Marina Del Rey:
A Prototype For Urban Development
As the fiscal crisis of America's urban communities intensifies,
it becomes increasingly important to consider new strategies for economic
development. Much of the discussion about the financial plight of
large central cities concerns the need for bringing revenues and expenditures
into balance. This has led to numerous proposals for increasing productivity,
reducing fringe benefits and obtaining support for selected services
from state and federal units of government. However, it is equally
important to consider long-term development programs that can generate
new economic activity in our urban communities as well. Such programs
require the cooperation of public and private sectors in the planning,
financing and administration of large-scale renewal efforts.
One strategy for creating a systematic framework in which public-private
cooperation can flourish is public ownership and long-term leasing
to private entrepreneurs. This deserves consideration because public
ownership and leasing allows overall control to be vested in the public
sector while still permitting and encouraging private development
of urban land.(1) This mechanism has already been employed extensively
in the development of major industrial facilities such as ports, industrial
parks, airports, and food and produce markets. Public ownership and
leasing also is a significant management tool for the federally-owned
national forests and parks and is the primary development technique
for offshore marine resources in the United States.
Although frequently used in urban communities throughout western
Europe and Australia, little is known about the role of public ownership
and leasing in the development of American urban communities.(2) Its
use represents a positive approach to urban land management that allows
private development to occur within a public framework. The level
of public expenditure needed for development of property is reduced
through reliance on the private sector. Leasing also provides a sensitivity
to market preferences and thus maintains a balance between the dead
hand of bureaucracy and the innovative self-generating activity of
the market. Furthermore, it keeps open the option to recycle urban
land by relinquishing, control not forever, but merely for the term
of the lease. And, perhaps most importantly, public ownership and
leasing allows the public sector to capture long-term increments in
land value.(3)
Several questions must be addressed before public ownership and leasing
can be considered a viable policy option in urban land management.
First, is there substantial experience with leasing in this nation
or abroad? If so, how can urban governments become acquainted with
this information in order to learn from the experience of others?
Next, how does leasing compare with other developmental mechanisms
as a device for stimulating private development? Finally, what conditions
and constraints are necessary to further the overall public interest
in urban land development?
Marina Del Rey
Public ownership and leasing has proven to be a powerful and effective
technique for the development of Marina del Rey, a multi-activity
coastal community that was created on a site owned by the County of
Los Angeles. This recreational and residential facility is notable
because it represents the innovative application of a rarely-used
development mechanism and, perhaps more importantly, because it exemplifies
the largely unforeseen consequences of employing that mechanism. Located
on the Santa Monica Bay, Marina del Rey is 17 miles from downtown
Los Angeles. The marina's harbor accommodates more than 6,000 boats;
it has a residential community of 10,000, and its extensive commercial
facilities provide services to residents and visitors from many parts
of the world. The marina contains 23 restaurants, two twelve-story
office buildings, a 10-acre shopping center, five banks, a public
beach, and a regional park.
The emergence of Marina del Rey as a prominent urban phenomenon is
particularly interesting in light of its origins. In 1954, federal
support for a small craft harbor at the Playa del Rey Inlet and Basin
was obtained and in the same year the State of California approved
a $2 million loan for land acquisition at the harbor site. The County
of Los Angeles then initiated efforts to acquire land and prepare
plans for a small craft harbor. Public support of the project ultimately
amounted to $36,250,100 - $4.6 million in federal funds, a $2 million
loan from the State of California, $15 million from the County of
Los Angeles, $13 million from the sale of revenue bonds, and $775,000
from the State Motor Vehicle Fund. This public investment has provided
the opportunity for subsequent private investments exceeding $150
million.
The County of Los Angeles initially acquired the land for the construction
of a marina and, with little experience or information, undertook
the design of a leasing policy. Although leased development of publicly-owned
land has occurred frequently in port areas, there were no models on
which to base the strategy for developing such a large-scale facility
to serve such a diverse set of social and recreational purposes using
public land ownership and long-term leasing to private developers.
Intending to create a marina for small craft recreation, the county
employed a development mechanism without a full awareness of its inherent
potential. The initial set of plans for the harbor included facilities
for water-related activities and transient visitors. However, the
scale and range of uses which were to evolve were simply not anticipated.
Neither the attraction of the coastal site, nor the power of leased
development, was foreseen.
The lack of experience with leasehold arrangements in both the private
and public sectors produced a series of delays in the development
of the harbor. The initial set of rules and policies governing the
leases were not conducive to large-scale private investment. For example,
state law limited leases to ten years, a period of time that was considered
too short by the private sector. Consequently, state statutes were
amended to allow leases to cover a period of sixty years. In addition,
the general lack of familiarity with the leasehold system made private
entrepreneurs hesitant to invest in the marina. The reluctance of
certain lending institutions to invest in what appeared to be seasonal
businesses, such as anchorages, added further to the delay. These
financing problems were compounded by the discovery that the design
of the marina allowed surges to enter the harbor and affect the safety
of its waters.
This set of fiscal and physical delays threatened the public and
private investment in the marina. As a result, the rules for leasing
were revised to respond to private sector needs, and a new S4.5 million
breakwater was built just outside the harbor. When private construction
did proceed, the pattern of development was largely determined by
the need for producing revenue from the leaseholds to assure the integrity
of the $13 million revenue bond issue, which had been used to finance
the clearance and preparation of the marina site.(4)
Because there was a need for income-producing activities, the revenue
bonds imposed constraints on the range of uses which would be economically
feasible in the marina. Therefore, the county's leasing policies and
plans were adjusted to accommodate the preferences and interests of
private developers. The original concept of building a facility for
boating and related activities was altered in this process. These
factors caused the character and intensity of development at the marina
to exceed the original plans, while the fiscal requirements of the
revenue bonds were to determine the overall use pattern of the marina.
Just as the county's leasing policies underwent modification, so
did the response to private investors. The marina, with revised lease-hold
arrangements and safe boating waters, became an attractive site for
venture capital. A large insurance company provided financing to an
early marina developer and, shortly thereafter, leasing of the marina
parcels escalated. The outcome of this leasing policy has been the
creation of a new community on the coastal zone with a wide range
of recreational, residential and commercial facilities.
A New Town Intown
Three salient features distinguish Marina del Rey from other small
craft harbors. First, though basically a recreational boating facility,
it is qualitatively larger. Next, as a mixed activity center, it aggregates
an intense and diverse set of uses within a public facility on the
coastal zone. Third, the creation of this large-scale boating facility
has caused a residential community to come into being with its own
community services, symbols and infrastructure.
Marina del Rey is an unintended new town intown. The new town intown
model has been proposed as a way of generating new social and economic
development within the core of the metropolitan area.5 Although the
public ownership and leasing system was employed at Marina del Rey
for developing a harbor and not as a deliberate policy tool for creating
such a new town intown, Marina del Rey has emerged as a self-contained
community on the urban coastal zone. The intensity of commercial development
within the marina suggests that it has an economic base equal to those
of small, independent municipalities; in addition, its present residential
population has the distinctive socioeconomic characteristics of a
small, independent community. According to the 1970 U. S. Census,
there are 12 cities within the County of Los Angeles with a population
under 10,000. The residential population of the marina is approximately
10,000 and therefore exceeds the size of those independent municipalities.
The marina occupies a relatively limited physical space of 804 acres,
which is divided almost equally between land and water. An intense
amount of activity occurs on this acreage, made possible by the physical
design of the marina as well as by the leasing policies, A substantial
amount of new waterfront space has been created through the use of
a main channel which has finger moles extending off the channel. The
marina's two miles of main channel, three miles of side basins and
seven and one-half miles of concrete bulkhead significantly increase
the amount of visible and usable coastal space that previously existed
as swampland.
Another outcome of these development policies was the emergence of
a number of distinct activity subnodes within the harbor. Public facilities
for tourists and visitors; commercial developments, such as office
buildings and retail stores; and residential units are each concentrated
in distinct areas of the marina. This separation of uses into subnodes
permits the diverse activities to occur with minimal interference
from one another. More importantly, by aggregating activities in distinct
areas, users are able to gain easy access to the full set of goods
and services with which they are most concerned. On a peak use day,
the marina population is estimated to total 30,000. This user population
includes residents and boaters as well as a large number of tourists
and residents of the region who use marina facilities on a semiregular
basis. In order to understand Marina del Rey as an urban activity
node, the physical and economic development of the marina should be
considered as well as the community characteristics that have evolved
out of the physical development.
Small Craft Boating Facilities
The range of facilities located in Marina del Rey stands out in sharp
contrast to the activities generally found at marinas. A 1965 survey
by the Outdoor Boating Club of America indicated that only 21 percent
of marinas had restaurants, while housing as a separate category was
not even included in the survey.(6) The scale of boating facilities
is also significantly larger at Marina del Rey than at most marinas
in the United States. In the same survey, it was estimated that 90
percent of all marinas in the United States had less than 200 berths
for boat storage. By contrast, Marina del Rey has 5,822 slips with
an occupancy rate of 99 percent.
Although marinas are generally used by large boats that require wet
storage, the craft moored at Marina del Rey comprise an especially
select segment of the entire California boat population. Approximately
43 percent of the boats in the State of California that are 40 feet
or longer are moored at Marina del Rey.(7) This suggests that the
extensive boating facilities at Marina del Rey perform an important
function by providing services to the market of large leisure craft,
which comprise a growing segment of the boating population. Moreover,
owning and mooring a boat at Marina del Rey has become fashionable
for prominent Southern Californians. A number of boats are maintained
for social purposes, such as dining and entertaining, as well as for
the more traditional water-oriented activities.
Residential Facilities
The importance of the marina as a residential community was almost
totally unforeseen in the initial planning of the harbor. Yet, the
marina has served a rapidly growing residential population; by the
end of 1975, 5,886 residential units were completed with an occupancy
rate of 91 percent.(8)
Plans call for an estimated 6,000 residential units to be built in
the marina with a residential population of 10,000. The high value
of living in marina apartments that are adjacent to or overlook the
water is perhaps most accurately reflected in the cost of apartment
rentals, as well as in the design of the residential complexes.
According to the 1970 U. S. Census, the median rent for the residential
units, in the portion of the census tract in which the marina is located,
was $254.00 per month.(9) The median rent for all of Los Angeles County
in 1970 was $109.00 per month, while the median rent for the county's
coastal zone was $121.00.(10) Thus, the median rent at Marina del
Rey was more than twice that of both the county as a whole and of
the coastal zone within that county as well.
Given the relatively small size of the marina's residential units,
this high median rent is especially significant. Data available in
mid-1972 on 4,702 units, either built or planned, indicated that 70
percent of housing facilities at the marina consisted of one-bedroom
units. Therefore, it is unlikely that families with children would
find it convenient to live in the marina
Hotel/Motel Units
All of the leaseholds that had the option of constructing apartments
or transient units on their parcels built apartments. The construction
of year-round residential units has far exceeded the 3,180 transient
units projected in the original marina plans. By mid-1973, only 340
hotel/ motel units had been completed, although plans are underway
for construction of two additional hotels in the marina.
Restaurant Facilities
The diversity of purposes that the coastal zone serves is particularly
evident in the intense concentration of restaurants in the marina.
There are 23 restaurants, 6 coffee shops, and 11 snack-bar/take-out
facilities within the marina. Twenty-five of the eating establishments
have bar facilities and 14 have outdoor dining areas, many of which
look out over the water area.
The appeal of waterfront restaurants is seen in the intensive use
of the dining facilities at the marina, when compared with the inland
restaurants located on LaCienga Boulevard in Los Angeles. The marina's
dining facilities exceed LaCienga's famous "Restaurant Row" in both
seating capacity and revenue per seat. In a 1967 study, Gruen Associates
stated that the restaurants represent the most economical 1y productive
marina uses: "If we regard the rental per square foot as a measure
of the productivity of a given use, it is clear that restaurants are
the most productive. Restaurants have proved to be by far the most
productive land use at the marina, both from the leasee's and the
County's standpoint."(11)
Scale Of Development
Private investment in the marina has been characterized primarily
by large-scale developments that have been built on a limited number
of parcels. The predominance of large-scale residential developments
within the marina is reflected by the fact that there are no residential
developments containing less than 100 units; moreover, there are four
residential projects that each contain more than 500 units. Such projects
offer an elaborate package of recreational goods and services that
go far beyond the provision of a basic dwelling unit.
The Marina City Corporation is building the largest single private
development within the marina on a 31-acre parcel; it will consist
of three 17-story buildings with 671 apartments and 377 boat slips.
Of the 52 parcels in the marina, there are 20 which are over eight
acres in size. These 20 parcels contain 78.0 percent of the leased
area, 82.5 percent of the boat slips, and 88.4 percent of the hotel/motel
rooms which are either in existence or planned for the marina.(12)
The design, location and character of the residential and commercial
development at the marina suggest that these facilities are not simply
a conglomeration of apartments, restaurants and boat slips. Rather,
these facilities take advantage of their location at the coastal zone
through the innovative use of outdoor promenades and patios that overlook
the boat slips and the water.
Community Services And Symbols
The entire Santa Monica Bay area has been significantly altered by
the development of this remarkable small craft harbor. This area,
which encompasses the marina, has been transformed into a high-density
urban node with an extensive set of recreational, residential and
commercial facilities. In addition, the intense and varied use of
facilities within Marina del Rey has led to the development of a distinct
set of community services, organizations and symbols.
The growth of a community consciousness 1s evidenced by the formation
of social and professional associations based in the marina. Among
the service organizations that are oriented towards a marina constituency
are the Kiwanis Club of Marina del Rey, the Marina Rotary Club and
the Marina-Venice Lions Club. Other marina-based groups include the
Marina Bar Association, the Marina del Rey Art Association, the Marina
Democratic Club, the Marina Republican Club, the Marina Optimist Club,
and the Marina del Rey Performing Arts Guild. Two weekly newspapers
and one monthly magazine directed toward marina residents are published
regularly.
In addition, a growing set of community activities, and thus a social
infrastructure, are developing within the marina at a rapid rate.
The symbols of a community can be seen in the organizations, events
and meetings that are oriented toward the marina residential population.
This phenomenon is also evident in the increasing range of public
and private services that are provided within the marina.
Southern California Edison Company has built a substation in the
marina, and a separate county fire station serves that population
exclusively. A full-scale branch of the county library opened at the
marina in 1976, and plans for a general-purpose community building
are currently underway. Health services are available at the Marina
Medical Center and at Marina Mercy Hospital, which is located just
outside the marina's boundary. There are two shopping centers in the
marina as well. One covers 10 acres and contains a movie theater,
a 24-hour supermarket and a wide variety of retail shops. At the time
of its construction, Marina del Rey was the first small craft harbor
in Southern California to encompass such a wide range of non-boating
services within its boundaries. Although a number of marinas in Southern
California now contain non-boating facilities, none have either the
diversity or the intensity of uses that distinguish Marina del Rey.
Law Enforcement
One sign of the full-scale social and economic life of the marina
can be seen in the area of law enforcement. Several public and private
security agencies patrol the marina on a regular basis. The County
Harbor Patrol is responsible for water-related security. The Los Angeles
County Sheriff and California Highway Patrol handle on-land law enforcement,
and a number of private security firms operate within the large residential
complexes. A survey of 15 residential developments revealed that all
the developments but one utilized private security patrol services.
Several residential complexes utilize electronic gate-entry systems,
such as a card-key or two-way intercom mechanisms, and others have
television surveillance of public areas. A U. S. Coast Guard air-sea
rescue station is located at the marina and responds to general coastal
boat traffic and to air accidents at nearby Los Angeles International
Airport as well.
The intense use of the 804-acre marina has also generated a number
of traffic and circulation problems, which led the county to hire
a planning consultant to conduct a traffic and parking study of the
entire project. That study noted that the peak traffic load within
the marina would ultimately equal that of a small residential community.(13)
Socioeconomic Characteristics of Marina Residents
The marine functions as a residential community for a distinct subset
of the urban population. The most typical marina residents arc single,
childless, white adults. They are well-educated, employed in managerial
and professional positions and fall into a middle-income bracket.
At the time of the 1970 U. S. Census, 3,184 people lived within the
marina;(14) 92 percent were Caucasian, 6 percent were Spanish and
just under I percent were black. The median age for the marina was
37.4 years, substantially higher than the county median age of 28.6
years. Median family income for the marina was $10,79829.2 percent
higher than the county median family income of $8,361.
The age distribution in the marina further reveals the distinctiveness
of the marina population. Of the 3,427 residents identified for age
purposes, only 7 percent were 19 years of age or under, while 86 percent
were between the ages of 20 and 59. Moreover, there is a notable distribution
of age groupings by sex. There were 1.8 females for every male between
20 and 34 years of age, while there were 1.8 males for every female
in the 35 to 59 age group.
The nature of the marina community is even more apparent when the
marital status of the residents is concerned. Sixty percent of the
residents are single, separated, widowed, or divorced. The high concentration
of single people in Marina del Rey has been observed in a number of
periodicals concerned with emerging patterns of urban life. Newsweek,
in a cover story entitled "Games Singles Play," stated that "the unchallenging
pacesetter of singles hanky-panky is Marina del Rey."(15)
The Governance of the Marina
The power of the leasing mechanism and the attraction of the coastal
location have combined to produce a new residential community in the
Southern California coastal zone. But the decision-making structure
of the marina was not designed to respond to the needs of a community
that contained a complex mixture of facilities which draw on both
internal and external users.
Since the marina's inception, the County of Los Angeles has been
primarily dedicated to maintaining the fiscal integrity of the revenue
bonds through the development of income-producing activities. And,
the intense and varied development that has occurred within the marina
has enabled the county to achieve that goal. A further outcome of
the leasing policy, which was neither anticipated nor fully recognized,
has been the creation of a residential community with a complex social
and economic use pattern. This community is increasingly concerned
with a series of issues that involve the governance of the overall
facility.
Little consideration was given to designing a governmental structure
through which residents and boaters could articulate their interests
in marina management. As a result, the unanticipated growth of this
residential community has produced an increasing set of conflicts
between the lessees and the various user-groups. Thus, new demands
have been placed on the existing governmental structure, which was
primarily created to administer a set of leasehold developments.
During the initial stages of the marina's development, the management
of the marina was mainly concerned with the design of leasing policies
and rules that would induce private investment in the leaseholds and
thus produce revenue for the county. The bondholders and the lessees
were the major private actors in the marina decision-making process,
which primarily consisted of negotiations between these two groups
as well as with the Department of Small Craft Harbors, the Los Angeles
County Harbor Small Craft Advisory Commission and the Los Angeles
County Board of Supervisors. The interests and values of the lessees
have been largely articulated through the Marina Lessees Association,
a nonprofit corporation consisting of leaseholders, which was formed
shortly after the initial leasing of parcels and which has worked
since its formation for marina policies conducive to private investment.
In recent years, the problems of governing the marina have gone substantially
beyond the formulation of leasing policies which would respond to
the interests of the lessees and bondholders and thus assure the fiscal
integrity of the county.(16) The residents and boaters of the marina
have raised new issues related to their rights and privileges within
the small craft harbor. These two groups, the boaters and residents,
are sublessees in the marina and thus have no formal relationship
with the county for the articulation of their needs. Conflicts have
arisen over boat slip rates, live-aboards, parking spaces, and rent
increases in residential units. In 1974, the county created a mediation
committee to resolve conflicts between boat owners and anchorage operators
and, in 1976, marina residents called for the creation of a similar
committee to deal with issues involving the residential developments.
The passage of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Act in 1972
compounded the marina's governance problems. This act imposed a new
and different set of rules for future coastal zone development, through
the creation of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission,
which enabled third parties, such as environmental groups and residents
of adjacent communities, to participate in decisions affecting the
marina. The potential for this Commission to serve as a vehicle through
which specific groups could participate in decision-making processes
intensifies the need for a resolution to the marina's governance issues.
If leasing is to be used to create a new town intown, appropriate
organizational arrangements must be designed and put into effect.
Royce Hansen has noted that financing arrangements and the provision
of services have been the basis of governmental arrangements in new
towns, with little attention given to the participation of residents
in decisional processes.(17) At Marina del Rey, the institutional
arrangements have produced problems of governance which clearly resemble
the issues that new towns confront when designing decision-making
processes that respond to the interests of residents as well as developers.
Impact On The Community
As an urban development tool, public ownership and leasing has generated
an impressive amount of economic activity. More than 250 individuals
and firms conduct business at the marina and an estimated 2,000 persons
are employed in the marina. Private investment in marina facilities
exceeds $150 million, more than four times the amount projected in
the original county plans.(18) In 1975, gross receipts for activities
occurring on the leased parcels exceeded $84 million. Marina apartments
accounted for more than one-third of the total rents paid to the county,
while anchorages paid 25 percent and restaurants provided 17 percent
of the total rental payments.(19)
Just as the nature of the development within the marina was not fully
anticipated, the impact that this public facility would have on the
surrounding area was equally unforeseen. The success of Marina del
Rey has stimulated similar residential and commercial development
in the surrounding communities. Three major condominium developments
have been built just outside the marina's borders, which have incorporated
the term "marina" in their title, though they are not formally within
the harbor's boundaries. The status and attraction of the marina as
a residential and commercial location has also led many individuals
and firms which are in close proximity but outside the harbor itself
to use "Marina del Rey" in their street address.
The most visible impact of the marina has been in changing the tone
of the social and commercial life which occurs in the neighboring
community of Venice and in the larger area surrounding the marina.
A number of new office buildings and retail shops have been built
on the periphery of the marina to serve marina visitors and the residents
of the new housing complexes located outside the marina itself.
Although the external effects of the marina have increased the value
of property in the surrounding community, they have also led to the
displacement of low-income residents as new condominiums and apartments
are built in the surrounding area. Furthermore, the intense development
of the marina has also generated spillover effects in the form of
increased traffic and congestion in adjacent communities. This has
led local residents to challenge further development of the marina
at meetings of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission.
As the marina has evolved into a "new town intown," the intensity
and style of use at the harbor has had social and psychological implications.
Southern California is a highly dispersed region with several nodes
of activity. For many years, Beverly Hills and Hollywood Boulevard
were the prime centers of cultural and social life in Los Angeles.
A number of current observers suggest that there has been a shift
of emphasis from those traditional centers of social life to this
new urban node for social and recreational activities.
Much of the attraction of the marina lies in the fact that it has
become a model of urban lifestyle. This lifestyle does not entail
boating as such, but rather the combination of a recreational lifestyle
within an urban setting through the concentration of a number of distinctive
goods and services in one location. The marina has become a symbol
of the casual, relaxed, outdoor Southern California life and indeed
has become a part of our national imagery. Numerous television shows
and films use the boats, restaurants and apartments at Marina del
Rey as a setting, and thus the concept of this recreational and residential
harbor is transmitted regularly through the media. In 1975, more than
50 major motion pictures and television productions were filmed, in
part, at Marina del Rey, as well as 20 commercials and six film documentaries.(20)
The character of the marina development has produced questions regarding
the equity of the marina facilities. Although a great deal of activity
occurs within the harbor, the cost of gaining access to many of the
facilities is relatively high. If public ownership and leasing is
to serve as a means for managing urban land, it will be necessary
to take such issues as equity, governance and external effects into
account. Marina del Rey provides evidence for the assertion that leasing
is a powerful development mechanism that can potentially form a context
in which public and private cooperation can flourish.
It is important to note that most of the constraints that leasing
has placed on access to and use of the marina were engendered by the
requirements of the revenue bonds, not by leasing per se. ,Had another
financial method been employed to finance the harbor, a broader range
of uses would have been economically feasible. These constraints,
which the revenue bonds imposed on the development of Marina del Rey,
highlight the need for careful consideration in the selection of financing
mechanisms for publicly-owned leasehold systems.
One critical issue which has yet to be resolved is the future of
the land and water parcels which, once the leases expire, revert back
to the county. One major benefit which stems from public ownership
and leasing is the opportunity it provides for renewing the land while
eliminating the need for repetition of the acquisition process.
In addition, as the expiration date of the leases draws near, it
will be necessary to assure the maintenance of structures that are
on the marina parcels. Leasehold developers, who have fully depreciated
their buildings and do not foresee the granting of new leases or the
extension of existing leases, may have little incentive to maintain
and repair their structures. Therefore, policies must be designed
to provide incentives for developers to keep their buildings in good
condition.
Public Ownership And Leasing: A Development Mechanism
Public ownership and leasing, as it has developed at Marina del Rey,
provides a marked contrast to the character of development that generally
occurs on publicly-owned land. In addition, the unforeseen effects
that have occurred as a result of the use of a public ownership and
leasehold system at Marina del Rey offer further proof that this development
tool warrants greater consideration by local governments. Publicly-owned
property has traditionally been used for single-purpose activities,
such as schools, housing, beaches, or parks. In the 1960's, when many
communities were engaged in urban renewal programs, land was frequently
acquired by public agencies; however, development occurred, in most
cases, through sale of the land rather than through a leasehold arrangement
which would allow local governments to capture increments in land
value. (21) Currently, land acquisition is commonly pursued by local
governments for the limited purpose of minimizing or preventing intense
development of natural resources. As urban communities seek to generate
new social and economic activity, public ownership and leasing should
be given serious attention if public-private cooperation is to be
achieved in urban development. It 1s a powerful policy tool which
can effectively combine both public and private objectives in urban
land management.
Notes
1. For a detailed discussion of public land ownership and leasing,
see Mitchell L. Moss, "Urban Coastal Resource Management: Public Ownership
and Leasing As a Development Mechanism" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Southern California, 1975).
2. Marion Clawson, "Historical Overview of Land-Use Planning in the
United States," in Environment: A New Focus for Land Use Planning,
ed. Donald M. McAllister (Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation,
1973); John W. Reps, "Public Land, Urban Development, Policy and the
American Planning Tradition," in Modernizing Urban Land Policy,
ed. Marion Clawson (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1973); Ann
Louise Strong, Planned Urban Environment (Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins Press, 1971).
3. Bennett Harrison, Urban Economic Development (Washington,
0. C.: The Urban Institute, 1974); Robert Wood, The Necessary Majority
(Mew York: Columbia University Press, 1971); and John Reps, "The Future
of American Planning: Requiem or Renascence," Planning 1967
(Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1967).
4. The basis for the choice of revenue bonds as a funding mechanism
is discussed in Moss, Ch. 3.
5. Harvey Perloff, "New Town Intown," Journal of the American
Institute of Planners, vol. 32 (Hay 1966); and Harvey Perloff
et a1., Modernizing the Central City: New Towns Intown…And Beyond
Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1975).
6. Charles Jones, Where Marina Profits Come From, Boating Facilities;
Outdoor Boating Club of America, vol. 7 (1965), cited in Ira L.
Whitman, "Economic and Social Values of Estuarine Recreation," in
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, The
Economic and Social Importance of Estuaries (Washington, D. C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971), p. A-30-31.
7. Philip J. Symonds, "Supply and Demand for Small Craft Harbors:
Some Economic Considerations" (Los Angeles: University of Southern
California, Center for Urban Affairs. Working Paper, December 1971),
Table 1. Mimeo.
8. James Hayes, "State of the Marina," The Argonaut, Jan.
29, 1976, p. 2.
9. Philip J. Symonds, Robert Warren and Susan Stallard, Statistical
Handbook of Coastal Zone Socio-Economic and Housing Characteristics:
Los Angeles County (Los Angeles: University of Southern California,
Center For Urban Affairs/Sea Grant Program, June 1974), p. 78.
10. Ibid., p. 8.
11. Gruen Associates, Marina del Rey: Land Use Study (Los
Angeles,
12. Marina del Rey Facilities Tabulation (Los Angeles: Department
of Small Craft Harbors, April 1973).
13. Gruen Associates, Marina del Rey Traffic and Parking Study
(Los Angeles, California, Dec. 1971), p. 2.
14. Symonds et al., p. 118.
15. "Games Singles Play," Newsweek, July 16, 1973, p. 57.
16. For a fuller discussion of the internal management of the marina,
see Marsha V. Rood and Robert Warren, The Urban Marina: Managing
and Developing Marina del Rey (Los Angeles: University of Southern
California Center for Urban Affairs and Sea Grant Program, Jan. 1974).
17. Royce Hanson, "Background Paper," in New Towns: Laboratories
for Democracy (Hew York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1971).
18. George F. Nicholson, Marina del Rey Economic Study (Long
Beach, California, 1956). p. 2.
19. James Hayes, "State of the Marina," The Argonaut, Jan.
29, 1976,
20. Ibid., p. 2.
21. "Long-Tenn Leasing in Urban Renewal: An Alternative Method of
Municipal Land Disposition," The Yale Law Journal, vol. 68
(June 1959), pp. 1424-58.
Originally published in Financing
Local Government:
New Approaches to Old Problems
Mark Rosentraub, Ed.
Western Social Science Association. Ann Arbor, MI. 1977