83 
quisitions of land for the development of public facilities until the 
private demand is sufficient. By that time, the most suitable sites for 
these facilities are preempted by the very private development that 
generated the demand in the first place)” 
The second part of the above assertion has to do with the manner by 
which private developers currently acquire sites for new community 
development, a manner that might be characterized as the ‘‘and first 
approach,” because, as it usually happens, the first action the private 
developer takes is the acquisition of the land. His criteria for purchase 
normally are based on such things as the anticipated marketability of 
the site and the ability of the surrounding area to service his project 
with the level of facilities it requires. Although these considerations are 
important, particularly for the security of his investment, they fail 
to encompass several other items which, from a regional public policy 
standpoint, are crucial. These include such considerations as: 
1. The impact his development will have on the entire region’s 
growth. 
2. The strain it will have on the surrounding communities to meet 
the increased demands of new residents in the area. 
3. The employment and valuable cultural activities it will attract 
away from areas of greater need within the region. 
4. The changes in priorities in regional and State appropriations of 
funds that will be required to provide the community with the desired 
level of facilities.1° 
Jt is just these four kinds of regional considerations that the British 
new town developers have recently recognized as crucial to the public 
interest of the new development and the surrounding area.' 
While some private uew community developers prepare analyses of 
regional growth patterns and demographic and economic trends, their 
studies are frequently only for public relations purposes (i.e., for their 
industrial and commercial sales and leasing brochures) or for deter- 
mining what share of a particular local market they can expect to 
capture. If governmental agencies could be involved in the site selec- 
tion process, hopefully they would have the necessary motivation and 
expertise to encourage regional community strategies that satisfy the 
regional needs and plans and to discourage those that do not. 
(122) Government sponsorship of new communities will mean an improve- 
ment in both the patterns of land use and the quality of planning —This 
particular assertion serves as a pot pourri of secondary benefits asso- 
ciated, in one sense, with advanced public acquisition of land. The 
value of itis easy to understand—plans can be better and more realistic 
with the tool of advance acquisition because there will be less impedi- 
ments and obstacles to deal with. In this sense, the thrust of this 
assertion is economic; that is, how to maximize the quality and utility 
of a new urban environment while seeking to minimize its cost. 
However, in quite another sense the assertion is social; that is, 
seeking to create urban communities that can ‘‘intermesh the lives of 
people who live in them, by concentrating on integrating their work, 
101 Shoup, op. cit., p. 4 (see note 37, supra). 
102 Hobbs, ‘“New Communities; a Public or a Private Venture?” unpublished manuscript, p. 12, Harvard’ 
University (Dec. 2, 1969). 
03 Notes from speech given by Professor Rose of the University of Birmingham, England, at Harvard 
University, (Oct. 24, 1969). 
