October 2, 1967
Page 27428
BALANCED URBANIZATION AND NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, increased concern is being expressed in Congress, in a number of executive departments, and in the country at large over the continued migration from rural areas into our concentrated metropolitan areas. A new word, "megalopolis," has been coined to describe this concentration of population in geographically limited areas along the east and west coasts and across the lower Great Lakes region.
People are leaving rural areas which lack economic opportunity because of changes in agricultural production, mining, lumbering, and other industries and crowding into the already densely populated metropolitan areas. In a sense they are merely transplanting economic problems from the rural areas to the cities. Many of them lack the specialized training and skills that are needed for industrial and urban jobs. Furthermore, while the migrants tend to locate in central cities, there is a distinct trend of movement of industries out into suburban and other outlying areas.
Increasingly the need is recognized by many of providing alternatives by revitalizing rural and smaller urban economies. Through all of this, the need for a national economic development and urban growth policy become increasingly apparent.
A number of bills have been introduced in the current Congress proposing programs to increase economic opportunity in rural areas and thereby foster a balanced pattern of urbanization. Several proposals have also been made for the establishment of a national commission to study balanced economic development. I invite the attention of interested Members of Congress to the fact that in connection with a study of the development of new communities, the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations is directing its attention to this problem.
The Commission was established by Congress in 1959 and is composed of representatives of the public and each level of government including six Members of the Congress. The senior Senator from North Carolina [Mr. ERVIN], the senior Senator from South Dakota [Mr. MUNDT], and I are all original members of the Commission. In the other body, Representative DWYER, of New Jersey, and Representative FOUNTAIN, of North Carolina, are also original members of the Commission, and Representative ULLMAN, of Oregon, was recently appointed to membership.
In addition to the six Members of Congress, the Commission has three from the executive branch: the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney-General, and the Director of the Office of Emergency Planning. Other members include four Governors, four mayors, three State legislative leaders and three elected county officials. The public is represented by three members. The Commission's study will provide an excellent opportunity for Congress and the many interested groups and individuals throughout the Nation to give this matter thorough and informed consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the Advisory Commission's study outline be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the study outline was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[From the Advisory commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Washington, D.C. Sept. 8,1967]
OUTLINE. OF STUDY OF BALANCED URBANIZATION AND NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The following is a topical and paragraph outline which develops the major areas of
coverage for the Commission's study on Balanced Urbanization and New Community Development. Not all topics are treated in equal depth nor is the depth. of treatment necessarily related to importance.
The study describes the present pattern of urbanization in the country and the patterns of urban and regional growth and decline. It will review the economic, social, and political factors which influence economic development and urbanization. Consideration will be given to the need for a national economic development and urbanization policy to foster balanced development throughout the country, and to the respective roles of Federal, State, and local governments. It will then consider intergovernmental problems involved in evolving policies and programs to facilitate the financing, development, and governing of new communities as one of the methods to implement national policies and goals for a balanced urbanization.
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of the study.
1. To examine the present total pattern of urbanization nationwide, emphasizing the whole range from villages to metropolitan centers, including specific attention to trends affecting small towns and rural counties as well as the large urban concentrations.
2. To provide a description of urbanization, using a broader definition for "urban" and more restricted for "rural."
3. To identify the forces which have influenced present population distribution patterns with a view to facilitating the consideration of possible policies designed to encourage balanced urbanization.
4. To identify economic and social advantages and disadvantages in population concentration in metropolitan centers.
5. To consider the need for a national urbanization policy which can guide specific decisions regarding programs which affect urban development.
6. To examine several types of measures at various levels of government that can be used to foster balanced urbanization.
7. To examine the potential of "rural growth centers" as a method of counteracting the diseconomies of metropolitan concentration and congestion.
8. To examine the potential of new communities as another method of meeting the problem of population concentration in metropolitan areas.
9. To review the problems involved in planning, regulating, and building large new communities. Particular emphasis will be placed on the possible role of Federal, State, and local governments and the relationships between the public and private sectors in developing new communities.
10. To explore questions of land assembly and development; planning and development; provision of community facilities and services; the time and character of municipal government for new communities; and to explore the regions and metropolitan areas.
11. To examine the governmental and administrative techniques that can be used to encourage and regulate urban development in accordance with public policy objectives.
B. Definitions – distinguish types of new communities and related developments: satellite new communities, independent new cities, regional centers, growth centers, planned developments, planned residential districts, planned unit developments, "new town-in town" (on undeveloped sites or cleared sites or a combination of the two).
C. While the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the study of new communities will have relevance for rural and urban growth centers, "new town-in town," planned residential districts, planned unit developments, etc., the emphasis will be on strictly "new communities," i.e., communities started from scratch in areas with no significant development within the projected borders and no coterminus local government. Perhaps modified to include those developments (especially those using staged development) which so enlarge an existing small incorporated nucleus as to put them outside the normal subdivider/developer situation.
PART I – NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND URBANIZATION
Chapter 1. The process of urbanization
A. Descriptive and statistical account of urbanization in the United States identifying the growth of urban areas emphasizing the whole spectrum from the smallest "rural" urban centers to the largest metropolitan areas and "megalopolis."
1. Emphasis should be given to the total pattern of urbanization stressing the growth of medium-sized urban centers.
2. The significance of the growth of suburbs in relation to central cities and the distinction between central cities and other components of urban population (fringe areas, urbanized areas, other urban places, and some rural nonfarm).
3. A description of the megalopolis concept.
4. Identification of the most rapidly growing small- and medium-sized counties and cities (including those cities located within SMSA's but not a part of the socio-economic structure of the SMSA).
5. Description of problems attendant upon the pattern of urbanization including heavy concentration in metropolitan areas and suburban "sprawl" and the resulting economic, social and governmental problems. A parallel description of problems created by the exodus of population from rural areas.
6. Significance of dispersal of industry into urban fringe and rural areas and increased industrialization of agriculture with owners and even operators more frequently living in urban places.
Chapter 2. Factors influencing economic development and urbanization
A. Analytical discussion of factors influencing national and regional economic growth and decline and urbanization based on the recognition that mature economies function through the interaction of urban-industrial complexes (cities); that the major economic activity of the nation operates and will in the forseeable future continue to operate through a system of cities; that regional differentiation tends to give way to urban interaction as the economy of a nation matures. For the purposes of this analysis, the urban complex or center is not just a densely populated area, but is a social complex containing a hierarchy of economically and socially interrelated and overlapping hinterlands which collectively comprise a recognizable, viable entity.
B. Examination of social and economic forces influencing regional activity and urbanization.
1. The extent and character of national economic growth.
2. The impact of change-initiating factors central to such growth, particularly (a) technology, (b) natural resources, (c) population and labor force, (d) changes in consumer demand, and (e) strategically important institutional changes, such as those flowing from governmental policy.
3. The relative extent to which regions have shared in the national economic growth, and the shift in the relative position of individual regions with regard to the key measures (i.e., employment within major industries).
4. The major characteristics of the economic growth (or decline) patterns of the individual regions, particularly the extent to which such growth (or decline) is related to industry composition or to within-industry locational changes.
5. The nature of the individual regions, and their patterns or urbanization.
C. Examination of economies and diseconomies of concentration and dispersion.
Chapter 3. Conclusions and recommendations regarding the influencing of economic development and urbanization
A. Identify the need for national and regional, State, and local economic development policy incorporating urbanization policy.
B. Consider possible Federal, State, and local policies to encourage a balanced industrial and economic growth throughout the nation and a balanced pattern of urbanization between large metropolitan centers, smaller urban places outside of metropolitan areas, and rural areas.
1. Policy to stem the continued concentration in metropolitan areas and to encourage the development of alternative patterns of urbanization including smaller growth centers and new communities.
2. The use of industrial location policies to influence development; placement of public contracts, institutions and facilities as an influence; and the development of job opportunities.
3. Land use and development policies such as new approaches to zoning, open space provisions, and timing of water and sewer lines and highways.
4. Measures dealing with government organization and structure such as boundary commissions, extra-territorial powers, strengthening county governments, and regional arrangements.
5. Elimination where possible of the arbitrary distinction resulting in similar but separate programs for rural and urban areas – 701 and community development districts, urban rural water sewer facilities program, HUD and USDA extension programs, proposed separate urban and rural job opportunity programs.
C. Organizational alternatives to formulate economic development and urbanization policy.
1. A national economic planning agency assigned responsibility for economic development and urbanization policy – an existing or new agency in the Executive Office of the President.
2. Complementary regional, State, areawide, and local planning organization and process.
PART II – INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND GOVERNING OF NEW COMMUNITIES
Chapter 4. New communities in America and their objectives
A. Objectives of new communities and identification of the public interest in them. (Obviously not all of the objectives are equally important or feasible.)
1. Dispersal away from overconcentrated urban centers.
2. Regulate development: an opportunity for planned, staged development to influence the future course of urban growth encouraging desirable cities and towns based on sound principles of physical planning, using flexible approaches, viewing the total projected city as a whole, and providing for various needs on a rational basis.
3. Assure the most economic use of public and private resources for new urban development.
4. Provide a wide range of single and multi-family housing covering a broad price range from low-income housing to luxury homes and apartments.
5. Present the opportunity for innovation and experimentation unhampered by preexisting structures and organization.
6. Provide relatively self-contained social and economic opportunities within or easily accessible to the community for a wide range of professional and occupational needs.
7. Provide housing choices to all groups as a step in overcoming established patterns of
segregation which foreclose or minimize the opportunity for moving out of minority ghettos.
8. Relieve pressure on central cities and built-up areas for relocation opportunities in connection with urban renewal, highway projects, code enforcement, and other displacements.
9. Provide for amenities and desirable residential, work, and recreational opportunities. Forestall blight and deterioration.
10. Contribute to the sound economic development of a region.
11. Provide direct economic benefits to the governments involved, such as a diversified tax base and economic provision of public services and facilities.
12. Provide alternative residential and work opportunities for migration coming into metropolitan areas.
13. Provide geographically dispersed alternatives to migration into the largest urban concentrations.
B. History of "new towns" and new communities.
1. Early history.
2. General philosophy of "new towns" and new communities – various streams of thought going into them: town planning, good government, garden cities, economic interest, company towns, convenience.
3. New towns in Europe.
4. New communities in America.
a. Roots in city planning movement.
b. The company town.
c. Earliest planned suburban developments.
d. The 1920's and 1930's Garden City efforts.
e. New Deal "Greenbelt" cities of the 1930'S.
f. Defense towns: Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, Richland.
g. Post-World War II large suburban developments – Levittowns, Park Forest, etc.
5. Evaluation of previous experience.
Chapter 5. New Community Development and Government Action
A. Present experience and problems facing new community development – their political, social, and economic feasibility.
1. Need to combine the public interest requirements essential to justify special provisions, concessions, and inducements with the economic need for a profit to interest entrepreneurs.
a. Provision of essential public services and assurance of adequate public facilities designed to incorporate the capacity or be capable of expansion to incorporate the capacity to serve the ultimate planned population.
b. The protection of public objectives such as the provision of a range of housing types including low-rent, public housing and middle-income housing either subsidized, nonprofit, or limited profit.
2. Need for national and State and metropolitan areas, urban development policy to provide broad, basic goals and objectives to guide and inform decisions.
3. Large initial financial commitment and extended development period during which return is limited or nonexistent.
4. Limited tax base for current public needs during earlier stages before commercial and industrial development.
5. Problem of securing adequate fiscal resources to finance needed public services and facilities in those new communities which don't include sufficient industrial and commercial development within their borders.
6. The necessity for imaginative public regulation during the crucial formative stages before a government exists which is specifically concerned with the "new community" per se. Their government, in some States particularly, may not necessarily be coincident with the borders of the new communities i.e., it may be the county, town, or borough within which development takes place.
7. The need for flexibility to develop new imaginative approaches and meet changing conditions over the period of development while at the same time protecting the public interest by preventing exploitation of the more liberal or flexible regulatory policy thus preserving the essential assumptions under which the initial commitment to develop is entered into.
8. The necessity to anticipate a political and community leadership and a constituency not yet present or even clearly identified consisting of residents, merchants, industrialists, etc. The general direction that will be desired or acceptable must be foreseen and then there must be allowance for adjustment without compromising the basic objectives as actual experience grows.
9. Relationship of development to an existing incorporated place – either a city larger than the new development or a town much smaller than the new development – when annexation is a possible alternative step rather than independent incorporation. Use of local agency formation commission or State review agency could be helpful.
10. The necessity to assess the market for and acceptability of new communities.
B. Possible recommendations for government action to assist in the development of new communities.
1. Organization.
a. A range of organizational possibilities which can be adapted to varying specific needs and objectives of new communities is needed. The organization must provide for supervision during initial stages and the ultimate transition to a permanent arrangement including incorporation if desired. There must be provision for representation and protection of metropolitan, regional, and statewide, interest.
b. Organization. for overall development responsibility.
(1) Public development authority with an opportunity for participation by and representation of a wide range of public and private interests.
(a) Could include authority for acquisition of title or development rights to land with subsequent sale to private developers or use for public purposes.
(b) Could include responsibility for planning and designing, land development, regulatory authority, public services, and supervision of actual development of public facilities and private houses, buildings, and factories.
(2) A mixed consortium of public and private groups (using the Comsat corporation as a precedent) or a strictly private consortium, but with public funds involved in research and development, to take responsibility for development. Existing governments would retain more of the regulatory authority under these arrangements.
(3) New authority to equip the county or the State to take direct responsibility for regulation and development and for marshaling and coordinating participation of other public and private entities.
(4) New authority to permit existing cities to develop satellite cities – to take initiative and exercise early regulatory authority over them looking to later incorporation or possibly annexation.
(5) County subordinate service areas.
c. Organization for development of segments or parts of the new community.
(1) State-chartered development credit corporations to help finance individual developers of housing, apartments, commercial or industrial buildings.
(2) State development finance authorities to channel State funds and credit or credit guarantees into new communities development either through State-chartered development corporations or direct to developers. This type of assistance might be limited to or have more desirable terms for limited-profit groups.
(3) Citizens nonprofit housing cooperatives or other organizations for low- and middle-income housing and housing for special groups such as the aged.
(4) Limited-profit groups for middle-income and special housing needs.
(5) Authority for an existing government or public agency to undertake low-income public housing and middle-income housing and make necessary commitments and assurances.
(a) Could be either the county, other existing local jurisdictions, or the State.
(b) Could subsequently be superseded by an incorporated municipality or an authority of such a municipality.
(6) Limited, but multi-purpose special districts or county subordinate service areas to assume responsibility for certain public works and services either directly or by contract or interlocal agreement.
(7) Interlocal contracts or agreements with existing governments.
2. Financing.
a. Direct public financial programs.
(1) Federal and State grant programs for land acquisition and development.
(2) Federal and State grant programs for construction of public facilities – open space, water and sewer facilities, public buildings, hospitals, schools, etc. Special provisions for additional matching or incentives or higher ceilings could be made for planned new communities.
(3) Loans or loan guarantees for similar purposes and postponements of interest where justified.
(4) Grants and technical assistance to the responsible government for planning and for administering development controls during the formative stages.
b. Tax concessions or equalization measures.
(1) Certain types of tax abatement, forgiveness, or other concessions during the period of holding land for development or during the early years of development.
(2) Tax equalization or redistribution measures to help relate needs of new communities to tax resources. For example, in earlier stages of new community development, needs often outstrip the tax base. Or a new community may be located to be accessible to an industrial complex and thereby serve it and yet not include industry within its borders.
3. Planning, site designation, land assembly, and regulation.
a. Public acquisition of land or development rights for subsequent sale to developers or use of public facilities.
b. New, improved and flexible approaches to land use and development controls such as zoning regulations, subdivision control and official maps and building codes; to development plans; and to the formulation of comprehensive planning policies and objectives.
c. A regulatory system to permit negotiation of a total plan with provision for staged development and adaptations to changing population and social and economic conditions while still providing predictability for the developers and adequate protection of the public interest.
d. Application and adaptation of existing regulatory techniques such as planned unit development, planning residential district, usable open space, and staged development.
e. Development of new land use control techniques for large, mixed, residential-commercial-industrial developments such as borrowing or average densities, "floating zone" approaches, and so forth.
f Some techniques for obtaining assurances of continuing ratios of low- and middle-income housing opportunities to total housing which are the quid pro quo for special regulatory and financial incentives. Protection of open-housing practices. Assurances of adequate, well-planned public facilities to anticipate projected growth.
g. Regulatory leverage arising from public ownership of land or of development rights and conditions attached to sale.
h. National, regional, metropolitan area, and State planning for identification of possible sites and designation of specific sites using physical, social, and economic analysis techniques.
i. Tax policy to influence development.
j. Programming of public facilities to influence urban development.