vsapproaches, supra note 16s, at 3D-21. >+I nd., at.2O, mentscan satisfy on1y sf>ecific, identified rieeds of the newcommunity, andt hoseneeds wiH be !net niost adeq»ately only wheretheir provision is in thc perceivedar ,tt-wideinterests of A.and 8. AlthoughC will be represent d orl the govstiiing councils of both A and B, those bodres meet separately tvith the result that an exclusive reliance on inter- gove".rrrrrcnttrlcorrtracts to meet C's ongoiiigncr ds will leaveC without, any ! neanst» expressthem as a s parateentity to a goverriingbody capa'>leof respondingto them,Thc para]ysislat iit in sucha situation is en,irelyunacceptable for a,ncw cnmnninityof any substantialsize. iVeb opolt'tangof,'ernmeytt The,third altcrriativesolutiori to newcommunity boundary problems then is soine form.of metropolitan governmentirt which the.interests of the ncw communityas a functi»rial,indcpcndelrt whole would be giver. considerationalong with th»se of the murucips1iticswithin whoa»bour!daries the nrw rornmunitylies. This kir»1of metropolitan govelnrrient couli1 not d al wit!I the nett communityonly by discrete, voluritary agri!uments r !ached froin tiros to tinu on narrow issues. Conseqiicntly,metropolitan adminisrration by couiicil-of-govern- mfints,for example,would be iriadequate because it is strictly advisory. Alth»iigh the c iuf!ail might provide for ri present»tionfrom the new comrnuiiity as a separate entity, the cffe«t of council action still ivoul<1be jr>st to rrc»rr!fnend,not to reqliire, thar the dulv constitutod fnunirip»lirieswithin thc coun«ilregion act or>issues pcrtiner!t to the ne W <;omrriuility. !n t h i> l! r lii!Tid,» tr le>cnr>!pnls<>ry I! etropolitan gi>v lament, in tvhicl! thr inter st>sof A, 8, and C ar representedand balanced >icrrtctical and tegttl1>rot>L ins in Massa«husetts,Perhaps the mostconvincing prac- tical problem is tl>at thc t;reation of such a metropolitan government at tl e very least woilld requir'esprciiil legislatioirby the general coiirt; "' while !qiiippingit with the compulsorypowers necessary to overridethi! will of iu iiviflua1rnuf!icipaliries ori someissues rr!ight require an smrndinent to the. horne riile provisions of the constitu- tiori."' Becausethe likelihood of achieving eve!i the first piece of 1cgis1stion is rcm»te,tlie creationof any kind»f metropolitangovern- mlnt, to assist n !w community rtevelopmcnt in Massachusetts is equally re!note."' Annexation rnerit'Thn »ffoiirrh aii overlapping possib1e,alternative riewcommurrity to rn ;cringisa»iiexation. thc boundaryStric~tlyrequire- iu term. of its pliysical effect on boundary tines,ar!i!exation would mean thc iriclusior! ot tire entire nstv con!munity site witlii» tile bourrdaries »f ori: municil>alityand thc concurrentexcision fr >rrithe contiguous mi!rii;ipaiity of that part of thc site origiiially fallir!g tvithirr it. For equally strorrg 1cgsl and po1iticalreasoris, achieving annexationof a neiv r ominunity is virtually impossibleifi Massachusettst >day, » Sla.sachuserts '.ou~tI >v the homerule ameiidrnent a not desi, althoug!ithe wou!lugof sais8! makesit ovliicntthat thecities aud towns encompassed hy It are noi:iira il to I>iisuperseded hy th»entli y withroe peel to thoseciiurter adopting powers gran!ed to therehy sec,'>, »I' courauldbe created without iui iuneuduiini hy ilissolviiigmuuictpalltles A a uridersec. 8! eudriinror fl is no a rnotro. pohraiiovernn>eti i countyiti iIll tvo 'J>alit v I!i'lesw I!Il esisllilg irietro- pcli aii 92renelii tfie Ccinriieiiwealih,rutermuuieihal uvlstleia, Siiprarich. 8, Ot38-2T. 87-242 7r 7 A simple definition of annexationpoints up the crux of the 1ogal ilnl>ec.iment in Massachusotts. Aan 'xatioii is the addition of territory to s niunicipsl corporation as an integral art. C!enerally, it involves joining sll or part of the territory of an unincorporated, ess pcpulous, or subordinate local unit, to ths.t of s larger unit, usually incor- porate i, offering s inorc complete array of municipal services.i» In Massachusettsa11 local units aro incorporated, and the question thus 1!ecomcsivhether one inCOrporatod municipality may annex part of «n adjoining incorporated municipality. The answer is to be foinld in 41lchome rule amelldlnent and in chapter 3.S f and chapter 42, S 7 of Ne generallaws of tho Commonwealth. ln .Vlassschusetts,as in the majority of States,»o st«tute explicitly excopm incorporatedareas from annexationproceedings, nor doesany- statutestate that only unincorporated territory lnay b~e annexod. In fact, tho only provisionsof the generallaws dealiiig a,t,all v ith annexa- tion are chaptor 3, S 5, and chapter 42, S 7, The first merely provides for uniformity of petitions to the general court for special legislation. The secondprovides that the department of public works, with the COiiCurrenee Of tcwn meetings, may prOpOSeto the general COurt,ChangeS in town k oundaries.'te i%eitherqualifies as M!y sort of enabling act providing procodures for amex«lion.,and no caselaw soclnsto exist dealing with the impli- cations of the statutory silencewith respectto annexationprocedures in Massachusetts. Th!'eeother jurisdictions,however, have considered the legality of annexingincorporated territory in the face of statutory silence,and all th.ee have denied the legaXity,'49 If the appellate courts of other States were called upon to answer the question of whether or not annexation laws are «pplicsble to incorporated territory in the a,bsenceof an expressprohibition thereof, there is more than a possiMity based on cxpei'iencein the abovethree States of North Dakota,Wisconsin, and Texas! that, tiiev wwl!,whother ol not it has adopteda homerule charter, receives aH th» protectionsof the amendment.149 Vice!ringthe amendmontfrom the porspectiveof tho homerule powe!vgranted, and not the protectionsafforded, one reachesthe sameconclusion Zven with respectto unincorporatedterritory. Yo inost States having home rule provision... the courts have held that, home -ule powersdo not sdd anything to a cities sic1power to annexterritory. Qener tl laws must still be looked to for such power.'» Massachusettscourts too are likely to reach that conclusion. thoughone State does permit a homorule city to annexeven, unin corpotatodterritory on the basisof its homerule grant alone,'»the reservationof the boundary alteration power to the legislature in the home rule ameildmontitself,'43 the presenceof only incorporated1and » A.d usttugMnnletpe! Boundaries, supra nota 149, et l. uelut uniunieipa!Re!et!ops, supra note 8, et 3L «4F, «insstoe!r,"Annotation; A solutionto theMetropo ates Area pro b!ent" 43-43 in|89! tbereettor sited ssAnne ration!. io 5>iii. to 114Massaahusette COnetltutiOn are. Srt. 89, Sec. a » lie Litt!caela,supra note 151, at 93, io lbi l. at 98. nr~MesseehuSetts ConstitutiOn aln. ert. 89,see. 8!, in theCornmorrwealth, andthe total absence of any kind of aiuiexa- tion c»ablinglegislation in the generallaws all suggestthat .vfassa- chusi;ttsvill followthc majority rule. If it does,a newcommunity could bo absorbedby an existing municipalityonly by speciallaw,"' for nogcrieral aniiexation lav- now exist.',As 9 po]itlcalmattet, pa,ssagc of that speciallatv would not be simp.e..I» the 10 years prior to 1960no significant annexation or.- cu,rredin Xfassachusetts" nor mouldt,ho pattern chang< the new cornf!umity scheme. Matters of localpriy cftfroposslshould be tpsto suggest,an annexationstatiite. Partsof the prop >s !tl»t!ttutc I'or example,should bc redrafted to make clear the procedureto bc f<>llowedif annexationnero to bc part of the develop- ment of the n w community. At the pr '»<,rtttime, howevaruiexatiori pro >ed«redoes exist in t hniil iirban gronth, obtainingthat 1>assiigen.«e«sier tf!ttr! <>bt»iriiiig pa»»!tge of th spo :iallaw ct!rrc!ltly»<'.cess try to achieve any ki»fifth alt rn»live, cot!soli i»lion,is < loselyr<'late<1 io annexation arid,cotlse trit! ] tly, pres~ 'i!tssllilllilr 1oliticallirob- 1ctu»«re»ot «nly similar brit more s«vere. !intply rmore mimiripsl rorpcrati«i!»or ui!its r<>« s»,tt nein mii iire.a lvaiiiag ousth>t!t annexation for new < «m»uinitypmer! t it reatesan effective< «mpulsoryrnetropoli- tan govorinnI! t»l u!iit, ii, redt!c<'sthe coordinationprol!i«ms inhererit in a.ruultigoverrii«ent«l ! trit sei,-up,und ii provif1'setby the political infea»i biliiy of coiisolid» i,ior!, Crorterally,c«ns >lidatiou. procedures be vi!ivith sortieforrr! of petition in eachi»!inil>r<>val 1!yinajority t «teit! >uh »lichrtt!ini<:ipality. That, liflic,!lty,«ii<1 the thr »t to lolid >iion Impossible.' ' Tl.c pra tie«1result in Massachusett»has be< n theref tsalof tlio le«islatureoven to considerpetitiotls for con»olid«tion.A case in point,is th«19t>8attempt of t»o lnuriicipalitiosiri w«»tern.vfassa- chus>tt>s io tiidy «possibleconsolidatioii. Not only did thc legislature give little attentionto tire bill, but,: iT1>e main opposition to ihomeasure e!>me frorri citiea and Losvns in the Greater Boetcn Metropolitan Area hobelieved that. the .uooessof a ruse»ureof this kind >nightprovide a preoedentfor the mergin>;of ooinmunitiesin their area.>44 Detacftme7ttand separateincorporation G.'.venthe practicalineffectiveness of the co isolidationapproach, the firtal alternative for adjusting bouridaries to accommodatea newcorniriunity i» the detachmentof i.henew commuiiity site snd its iucorpor»iionas an independentn»inicipality, Like annexation or cmsoId!stion, this procedureis pos»ible,unless otltcrni»e c«nsti- tuti >nallyimpermissible, by speciall«n iindersection S! <>fthe "' A tiusttnaManic!pat Boundaries, supra note 149, at 57. >s>Aclrt; A!<>restive Ap!>roan!>ss, supra note Is!, at 65. »snid. » AdiustingVtnnioipsl Boundar es,supra note 149 si. i77. horrc rulearncndrncnt. Co»seri>ten tly, its l elative,worth its a boundary adjtstnient tech»i luern«y be deterrni»ecl by «omparingits plant>ir!g adv:tntages and political feasibility with those of annex«,tionand consolidation. As a 1>l«nningmatter, and apart fror» cm!sritutiori;>1restri«tion, det»chm«i>twottld assure a devtti;r control ovc> the deve1op- mentof his project,, «»d thus niake tlic i»vestment ra»re attraclive 1<>1 im. 1c of the new comrrlunitytvould «liow tl><>devc!ol!cr to expcrir»crit nore 1'reelyarith iic«desi«r!s and t ><:hr!clodand t <><:r cate a r»ore unified plan. >'1oreo ver mde- p leuc«tvould all<>w'parallcd experimentationin governr»ental aitmorc representatirnity.'s'All litrs«rc cxtrcrtrcly important iri inotivating the actu«l iiria, on tl>e otlicr hand, are 1>roadly cogli vital, would riot, nc«ssarily disc<>ur«gclt dev loper from»nd rt «kirig thc new cnf»mi> nity project. These factorsin<'liidc losses of <',conomicsof s>le in >lie st>!aller arcs; difii- ciilties ili providing basic services de novo mthoul, the assist«i!«c of cxisti»gml»iicipal facilities; the complexitiesof institutir>gan eritircly ntiw fu>tol i<>rial go v< rruuc»t, bur au< r >t<:y;<f it!trod>icing another indcp<;r>dei!tgovcrnin< rlta1 tmit in art urea that is likely to rcquirc sonic for»i of ruetropolita» gover»ance onc Ia.y, '1'!e 1!»lit>rporliliorl is»c t niii< li rriorc ct>s<>li latin «>rari!»>xttli<>rl, «lllioiigli the iiovl lty of t1>ei<1 «,al>d the variations it pr«serif«frorr> th<»s«al catisrs ft.surlilrigs >I>lf«ltial overlap, t>rither exisli»g i»»nit ipality los<> terrilory tn the adv>tntttgr!tig»»i>sn ighl!or; n<> con!]>cll«fits»eig!ili<>r; neithriseof il,. rt«ighl>or; and neither !till be corr!pclledti«ipalservi«s. Pith<»tgl>t><>th r»lit>i<>ipa]ities wiH lo.< teiTi.cry >in<1potentit>l cconomi<;growtli, be<>t>tsc th» loss !tiH b< equalar!d sh>>red il, i»ay riot arouseth< . arne«ritagoriisl»s <:r lite!ewerc f<>lose to thc advantage or tlie oth 'r. F»rthe>mor<',tl!e creaiion <>1a ivholly sep«rateunit. nrer>L, ralli< r th«n tlu<'tit«li tire ob se<:iirityof s<>lric .le«ted >is and i»»»icipal ernpl<>y 'rs, most likely tvot>ld in<;rcasc'.the niir»b

    CONCLUHIO'c In draflirig the prol!<>sadstat>it«, all of these»lterilative»l>1>rot!chs to drse various costs anil b»Tl ls eaventngeassn>nurse, that the reelnet>in> i» y of the n>w rn>n>nnn>tieenrleiwill>h> iorporel>.. 8use tbe nrw n hes Ln<>i »»sse» a!lay!ate ststewlle nrhn:>problems, the real constituencyof the new>wn»sanity >nay l>e the l>en«leilrn>g i« >i>o nearbycanto>toity. Wtu!terkey, "'fhe EVOlnt r> nn>ent,' ega.4<>2, 475 eo! !srkey!, Although this srgn>nentis psiva, it ilityof insuringfor thosealready livi»g in n nee. coneej>tbegan to emergeas the onestrategy which best.accorumoziti<.alart i egal problems posed.by homo rule considerations. To <«eia clearer picture of how the ievelotunent district, will accompjish these tasks we now turn to the s't,atute which s!>ellaou I, the inter- relatie rtships anticipateti bettycctt publi< devrlopment art>1local goverrunent. ErrrTort's j>Itotz. Mr, Browning thcroughlv loveless ttn

    B tant ooast>srY Abc i>d, Norman A, Transportation Inputs i>i New Tov ri Plai>iiing." T«afffc Qua«!erly. April 1969. p, 248 261. Transportation planning for new communities must incnrporate flexibility to accomtnodate future growth. Much of current V.S. t>ew community planning is neglecting this consideration, AdvisoI'yCommission on IntergovernmentalRolut.iona. Urban cad P~wro!.4mericfh,A Commission rol>ort. Washington, D.C. :overn- mont Frit>tirti>; Office, 1968. 186 p. Chapter IW iiioludes a history of 'V.S. aud Europeaii new town development fry>tn the 19th century to the present, and surveys recent public:ind private efforts in the United States. Chapter VI t«eats sotne of tho govcrnrnental problems of public-private joint vcnturt. Adviso! y Cmnniission on Intergovernmental R< lotions. 1«>le«go>>e«>>>r>e>ttolPoh'ct'ee fo> I «baai.of on a>>te«>j.Washington> D.C., Septem- ber 1968. An exaiuiuatiou of the historic drecent dcvelopr>i<,iit of tie United States; a, survey of plannbtg and developtnent, controls for largc- seulc dcv<.iopmcnt, and thc shaping of urban grutvth. Arn< ricm I»'titiite of Planners..Veto Communifies! Challenge for Tod<>y.Edited by Itf >tr;el I. Allen, The AIP Task Force ou Ved Paper No, 2! 89 p, Suggestio>>~for a national scttloiricnt poliry, and dstiock grants for uew cotruuunitics and ntt tiauk to >nake loa>>s to State and lociil agcncics for th<' d< vnant of now c<»n>>elopme«>tDiet«ict; a govc> un>ental iustit,utioi< io« the b<'ttor orga»i«ation of thc >irban developme»t proc<.ss in the hi-county r< gion, Pre- pared for the Maryland-National !spital 1'ark and I la»nine 'nmmissinn, Wasliington, D.C., Washington Centi'r for Xietropolitan S>t>tdies,1068. 204 p. A proposal for the creation of a, now' govir«v oiit urban di:ve'optnont within a county. Thc study was prepiued in anticipation of further new couununity development. HaitiroRegional Planning ,'ouncil. hletroros>nsfor he Boll<'r>Baltimore, 1962. 27 p. A hierarchical concept for new commiinity b»ilding. The metr<>towns would b< rtgional employment centers separated by open space and dri>ondit." In Ewald, William R., Jr., editor, Zaatty Prt>9 274. A report on the Iencral Electric Coinpsny' study of the feasibility of large- scale city building incorporating advanced meohanical and so<:ial concepts. Hosseli li»!.Washirland-use cotttrol »toss»res: plat»>cd develop>cent zo>ies intensive dtvclincnt on a st»;ill scale!, coiu- pentuitive regulations paynieuts to otvners of rust<'icted-usc proi>City. Repot't of tlic Nation>il Conuiiission ot>Ur'i>an Prok>- ion>sto the congress and to the President, of the L' i>ited States, l lot inient 91-SL I>.S, Government I rinting Off>ce, Washington, D. L 4 5<1!. < hsptcr IV, "Cooperative Housing," describes F9. 160 p. A series of papers for thc National committee on Urban Growth Policy' coi cring the process of urbanization, future patterns of urban growth, historic neiv towns in Anierics, new towns in Britain, and proposaks for new cities in th< U.S., with rccornrncndations for a systcnr of Federal subsidies. Cartrand prcricsiiSociety of PlanningOfficials. q. 171 177, 1&iclcs bvi .William L. Slsyton, "isew Cities: Policics an.A,, using rcsi proprrty as the onlv basis for p«litic«! parti<.ipetion, nisy contiict with constitutional equal protection cis.uses. Dienslfrey, Ted. "A Note on the Economicsof Cu;.January 16, 1964. Washingtou, Ho»sing ai>d Home Finance Agency, 19 i4. 9 p. Eiclde>, Edward P. "Why New Communities," In Friedvn, Bernard J. and William W. Nash,Jr., editors,Shaping A» L>rbar>Fut>J phono>uenanot superior to sprawl digthe new towr s movcrncnt as rather irrelevant, for coun>lcxsocial and economicpatterns. Eichle>,Ed>vard P. aud 'tiarshall Kapla». Tl>e ."oms»<»ilyIfuildere. Berkeley, L"t>i>ersityof California. Press, 1967, 182 p. A comprehensivea»d often critical analysis of large-scab.a»d new co>nr»»nitiy development, with emphasis on the Cslifor»ia rxpcrisnce in tl»> rnid 1960's, Columbia, Maryland, nnd Reston, Yirgiriis,. Eldredge, H. Wentworth, editor. Tat»>'ng.3fIsa»age>4»Urba»ietaius s. chapter on »Th New Towns Co>tcopt,»with articles by Osborn, Frederic J. "Britain's Place iii Town Planning," p, 819-822. Eldredge, I'{. Wentworth. "Lessons To 13c la»rued Franz The. BrI tish New Town Program," p. 823 837. Gutheiin, Frederick. "Conti»c»tal Europii Offer; Neut Program for Cnlifor»ia, p. 848-864. Rubcl, John H. "The Aerospace Projeci, Approach Applic,oBuilding Ncw Cities." p. 8;>4-874. L<'vsns,Henry K. "Trs»sporir»u»i il3»shington, ,C,> Va>.ional Acadeaiy of Sces-Nation»l Itsneil. 1965. >. '3 6>0. Bt 'ps tokvn in highway trafFic planning » i neat aud Naiio»al Pnlicy,' I>i E» R., Jr., iditor, Fr>iieor<»a»d Policy: Tb< Xor>iingtou, Iiidiii>»i 'uiv<. A port of this chapt«r, p. 304 309, cxa»>i»cs the riisjor urban conrvntr»- tions of tho U.b. The co>iclusion is tbst, t. Fnrr, >>ihert A. "1!em»cracy In Thr Nrw Towns: 'I'hi> Liiiitts Of Priv>its Gnvvr»- mr»L" '»adversity nf Cbieago Ia>o Reviei»e nwncn ass<>cia i»i>snf B< stnn n»rl Col»mbin ns >nod<iiir>stion of periiuent cis, siiggi sting that h<>i>ie,cal i>articipation, >risy violate ronstitutiniial c<3»slprotectio» clauses. Frevmi n, >rvillc L. "Towsrc4 A National Pnlicv !n Bain»crd C >mi»unities." I fi»>>ceo a I.au Ifevie>v. Jiine 1969. p. 116,'3 1178. Suggest.inancing nt riew cnmnumiry dhvrlnpmcn>, crn ianccs nf nbligaiio»s guaranteed by the Frdcrsl gnvrrninrni.; l»>ilrling ~> ivelvc»c>< tewns in Appalachi;> is ad< ucated. Galantrv, Zrvin. "Black Ncw Towns." Progressive Arebi ee »ee. W«g«st 1968. p. 126-131. A proposal for new tn>vns for Negroes tn shspr. an r»virnmnr»> that they would cnni ro York Sub- urba» Community. New York, Pantheon Press, >967, 474 p, A si>rvcy of the residents ot' Willii>gbnr i, New Ji ment. Giu>li». IIovt. Xe>v Tonne. Ivditoria' Research ll< iioris. Vox< rnbi r li>68. p. 80'>- 822. A survey of thc new towns move>uent i» Ei>rope ai>d the L<.S.A., >vith brief discussion of several U,S, projects. Sonic of th< >iiost ri<.v; town ideiis, s»ch as thv Mi»nvsota Exptal City Prnjret, arr cited. GlsXI."Does Building A City!fluke Eco»o>»ir. Sr»s<.." A ppraieal Jo«vt>»take ! cono>»ic =e»se and n>cet !na>y urg«nt problems. Critical to rconod cos. of d<:vcloping public. facilitics. Gvn'sRole in ljrt>anGrowth Explored," Journal of IIossinf . January 1066, p. 28 26, I',xan>i»stionof some of thc.public policy i. s»mu»itirs,i«ch>ding Stateand Federalroles, 'ommentson tl>c,d Melvin F. Lrvtnc, Gladstone,Robert tf, at>dFIarold F. Wisr. "Ncw To>vnsSolve Problcan !rowth," Pub i!-.tfanot crnsnt.May 1966.p. 128 189. 1R«printedin .tIahood,II. IL and,Edward L. Angu~,menruwith s critique on the >«ahis, VIaryla»d> and !<' ihoodanr,ncw tow»s and idc«l co«>n>u»ities. Gruc>! Victor! Associ«tcs.Yet. A state»>e»tof purposeand prograurvrlop«><.nt. 1966.42 p. 'I'hr. csee for a natio»al progrs>» to i>uild 26 new cities of about one half odateon< third of the expectedurban gro vth over the»ext t.wo dccad<'s. H«rvt.rd 1'nivnitirs:One A terna- isa A Ifa>vard !St!!!I>yof a Ãoto City. Vew <'ou>muniticsProject Preliminary 8>nu»bydevelop»>cnt in the Great«r J3osto«uutr»polite» «r«s ledrsig» a»d building t<.cl!n!<1«cs. Hoppni»g-Buildi»gProce, s for ;oh>mbia :vis-cia«d." Journal of' thtits ! nf Plans!!rs.Nore»>her l967, p, :I<98469, A rbias decision-maki»gprocess anvith <>th!.r variabl< s to prod»cr, a, vial>lc, b«h<»unity. Happ John L'., Jr. "Pls«»ing Vew Tow»s for ludustrv." 1«Pro>ns.'A !><«r!ension of Vrb.>nism.1!hicago, 1 968.64 p, Artich s i>y- Kirlc, . W. G<.T, "Ncw Tow ns in Grrar, 13ritai».' >utl>c.im,Frederick. "Europe Offs Solve Problem of L'rbau Growth." We«vcr, Robert C. 'Federal Proposals 1>I!irma." Thoson!W:<.signfor TonanGrowth Challengesns h>ghr To I3«," Jacob>,Janr. Aand it'fr of frrat Ame!icon i>'!r>'.V<'w York RandomHouse, 196 ! 468 p. T Ici«troduction, parti, c >c»ts o«the influence of Ebr»«zerHoward and Jw Corbusieron ti<««ewtowns >nov< ment a«d city plan ning. Kaj>ta>, 'Itsr~hall.Imf>lo Bat »norelfea>ona P nnAttornatioos. San Fra«cisco, Institute I'or Planning aud Drv< lop»>ent, 196>. 94 p, Toe report, preparedfor thc Regional Planning Council of Baltimore, includes a di.cussion nf Cnt<<>»hia!Maryland, pp. !>2-,>7,It rrfcrs to 'nrter y.Februamunity ides in the. planning profession. Katz, Albert M. "Lower Rent Costs; A Net Social Gain through Creation of' New Towns," Land Economics.Msy 1968, p, 233-275, A model is prcsontcd to contrast rent costs bctwoen a new community' snd a ocnventionsl major urban area, Keegsir, John E. and William Rutzick. "Private Developerssnd The New Com- munities Act of 1968." 6eorgetotonLate Journah June 1969.p. 1019-1058. A.r analysis of tht. Federal Snsncisl guaranteeprogram for private developers. Some discussion of the role of State snd local government snd the balance of ltiw and moderate income housing requirement of the New Communities Act. Krootlt, Dsidd L, "A Program for New Towns in America." In Housing Year- book 1,9ttg. Washington, D,C., National Housing Conference, 1966. p. 27 30. Stiggestions on the Federal role snd requirements for s, new towns program. Lslli, I "rank. "New Towns: Are they just Oversized Subdivisions with Oversized Problems?" House 4 Horne. June 196B. p. 93 103. A pessimistic view of four projects in the United States: Clear Lake City, El "Land-FinancingDorado Iiilts, RestonIdes andStirs Columbia.Doubts." Diagramsengineering of meeter¹tos-Record. plans are included,February 4, 1964. p. 45 46. A discussion of land loans for State deveJoprncnt, agencies, proposed in the Administration's housing bill for 1964. Lillibridge, Robert M. "Urban Size: An Assessment." I.and Zconomtcs. November 1952. p. 341-352, Tire issue of optimum city size is traced from the garden citv movement through the greenbelt towns, Levittown, Park Forest, Oak Ridge., and others, Lynch Kevin. "The Possible City." In Ewsld, William R,, Jr,, editor, 8noiron- ment and Poh'cg: The ¹zt Fifty Years Bloonrirtgton, Indiana, Indiana Univer- sity Press, 1968. p. 137-166. In this chapter on tbc changing metropolis, some innovations are listed as possible for experimental communities. Whole rtew cities, however, src thought to bc more feasible outside the U.S. McDsde, Thomas. "New Communities in America." Urban Land. Zeros and Z'rer,de. January 1965, p. 6 8, T tree major elements are cited to facilitate new communitiee as proposed by the .Zresiderrt in his message to the Congress: Urban Planning Assistance Grants PublicFscilitiee Loans, and FHA insuredprivate tnortgsge loans for lanh scquisitiort snd development, Mandt.lker, David R. "Some Policy Considerstiorts in thc Drafting of New Towns Legislation," Washington Unieererl p Late QnarterltJ, February 1965, Discusses the relation between new town development snd land-usc problem, emphasizing the need for strong controls on site selection by government The sutlor wants to see new towns constructed only as s facet in s comprehensive land policy. The Itlarylsnd-National Capital Park and I'lancing Commission. Development Corliorationa, November 1968. 62 p. Tre necessity of some kind of land development corporation ss s vehicle for alarming snd building new towns is asserted. The experience with such corporations in Europe, Csnsds, snd Amerir e,is detailed and possible slterna- tiveti for use in the region around Washington, D.C., are pointed out. Mayer,Albert. "The Roleof RegionalPolicy." Architectural Record. September 19@. p, 197-205. Ezsmp!es of regional planning with new towns in several countries. F~lements for sn American policy. Mayer, Albert, "The Urgent Need for New Towns." In Hot4eing Yearbook fgtt7. Washingtou, D.C., National Housing Conference, 1967, p, 35-36. Ar outline of the key elements considered needed to achieve economically snd socially balanced new communities in America. Meyers, Carol S. Taaarion and Deeefoprnent;The Useof Z'az Polioieefor Preserving Opetr Space ana Improving Deeeloprnent Paftrrns in the Bi-Connttg Region, Pre- ared forf the Maryland-National Capital Park snd Planning Commission, ovember 1968, 82 p. Resent, snd alternative tsx policies in Maryland studied as s means to determine the role of tax policy in development. Mullst key, Mary J. "The Evolution of a New Community: Problems of Govern- ment." Harvard Journal of Legt'elation. Msy 1969, p. 462-495. Az evaluation of the Federal atomic energt- snd greenbelt town pr'ojecter leadingto s discussionof problemsof tmplerirentinghome rulc in Federally as:istl i» advoca ed.A modelincorpora,- tion snd local govemrncnt act is offered. Nati<>nalCo«ldkrr City. Rcport of the Vational Commission on Urban Prob!erne to the Congressand to the Preside»tof the Uuited States.Washington, Govt, Print. Off., 1968.504 p. II»use Documentno. mission contair>s a brief suxnmaryof the New CornrnunitiesAct of 1968,its purposesand objective»on p, 178-179. N»ti<>n»lGovernor's Conference. "New Towns for Americ»7" In The Stnta>rProblems. A stat7stittccon State-UrbanRclotiorewtown de- veiopmer>i,.Tlie Vcv Jersey M»nicip»l I'lanncd 'r>it Developmont, Act is sceu ss a l>otcrstil«te of Pta»»ers Mes>sletter,August 1968.p. 11. Report,on ttrreemodels developed hy the Howard 'or>nir>gDepart- ment for projecting s»vings on new communities. Nore>oss,C;< ln Tl>e Ifaeice.Washington, Urban I.r<»dInsritrrK, 1966,97 p. Tech- nic»l Bi>!lorin No. 57,! .r study of 28 or> standingopen spaceproje<.ts featuring c!»sr<.rdevelop<>rent prhxciplcs, ranging froxn a few to sever»l thousand acres. Noren, Cr»ig. Vredevelop< r, pl».nningproblems, ho»sing, ope«space, <>nd many other ;aspectsof »cw town». Also includes thc argu»«.i>tsfor dagainst 'ru>dprospects for the future. Penn»pactof the FairlessSteel Plarit in Lower BucksC<>unty, Pennsylvania Critical DeferrseHousing Ares!. With the cooperation of the Hnnsylv»nia. 0'1Ia>row, Dennis."New Townsor New Sprawl'" AmericanSociety of Planrs tow«~, and the need or balanc< uf uses and »is<.limitation. Pcrloil; Harvey S. "ModernisingUrban Dcveloptuent."Daedalus. $>rmmer 1967. p. 789-800. T hc creation of non-profft comrnu«ity devel<>pmcntcorporations could enlist prixate enterprise to b>rild new towns, wir,b superior feat<sInstitute of Ptas>ters.Jour>rat. Via,: !96 i, p, 15>5-161, Reprinted by Resourcesfor the Future, Inc, Wash- ington, D.C,, Junc 1966!. A proptof the city in order to meet social objectives and human resources reeds within the existing urban area. Peter.on, I!»vid Lec. The Planned C'ommrestorsrEconomic a»f Urban and RegionalDevelop- r!<.plan»i«g with respect to the .'rrarci»l position of t}rc developer, tbe effect of cor!>orate adventures into commurrity development, and the regulatory responsefrom government. Pickard, Jerorr>eP, Dimensio>rsof ltfetropotitartellitz City: The Planned Dis- >osiiion of Public Land." UeharrI a<»Annual, The School of Lav, Washington Iniecrsity> 1969. p. 1-28, Ax examinationof public land planning policy with respectto a surplus penal farrxr in Shelby County, Tenrecedent for a dual pric~ svstem for p acus:io» of new coriini»nity l!uildii, »iih sor»e e»alysis of the fi<«ic«n Institute of Planners. Journh commn>n»>ritftin I'rhan I t«n>rinft. Phila- d<.lp>ia, University of Peirope, ed in rh«past ce»tury. IIciss»ban Process; Cities in. Industriat 8oe p. Chapter III, "Thc Visionary Planricr for Uri>an I:rank I loyd Wriglit, and Lewis 5'I n. Bost»n, IIH. 6,>0 !!. CEiprove the ma»agernenr.of F«cs." I4cor»<<, Hp, '"I'h<. I.urge New Cominrowth: A Broader Per;peetive n»d its Inor1066. 6 p. Pot>lort, Berkeley, I »iver. ity ol' California. Institute ot Glr 1rriri» nial arrangc- mt,ucd»i»re cuu»<.ilsof gov- ernment, are c,dvocatcd. Scott, Htanley. "Urban Growth Challenges Nlr'o SIanage>nent. Si pi< mi>3 260. Tf c absenceof goalsfor»rhsn grouch is viourd as the.primary cat,ncw conts, Self, P<>icr.'N»w Tow»anRegion." I» U»ivcrsity of C.ilif >ruin. The Meteot>olita>iri a serieson "California arid < beChallenge of Groetcsand I.cgish'7. Chi«go, Am<.ricanH>ociety of Planiii»g Officials. p. 17i l74. Tl c conc a national rdeveloped through State-chartered public corporations. Steb>,t.'lare»ce S. Touard XeImerie0,rcvisrd in 1065,this study hss descripi.ionsof Rad- h»rn, Sal "gr«nhcIt' commi'tttL»r<> Q>1>t, February I! <66 Arricl< - hy- Maudelker, David R. "Some Policy Corisiderationsin the Drafting of New Tuw»s Iegi~larior<." Kapla», i>Iarshall. "Tlie Role of the Planner and I!eccl»per in the Ncw Comm unity." "Adininistratiorr of th< I".nglish New Town.- Program." Atkinsnn, J. R. "Washington New Tow», I:;ngland," Theme, Wyndham. "Ncw Towns Devel<>p»rent." Woods, Shadrach. "Lc Mirail, A New Quarter for the City of Toulousc." Tai>nc»baui», Robert. "Plurining Dhia, A. Now Town in '.s and Authorities on Housing and irban D<~'. Public Law 89-7-by-sc D,C,, Govt. Pi int,. Off., 1966. S4 p. gummary of thc Title X, Experiments? Mor<,gage l»a»rance Program for iuiw. co!nmunities on p. 20-22; Text of the Act, on p. 69-6! . U.H. Congr»castrationCities> Housing anil f'rban Di!»!opm<'n «nd Urban 1fass I'r'ans< . gubcon!rnittee on IIoi!sing, S9th Congress, 2iid srssion, on H.R. 12341, II, It. 12946, II,I . 13064, H.R. 92;>6, and d of 1 Dpeoetopon. o»>!ring< Ba»kiiig h H,lf. 97<>l.Washi»go»> D. :.> wco»imuriiti«s. I..H. Cong!<'ss. Joillt Eco»o»uc Co»lndt to<'. f!!ban >1!>abler>:59 p. ?nclndcs testi!nony on new towns. U,iB.Congre~s, Benatc. Committee on Bsnkin ,'n»d Ciirr«icy, Ko>sing an8. IleariianAffair.:, 90th 'engr<'.s, 2nd s<'ssio»,on th< i>ropes«dhi!!ising lcgisia- tio'i for 1068. Wai?!i»gto», D. l., >out. Priiit. Olf., I<'it»esseso Govt,. Priiit Otf,, I964. 119 p. '.'estinrn»nit>Desvlopment; A. Co>iparatioe .St«»sfor thc. plimning»f i ificieiit nrw i:on imii» i t i«s. Urbs i I,ana D«i< op>ncn< gest« ;egis a ion, Part I: Th< I.«gal A-p<.cts, by Jan Kri!s»oy lti2.!96 p. $6.00 per col>yto llo» llielili>ers of tile Itis<.ere op»<<lc to n<<rniir>uriiti< >l>" scs.itei'e&94. A}>plicationof Europe'snew town policiesto the buildingof en egy for Urrban Devoloprnont." Wsshirigton Center for >Xe>c To.I'ort Linc >ln Advisory Panel Report and recommendationson program objectives, pres,tlinc of objectives focused on citizen participation, racial rind economic in'tegratlor>i and community facilities and services Weave>, Robert C. Dilem»ae of Urban America, Can>bridge, MLssschusetts,' Harvard I.nivcrsity Press, 1966. 138 p. Tie need for a Fedi>cd States." Jo>alfor P«tistratior> Ur>ion of South Africa!. J>mc 1969. p. 18">.-193. Sun»r>aryof researchur>dertaken al the Univ<:rsity of North Carolina. Survey of recent development, performance of thc prii ate sector, and p>'oposalsfor a national new coinmunity building program. Tiie Federal Ncw Comn>ur>ities Act nick. An Urban Strategy.Santa Barbara, California, Center for the Stiidy of Democratic lnstitu>ionr, 1968. 13 p. A bold 10-year program proposedfor mass r<1ocationof I<'el..."Journal of Finance. May 1967. p. 220 239. Ar analysis of the difflculties of finaricing ncw towns. Weridt Pa<>1F. and Alan II. Cerf. "Ir>vcstmi n. in Corno>nniry Develop«re>it snrl Jrban Dcvrlopment." In their Real Zstare lnsestoin , Anal ricw <.oiiin unity, and dose>iptio~>of a large-scale new cornio>>rii>y< oi>putcr «iod pesof corporations now eugagedin co>un>unit>devcioprncrit. Werthroan, Carl, Jerry S, Mandci arid Tex Die..ii>frey. Planning of the P>irchase Diriiions: II'hd Regional Development. Ceriter for 1 laiining and Devent Research. Berkeley, 1965.229 p. Monograph No. 2i White,John Robert. "Eoonomic Aisscssment of l.argo Projects." Thc Apprai«al Jo»rajah J»iy 1969. p. 360 371. Ar. anr>ivwis of market research problems in large-scale reside>itiai develop- meni; a definitionand illustration of the cashflow technique.Federal fmancing role in new communitie, Wh;tc William H. Cluster Deiiclopmor>t.New Y<>rk,N. Y. America«Conservation Asso;iation, 1964. 130 p. Cl apter VIII, "Super Developments," describes several new corumunities pla>ii>ed around the cluster design. Whi tc William H, Thc Last Laribieday, 1968. 376 p. A .on»nentary on the shortcomings of Britis!< and ILS. ncw town experience " in the postwar era in the chapter on "New Towns." Winth>op,IIenry. "Modern Proposah'for the PhysicalDecentralizrherine Bauer. "The Form and Structure of the FutureUrban Com- plex." In Wingo, Lowden, Jr. editor, Cities and Space;the future usc of urban land, Baltic>ore, Md. Johris Hopkins Press, 1963.p. 7t-10L 105

    An analysisof trendsin the urbanform, with suggestedalternatives, including super-cities and sxnallcr independent communitics. Xismsn,S.B. and Dilhert B, Ward. WhereRot to Build, A Guidefor OpenSpace Planning, Washington, D,C., Bureau of Imr

    PART II. RKCRKATION I AND I. SR ISSL~FS A grorvir!g pop»lation and gro!ving 1>ersonaldisposablo incom ', have «rcatfresidd. gon t?iosaine lands »cede foz rat lands for publi: recreation uses will remain availabb.. The need for an effective rerreational land-use policy has long bern apliarent. The papers within deal with two asprecrrati»nal lands arid the second deals with vario«s iiser 1>riri»g 1>oliries.

    A, THE CRISIS IN SHORELrxE RECRRATIO.'I Tia V»S

    bv Dennis W, Diic.ik, NIT!

    AI>S T!IZ r V Our Xati<>n t<>rlsyfaces a crisis irr sliorclir!e r creation. Ii, bas corm> ab >iii beruingrroutstripped the avrrilabfe supply. AVe have allowed a patt ;rri of >«o»oinicgrowth aiid d<.vcl- opment,in the coastal zone to contiriiie !!nc?reekedfor the past 300 years, s<>that now wr find that only a small percentage of the entire shoreline is in public harlds f >r recresiiir and <.rosion have combir!ed with i,lic iric!rasing tendency. of privatr orvne s t supp1y of avaihible shore. lin ', limit< I to begin with, is shrinking st<'adily. ! rt ilic <1ds ar< increasing at a brlicativc cfff i»cr< asing liopuIatiori, iricorri<., leisure time;, and mobility are expbring abi»» a t!ipling in thr demand for outdvhilr i.?ieic i» lit tlr or n nsirir!wlihirl i h< e>ristir>g ern I pII! 'lit. Th is s<,riur pres nt allo«a i i ve ir! < ! a»i sr»2 epriv!i te nisrkit and local polrtn al dc<;lsn>nnrukriig, Anal! sis lies «l«>w» 1>»1 tha»ismsfarl to provi<1e ari eHi lii>r'ticular cir< u!r!. tiinces, The..e cirric sysi th<' trii«»sts an l ber!efits ti 1»irtic»lar good and ! thr tlbo li s t» rr!ak«1< cisions ?!>riedo» < Ae .tsthai, «re net bager>>et!t >8 p!' >1> !sedthat plares th . prime resporisi!>iliiy f<>rsbor line r g»latiori iri rh< hands 07! SZ 242 71 8 108 of theStates. At thesame time, it mustbc recognizedthat a strong Ieeder>tliflvolvement is necessaryto ! coordmate the efforts of ininterstate secontbse»ceof thc f>rivateI»arket disciplme.

    I. INTRO<>UCTION Overg<>d water masses,to bc freely by man for thc growth and pr<>gress<>f his society. Since flic filnes of the early colonists,the coasi,alareas have bcgate- t«tvs to this VIation. The flrst sett]el»cuts that grew up afound the'. Ilaturi>l harbors of the coastalzone have sirreedevelol>ed i thriviifg center. of population and industry Oi>tthCOr tin! tra»SpOrtatiOnand C»in<»pttiongrowth and industrial expan.ion, the coastalzone has beenrecog»iz<>ttiou corridor linking the coastalcities, >lrulas ftf>ideal sourceof re»al opportunity. Sin<>e the capacity of ct>astsl resources to suppori these fnultipl«>ndeavors has always l!eci!.vicwclwsregulating man's activities in this zo»c werehistorically intenother" ' within the context of thc economicsystem of f'ree enterl>risei» the riVate marketplace. Under this syst, ihe ShOreline "has largely eenl~.,ft f<>i scquisition and exploitation by w hatever publi<.or private age«ciesrlesired to undertake iis nt."' Since ihere always seemed tobc pk>Ity of shoreline r getO the <.CclcmCalSyetCmS in the estllarinf ZO»CS,there WaSnO per<.rivat:; rn;»krt, Thf> result is that today, a~!proxirr>ately91 p<'rce»i,of ibis lhnlted, u»iquc natu>al resource is undnt>ol,>tf>other 3 prmilitary use,, l<.r>vingonly f> percent of the shorrli»<, in public ownership. Thus, the eoastli»<, as a l!ublie conI- II>ortsbecolne one of the most scarce of all r!ur valuable natural assd thc shortest in supply relativ< t<>thc hcavy dci»lgr uses. U»'fn!rfnal Inafk<>tcondit1ons, the prices associated with coastal real estate woulf1 adjust in such a situation so tl>at the usc deriving the greatestbenefit as measuredin ability a»d willi>>gnessto pay! froff> coastal ownership would be able to sc«ure control. This is indeed happe!ung to a certainextent as the costof acquiringshoreline property has becomeastronomic«j in recent years. It has becomeincreasIngly clear, however, that the price mechanism of the private mafket has failed to represent certain important societal values in its allocation of coastalresou>ccs aud is ui>ableto provide for thc proper expressionof

    r U.B. !epartrnentof tho Interior, Federa>Water I'ollutlon Control r>.dmin>aon, "The National Eatnrrrfn~ PO>fat>onstudy," VO>.I, f>t.Iif p, 27,NOv. 2, 19<>f>. r TheVashington University, 'Shoreline Recreatien Reennrers of the UnitedStateS," Study ReportI>o, 4 to the OutdoorReoreotlan Resonroea Revfvrr Co~a of the Bureauof Oubloor<82! .hosevalues in a conipel,itivemarketplvisionof adoquatefacilities for o Itdoor recreatio»,iri the coastalzorie, ttnd ! thc protection and preservation of the unique ecological ststems that abound in the marirur envirorrmont. Although both of 1hesoare i:»measurablyim- portant, and intricately related to tho life anr neglected as a publicresource, wliil<. the ireeftins irreplaceabloasset, has go»e»natto»»d. For gcr>erationsthere wss little or Ilo awarcriessof the dangersto future society "as long as the ability of tho natural en~»ronmentto absorbthe efFectsof the sociooonomic er!vironmontseemed un1imitod, and the problems of pollution and envir >nmentaldamage were iso- lated." ' Only recently has it bee<>meapparent that "the laws pro- teotirlg man from himself must, b<'.oxtc»ded. to protect the natural envnonmont from man." ' We have begun to recognize the need of bumrtio»both as itii esseritialpari, of i! s ecosysto>nand as an ex- ploitable assetto be carefully allorat !d sino»g < f>rnpetinguses. Of all these competing uses, the two that an>most, often rnisreprosented, recreation and «;<>logy,may ultirriatoly turn out to bo the most importarrt to the 1or>g-termhea]th slid wis rlow th».d<>miila»t species o» earth, his very survival dopondsor> tits intricately complexecological balaI>co among all p a»t>s«»<1 anir»als within thective cuvlro»»1<'nts; arid the tv<'ll-b<>rifle» polr the >,!aint<',nance with the lielp <>frecreatiorrj <>fhis i»ter»«1l»ychololrical bali »co and the »xtcInal balsrice tliat »xists ili his if>t<>r«<«ioris ttith the <>f the ahoca ior> >four soarco, valuableshorclino roso!lrccs a» an imp»rl >.it iso!rein 14<> Set fcrth l'«e impOrtant econ>mic>politic«1, t«r<1soci<>lngic«1 as1> crs <>f<;oastrtl land uso for outd>or rc»rostion, with tt f<><;»so» lh< N w K»grit >td;,1!<>r<;lir>e.The got>i is to <1erivesom< irrsighl i»t > 11><>>at»re»f effrC!lard 10 g<>vol»abiorl01 S l»reline rc- oour<:rs iri a, r»a»rior ri>»st c<>>isis<.<;»I,!«1ss>icl valuos of Amer<;a» society.

    II. THE sTATIIB 01' SHOREI,INE RKSoIJI!CKS Ollr X:rtiOrr fa»CS«CriSiS i» Sh<>r straightforward terms, it has c<>r»>»<.>utbecause a, r»<>rniirg d<>mttndfor this ur>iq»cand relativ<'ly s<'>lr<><;r'r>rcehas far o»4- Bl.ripl>cd'Lho cffcctiv<' «ripply. Tire pr»b1<.'riis>if<'! 1>lit i'lyttcuto lll tlwdedNorl,hs!,, of whicl! lhc Xev, K:>'»t»<1rcgb!ri ls >1,part. A»y<>newho has boo»lis, 'trri der trafhc, to CcC<>r who lias»xporie»care,or who i!as not, b<>ori

    > bi<.,reference 1; vch I, pt. I, p, S, ' rbl< ., reference1, > D. S>,Duo>t><, editOr, Prelect N5CAF, reportingthe rosnltsOr an ussuos nr lout.teron, incfudr!gelectric power production, shoreline >ecreotion, air sndwater pollution, ond political reorganr>e- rron <get to the coast.at, all becausethe beachis closed<1»o to pollu- tion or filled-to-capacityparking facilities, vill attestto the immediacy of this critical shortage of available, a<:ccssibicshorelin< rccroation areas. Nj indica,tionsare that, »nless immediate action is taken, these pr<>bl<;mswill get much, much worst» The deinsnd for outspeciallyat the sliore, has in<.ressedsignificantly in the last. 10 years. Th<; trrility eiiable larger 1>ropot'tionsof our gr<>wit>gpopii- lation to seek aythe rsl!iiis,lear>>ing more, s,boiit vacations an<1r< creation, developinga wider rang<>c>f skills and making more t who will hav« search of «, free, solitary hour by the;ea.. Fron< Mai»e to Florida a»d on aroiind to Texas, froin s<>«them California up to Wa=hir gton &tate, ihc Nation's seashoreshave hreomc chittercd with hotels, motel.-, spra« ling developments, military compt<>ac~,and indusd city sewage, %ha> rcmaiiis shoreland that is not dirty, crowded, or closed to the public- amounns to a tiny fraction nf the country's perce it of the shore areas considered si>ir<>spectof coritiiiuiiig encroachment, togeibcr witli the intensified natural erosion often eaiiscd 1>yhe< dless developinent, ei en in normal weath< r, winds, and w;iv< a i an eiit away or shift iip to 20 fee<.of beach a year!, has alarmed niany inar<»e biologists arid conservationista. Although... conaervatioiisists have been idicatious that aoiti» H..ates a>id bureaus of tlie Federal C'overs»>ni»g i»tcrested in protect ug th«Nai.horities. One is the sharp increasein recent,years in t,hns of pptc from ielast of it iu auy jiva» area and lan<1prices are;pirali iig far beyond the means of »ioat urb«i< dwellers. fn this Itrticle, ilfr. Webster has siru<.k kt, iln he;iri, of the is ue fr oni <.11iis < riiacts,Fir. t, the dwii»lling s1>iy<>f sttorelinc recrsaiionid ar<>ashas bo<>ncaused in part by i,he sciit.,"Tr«n>s in A Aa«>o jr keoreeiIon," ok kkc sto>ai r, "FewSeas<ieC Ruvi<," Yew York Times, I< a<,y>er. 2<<, lo O, historical ornpbasis oii economic growtli a»d iridustvial cxpaiisiori has a!loI<'ed this to happen without the ull realization of th<'. extent to which such uses exclu le a11others, As a result, 40 perg plar>ts in the Ur>ited States todav are l >cated within. thc liorders of the coastal counties, This i«clear evif thc con- 8 'qu!! icesnir>g,The use of culd be restvi<;repaiii<>s> r>elnical plan>s! require rnultifathom harbtl!cv, primary metals, power gci>cratior>! require subst.niitial water s»l!phcs in th<' cour:c of normal operations.Yet use,<>f coasia!. land for theseus< 8 a1 >n.lras ' I'csliltcd In the 1088 of I»any nllles of seer>rc silo>'Ol>no. Ir> Ci>lifornia,for example,power x>inparriesliave occupiedlarge stvctc]>cs of tf e coast for the siting of power ger>eratir>gfa :iliri<',. Even for indu: tries such as thi«, ways should be.so«glit <»it to sati«fy t.he opera- ti<>nsl req>iirement« for water while r»i»i>nisi»g ihc >isiirpation <' coastal 1arid for this piirpose scc accomp>i«yi«g >rrti<:lc,rcf. 57,!. Se.or>d, tlie expariding aru] coastward-shil'ring populatioii h»s placed fa»tastic pressures <>nthe sh<>relinefov privaie develol!rr>c>r>,. Tins ircrul is ac«iirlulngir«:reason iri ibl<: ir>cor«es a« l resort comraunii.ics by the sca,have sent land values «kyv C> rolina,the price of a front foot of 81ioreliiiois $1,>0, while iri Afnssach»srtts the prie~ of an acre of shor<;1»r>dlies i»cr<><8 <>f :Care, fav re>ri<>re<1I'v !rii !!!ulatior> eiiter ' a»d 1» :kii>giii gortaticvs wlio are assured a, fa»tasii<.: pv!!fit i«. tire riot too li«tii>it fi!i,i>re,.'1'hey >>rewell aware <>fhr!w rhc < viiving fov va ati<>nsl>a<.e by the !ccar> "has lc t<> thc l!mc«i. in such p/ace. as Virginia B< a<;h,Va., a«ear> !ity, 'Ald., of rrii>iny mil<« al<>r>l;i.hc beach."' A ihird major factor contrib»iirig to the l«read iii availal>lc shor line areas for rccrcatiu». is poll itic», wliid f »il<;d b ii<>hcs iii a«d aroiind <'!er! major coa«talcity, In Boston Harb !r, ma»y island«v oiild oNer xcellent opportu>iitiiricty e poor w>itrc iri l!art t > liigli baot<.ria col>ills r<«irl,'iiig fv<>rr>rii«ilicipal sewage diinlpi»g and . torr>i 8 wcr <>verHow. Oil sl>ills, licsticides, and indus>.rialeN»< >its 1iav!is tlieir toll blcm, A hnal element contvibuti»g the the t ster>rsCrom a lacl of knowledge, of tlic dy»!err>icsoC beach ai'e>Ls. A recent article entitlrd "America's «horelirieis Shrinking'" point«, out i,hc seriousness of this problen>: I'rorr> Cape Cod to California, America's oc an shorrli«e is being n>t and fur- rowed by cro«ion. Mooh of ihis is ihc roe»it ot the oeasoless actioii of waves ar>d ! f>i>s. ! >oh»Bunker, "A>ner>ee'e Shure>>ne ie ahri!!ki!!!r," 13 !e>AniIlererd Trerr>er, >!. 23, OC>. >8, >97a 112 wind,9, combination of forces as nld as the sets ~ self" 4 o anexample is! the draniaticcase of CapeMsy, X.J., a famousresort area which haslost a fourth of its lau.larcs to thecombined action of mind anrl weve diiring the last 30 years or so. TheState of hIary!andloses «bo»t 300 acres of valuableland ev .ry year along the sharesof ChesapeakeBay e e " Sectionsof shorelinent Point Huenetne, Calif.,o e * havereceded as Inuch as 700feet iii 10years. 'phr.article goes on to point tuft hov;the naturttl forces of I rosionare griatly abetted by theactions of man.Josef>h 8, Brotvder, a southern field ..eprescntativefor the AudubtitiSoru;ty, has cited erosionin sbfiarniBeech "caused by hotelsbui]t alfrtostright, in thcsurf, housing projc ts built on thousandsof once-wiltl acres lif tidal marshes."'P faft lh,fcHarg,in his book,"Design strath Nature,"" haspointed out thedfingers that tramplingdunegrasses, loiveriug thc level of ground- water,snd iliterrupting littoral san idrift lniseto the stalulity of dune forfrtatitrits.He hns this to sayabout such f

    Oalailed Recreation Publc Reslncted shoreline shoidino recreation stretche~ Shireline location statutemiles! statutemiles! statutemiles! stalutemiles!

    Atlanticcacao.. 26,377 9,96 I 336 263 Gulfof Mixioo 17,437 4,319 121 134 PacificOsis n 7 663 3,175 296 127 Gme'ttakes d ago 4,269 456 57 Totil. 59,157 21,724 I, 209 Sgt Note'.Mileage ofdetailed shoreline, recreation shoreline, public recreation shorahns, andreslncteil shoreline bymajor CnaatlineaaameaSured uaing Cnac! and Gecdetio Sorrier methOda and meeting Criteria defined in text. SOursa;ORRRC Study RepOrt NO. 4, "ShOreline ReCreaticn RSSOurCex Ofthe Omted StateS" p, Il 1962 referanae 12!, The knowledge that the New Jersey Shore is riot a certaiii !and uuiss as ic the Pfcrltnontor Coast~iP!ain is of sortieimportance, It is cnntii»tallyinvohrd in a corteei, with thc sea;its shapeis dvnamic.Its relativestability is deliendrnt idion the an:horingvegetation. e e e If yoii wouldhiive the jonesprotect you, ttnd the dunesare stabilized by grasses,and these cannot to!eriste r»art, thr n surviva! arid th; publicintrrcnt is well servedby protectingthe graises, Ifut in V is Jersey the;; a-e totally improtected, Indeed, nowhere ah»ig oiir cniirs, eastern seal>oar ! are thay ev<;rirecognised as valuable." e * Sadli, iri New Jerseyno e " e plaiuiilig princjp!cs have beer>developed. While sll tlir priricip!es are familiar to botanistsaud ecologists, this hasno efFectwhatsoever upon the forrtiof develop- tnent. Housesare built upon dunes, grassesdestroyed, dunes breachedfor beach accessand housing;grourid water is wit,hdraiunwith little control, areasare paved,bayshore is filled and urbanized.Ignoraii<:e is conilioundedwith anarchy and grred to makethe raddledface of the Jerseyshore. A summaryof the tidal shorelineof the.United States as reported by thg U.S.Coast and Geodetic Survey excludingAlaska ttnti Hawaii! is givenin TableI. The shorelineis oneof liur iriostpopular resctlrces for outdoorrecreation and in heavydemand; yet, as the tableshows, it is ntost scarcein termsof public ownershipfor recreation.The 48 contiguousStates have nearly 60,000 miles of shoreline,of whichs,bout one-thirdis consideredsuitable for rccrcatio»alactivities, This possible recrea:ion shorelineincludes beach, bluff, and marsh areasthai must meet tbe following criteria.''9 I! the exist i'nceof a mar'inffclimate and environment; ! the existenceof an expanseof view of a,t,least 5 miles iver water to the horisonfrom somewhereon tbe shore; ! locaticn on somewater botmdary of thc United States. m Ibid.,referenae 7. " Isn Iycnnrg, "no the entire Atlantic coast, only 336 miles of shoreline are publicIy owned for recreation, a merc 3 percent of the total recreational shore- line. Yet, this coast contains the population concentration of the sprawling Northeast megalopolisand Florida It is here, near the metropolitan areas, that the demands «rc the greatest, yet the avail- able absolute supply is small. Ns,tionally, the roast<>lareas contain abol,.t 15 percent of the total land area, "but withirr this area is con- cent;".ated 33 percent, of the Nation's population, with about four- fifth-. of it living in primarily urban areaswhich form about 10 percent of the total estuarine zone. The ost,uari»e zone then is nearly twice as densely populated as the rest of the coirntry." " Unpulousareas. "From Massachusetts to North Carolina, in Florida., in California near Los Ang.;les and San Francisco, and along tl>o gulf coast, a sprawling con- fusicn of buildings crowd the shore."" When the arlded effects of polhition most severe in inetropolitan areas! and erosion on existing sup ly are taker> into account, the situation become. even more crrtr<,al. In the densely settled north Atlantic and mico,97 }>cree>it of tie shore is inaccessible to the general press<»oson shor.linc facib.tiesnear metropolitari areasare s<>great that frequently the waters, even in poll.r ted. harbors, are»seri for recreational p»rposes bv those who carm<>tsword to go cise>where,regardless nf whethertlre waters are safe for body contact or not. This points to still another problem, the inability of low income, less mobile groups tc find suitable coas:al recreational facilities anywlrere but in tlrc ir>unorrros< severe, and where fewer beaches arc available and oftrntirrrcs inaccessible due to gl'os<'iovcrcro'ly sit«atiori wirlr regard io shor»linc resources carr best bc dcrnoristrated by corisidering what has been happening in thc 'State of Mahie in recent. years, Maine's varilal geographical area, 36 p<>rcentof tire popirlation, and 127 local governmental units. Forty psin Maine are generated in this zone, while 60 l><>ccrrt <>fall reer<>ationalproperty and seasonalresid<>r>e>es arc locateinlets, small bays> and similar areas serving as harbors <>rsheltered areas. Th<. shore areais only alii>ht]ydeveloped with only 34 miles or 1.4primary uses over the remaining 2,578 miles are private wir,h som< commercial resoit activity. The shoreline is least suitable for swimming and water sports since there arc only 23 mil< s of beach along the entire coas'.. The most suitable activities are can>l>ing, hiking, boati> > g> > ihfd.,~ ra. 28. « Ibid..referee<><> r, 114 sailin ;,and sightseeing, for whichthe '2,520>nibs of rugged,rocky bluff sh<>reprovide at> ideal setting.However, those a :tivitiesare sev<'rilhas cause ~seriousl problelns with the takitig of shellfish, By 1<062,67,000 acres tto residents arid visitois alike. In the de<;adepreceeding l962, tlie total areas <',Iosod due t< pollution increa od by 12 percctit. By far, t.homost serious question facing Maine with r<,gardt<> its shorelineresources is the largeper<;cntagi of private oivnorship.In 1967, a lau l use synip»siuiisuitant J<>hnMcKee pinpointed the issiicsrolating to tliis qu<',stion anhasized t,lic lnlblic's right if accessto unique shoreline,not only to a. emudflat ir a ru»- dovn beach,hilt to a el' and.forest and cove preciselyihe l>incus that,ure sellingfastest today..., UnlessMaine l 'cidesright now to <;otttrollhc prornis<:of developrnont,Maine's grcstosl asset will have1>o- ittg. havobeen given repoatedly over tho last ilecadcby professiui.it .rs, coiiservatioiiists, slid <>fher.-concerned >Adthi,lic rapid dis>tpf>raranceof Maine'. l>r<',cio ls,c >t st>tlr sourc<'s into privat< contr<>l. The most recent, of tlicso wu» a series >f »rticles bv R bert,C. Cuinmings iii tbe Pori.land !unday Tel gr:lni,"' which outlii>id the results of a s»rvov of reel ostatr ng<,rs tow>i tilld city officials, ural coutity courtlioiiso record!. %fair0 has probably lost its chanec for signihvir i s 8,000 nlilcs oi coasiliiie. Indeed, li fore thc c«d ol' this dforedawii un iiiost good suniniec week .ndsif they wiii'It a spo't at a l>ubllc be ich. This conch<-ionsiers fr«qncntiy have tO wait in line all night fOr 0, csinpsil< tc bCCOt!ie available at Acadia National Park. I'crsons who l ii want to go to i h , b arh for an afternoon will soonface "So>ry, wc are tilted up" problems. Dalton>nKirk, supervisor of the park district tllat ranges from Eagle.Island off Har>>s«eilto Pemaqui>utes that admit Roid State Park twice this sr<crswhen the nt Pophsm, cars are turned awav alinost eaerv good Sunday afternoon bv 1 o' clock Th<'.State >i,an; at twicr this rst . Kirk seesno possibilities of further 0'xpanding Retd Stat. Park without de.trovtng the naturalness of the area. "%e nerd to gct any beacl970. u n>id.,re970,aud "Maine areas, already under hen~a-pressures of spc which promi>cs to i>sr all but the Inost afluent fr<>mour,'3,000 rr! iles of ocean frontage. * * " development. hss already progressed ro the point where, regard.less of what Ihc f!tate does, there is unlikely to be enoi>ghsuitable ocean frontage to serve' faincand iks ever-increasing hordes of sumrucrvisitors. Our survey rcv als thai, 1vfsines coast has been sold, and that, the buyers are largely fro!u out-of-l!tate. Big blocks remain in efor<, fishing i,hc rocks, harvesting the crops set. Wildland that iri soxury vacati>1zone is in oui.-of-State <>wnership, which av<'ranee4;! l>OI'cent;i!I the Breab!rt react> 's75 pising p >p!ilatioi!., grOVViIlg resp rity, arid better iransportati<>ri suikc aud !ighv>av svstiem that makes half the Stsi.i 's «.iastlir«rio r!!our trip from Boston. These factors, cmthe he tic rnetroliolita» at»iosphere of noise and pollu- tifain s «:>astalr<:al state. As a,conserluel>ce, '111aii!e residents, tli<> great< st nunibcr >f whom frr!d the stakes too rirh for i lieir income, have foun! 1!ut up a signbel' iretl! 'y p!i! i!. I!ouse," "' Thi critical status of shorelmc resourcl!i i>>I!rledlste, ur'gout lie<'d to l!I' iieet all thu shoreline resourcesstill available> arrd to look for ways to reverse the trchysic>il environment so that the natural estuariric xoiie i:an be preserved, developed, ari<1used for the coniiriuing bcuclit r>f th<: citizens of thc United States." " 'lVe might a!k Ivhy this has nOi been r our institutional eiivironrnent take>i tow>ird thc coasi.al xone. Ur!til recently,most Statesand communitieswere not <;oynizarrtof the coration ar!id Federal agencies, arid private i>idustries, especially where corrflicts of interest economic <>rpolitical! existed, Hence, most planning f >r the use of tht cit, ">vere >ssI'e! Sherleei,"The Bestor MehreLost to the Restor Merce,"Bosioe Sunday Glo!>e, Sept. 297ee I, p. i. 1-16 !atelyresource-protection oriented,and the frectionneeds." " Suchthinking was in evidencewhen the national parkand forest systems were establisheR in western areas of light population, far removedfrom the recreationalneeds of urban centers. It se<.msironic that plannerswould recognise the needto preserve vast expansesof unto'uchedwi]derness in the remote corners of the Nati<>nwhile ignoring the necessity of protecting the relatively limited coastil resourcesin the heart of thecountry's most rapidly expanding regions,Kot until morerecent times have iiivestigations by the NaticnalPark Service,the U.S.Forest Service, and the Outdoor Reer<;ationResources Review Commission brought to light theneed for a broaderconcern for all theissues related t<> ss,tisfying the needs andthe deinands for all formsof outdoorrecreation by piesentand futur<:generations. These studies for thc first time demonstratedthe basiccausal factors in outdoorrecreation demand. In effect,they. foundthat "adequateplanning for outdoorrecreation required larger conce.-nsthanthe biophysicZenvironnient thatthe e<:onomic en- < ironinentexpressing the preference ofsociety for goodsand services snc the institutional environment decisions about the focus and chsra;teristicsof agenciescharged with the protection<>f rcsoiirces angement, a11 i>i recognition of the limited tolerance of this finite and valuable re- so<>rcerccivethe problemsclearly and proceedt~> do somethingabout ihem.The resultsof this analysisare outlined in the next sectionsof 1 his >i.ticlc. pnmary ancrt>isis Th<'l>urpose of this sectionhas been to providea generalpicture of 1 hen«tion><1 supply of recreationalshoreline. While a detailedinven- iorv wss not, included, it is possibleto draw somegcnera1 conclusions by lockingat theoveraH situation, Th<.first statemciitwe can make is that the shorelineol' New Eng- lsn<1iii particular an<1the United Stat<.sin generalhas beensol<1. Shcreisavailable prop<'.rty thereis highly>~ill be desirable,people tofor buy recreational it, regardless use and:is ofthe long cost. as Init every State the patternsof private <>wiiership<>nd development are simil<>c:97.2 percent, in Massachuseti.swith high development;94.4 percerartsof Maine are,there relatively1argeblocks of sh >relinethat reniain undeveloped>and even these are presently in the hands of ' <»,vo!. Il, p<.>v, p, E>>. ~>Is>d., «fe>e»ee >; »oL II, p<.iv, <>.3'. 117 speculators an I developers. This is compoun icd by thc fact that it is al>n<»tu»ivers»eely thc casetliai, competing us<>sfrequently preclu Ic »se ol' the sl>orelir!e for recreation. Itec.cation and commerce, recreation and housing, recreation and industry, reerea!,icn and transportation s e' <' in mOst cases Can>!ct »e Carried On in the same >dace.The practical and esthetic requirements of clean water, adequate land area, afety and pleasant surroundings, and necessary recreation devclopin >r>ts can rsrely bc assured in conjunction with commerce, industry, housing> and transports4 I>'o! years many shore owners have permitted public accessand use of tli each year, manp States are fin linp that thoir private owl>en cire riow Iiiniting suoh»ctiViiy tO maintain their OWnpriVaoy. HenCe, as the demands inure!>sc,this one part of the accessiblesupply is act,ually decreasing. The sii uati<>nis typified in the wordsof Psl Shcrl. >ckof the Associated Press in an ariicle er>titled '"I.'he Best of Maine Lost to the Rest of AI»in'".'" The mountains are still there, thc Atlantic G !ean still crashes its surf onto the roc> s >s it has done since tho icc agc and there i; still some wilderness. It's just a lirrle farther aWay now on the other Side Of <1major point to be noteion of most l>ul>liwt>edfacilities. Oii the C >»!>e<:tiut shore, ivhere tlie recre- ation facilitics are under strong lemar>prose«res from the ns<> A4ew York-Cori»<>cticut metropohl,an aru>L,local conimul>ities fi»cue»!ai'i lo i»stit«tc us>!rges,! IKl <>ther llsCMn>ina- tory . vi<: s t<>pr s rv< for th local rcsi lent» ivhat small amounts of sh 'reare 1efl ops ito >ublic. The sir!iationis muchihe sameIiear other pop>Elationcont rs In Sew EnglanLrraganset Bay, C"apeCo I, and i» thc Boston melrol> >litari region ar ! jan>>nc l >>in!o.=teveri iveeken<1in the summer, wliile the ben, nes farther north becon>emor'e croivich y ar as Vei l,>icccssibl !rccre>>tior>al »r 'as. I.'his trend is < vi lenced l>v the marke I inInlutio» an l erosion, often caiis !d by h<.e1 ;ss icv ,1<>prner>tin ecol» icallyst- severe where people are cr ncrntrateLIE l thr:>Elena >EiirriorO»sOlhore. L'rcsiOIE, t<>o, h>Ls<.3OSe Or l lrstr >yed be»eh:sand presriit sa cor>tinuousthreat, in placeslike Connecticut an<1i% eiv Hami>shire, ivliinwith, So > hisis the overall picture of shorelirie supply. Most of the Iand is privately owned an I !eve]oped an l is becoming more restricted to >ublic accessas the demands grow larger; and wliat is left in public. arireck1»>ce, the supply, limited to begin with, is shrinking steadily. Iioi«an iveexpect to sa,tis>fythe demanfthe futurewhen ivc are havinl; tro>ii>lichis >!ee led today2 A>ul all t'ilia >Lite praciicallv n ! sl!orcline left to lo ariythir!g with> In the I!ext » Ibid,. rererenev2, p, 7, a Ib!d. referesee15> . 118 sectic» wedevelop the rationalefor natioi!s,lconcern for ihe problems of sh<>relinerecreation while providing a basisfor «n analysisin section. IV of how the present situation has come about.

    c n THE NEED AND THE DEMAND FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION !iree the ear]iest lays of p1ani>ingf<>1' outdoor recreation gr ai eniplasia has been1ai<1 on tl>eva]uc of oiit<]oorrecrcati H!.iii helping cur'e thr ills >f sc>ciety.'doorr creation de- scrib d p;!rks,playgrounc[s, bracl>rs, an<1 <>ther opporii>niiies f >r re<- renala< tivity as "veritable curung peip] fr >!n.a»d immi!nise ther» agai!>si the de]!!!<]nancy,a]rohnlis>p, prostiti>iir>»,>tr>cl criritr th>tt abounclr<1in thr sl»ms."" In later year., thc einph!«is sbiftc<1 i<> the vu3ue <>fo.tior recreation in coi>»ter- a< iin» the. har!nfu] effccis of t]> stress and ic nsi<>nsof life, i» an 1t»- iii ]»atrialS ><'i<'ty,RCrreati >ngeneral]y 'aine to br so]!!t!n» i > the prnble!ns of mcnta] il'I»<:s that were attributed ti> s! 1 'h 1 '»sic>»s. Hted soci<>1<>gist,1»ts tal eii iss<>e >vith tl>is orien atioi! tov -ar<]s a causa1 link betvc en recreation a»el zrtental hca]t 1: [T!!cse attitudrs nero] developed hy a cult»>n ![y ni rrow reform group whi< hwits >'rootingto a deplorable physical and social er vironmont and rejocpie rur >llife: and hoped to useoutdoor recrerttion,>s s means] of maintainir a!.g least so>rie vestige of a, tradition>>1 society and culture. Giver> these conditions rr d me!iv eaaw fit to investigate th relationship beiugvshai re1sti uiship,if ui!y, exists hei>v 'enrerrc ati<>na»el i»eiital hralth, or, i!! hroaclcr terms, th ge!icial hca]th an<1w '1l-beingof Dian i!! iu<><]cri!society'. l h>st psy- cl!l>1<>gistsand soci<>log»ei>pi'c' hcanl '!'!i' h st 1>edrsriibr<] as thr task of inctiniainitig a bit]ance, b<>th internally a>id ex!. .'i'nally,betwee» r>tan's<>ften c »tf]i ting eicisten '. as a» o>yc>! srrr,and as a 1>crsonality. This precliramcnt has be<»! h- a«iib <1 by La>vr<;c!ceIw. Frank: rs t c;.ucial problemfor rrrrr tal health is hnc>an individual can resorterthis confti t oatinat so rd in nl»1 he!tlth as "tbe abilitv of aii iridividual or an occupieroi socialrob>s an<1 as a perso>1- a]ity to «rove toxvarclthe achieve»!er>tof his vision of ihe goo l ]if s»d the oooidividua] concept.,be auseif societyfrustrates the»>ovcsncnttowar<$ th od lifo, the menta] hea]th of thosr involve<1iiiay be affectrc]," '-' Thsiratcran in ]ivi<]ua1'»n>oven! ntion'>tr<] the good lif<, cn tl»tt it is ir>c!ragingly <]if]i<.ultt» niaintain the balanceneces- sary for >scll-bei»g as des ii'b<.d abo i . T]! e cli arseteristics and inien'ity of the emoii«»al stresses an l sirai!!s of rr!o<]em lif< have e' acr rect >ace,o Peopleand P!ana",Basic Bco!ra, Ioc. New Vcrk C!9SS!p. >09. » r!>>d.;p, >ie>. n Lac re«cc>C. Frnr k,er al., "Trc»daln A>ner>canLiving ari ! OutdoorRecreation,' OR RRC St rdr Repo t Vc. g", p. 2>s<>!>s2!. r