A valley of townhomes?

Sacremento Business Journal ^ | 08 October 2004 | Mike McCarthy

[Lorianne]

The comprehensive growth plan drafted for the six-county Sacramento area says nearly seven of every 10 new local homes built through 2050 should be attached or use small lots -- more than twice the proportion the region has now.

And with land prices soaring, homebuilders here are starting to see some merit to that approach.

The plan was assembled by the Blueprint Project, and the goal of its "preferred scenario" is to shift the region toward higher-density home construction as a way to reduce sprawl, transportation congestion, smog and other perils of uncontrolled growth. The Blueprint Project is a joint effort by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, a regional transportation planning body, and Valley Vision, a coalition of regional leaders that focuses on planning for the area's future.

The target of the preferred plan is to arrive at the year 2050 with 53 percent of the region's housing in higher densities -- in attached housing such as townhomes or condominiums, or detached homes at eight or more homes to an acre.

Today, 32 percent of homes fall into those higher-density categories, and five homes to an acre is typical. That means 69 percent of new homes built between now and midcentury would have to be at the higher densities to reach the preferred target.

The denser development would not be mandatory unless local governments adopt the guidelines in the preferred plan, but many see that scenario as the best way to subdue increasingly horrendous commutes and preserve breathable air and undeveloped land.

[PJBlogger]

What is a "townhome"?
I know what a town house (brownstone} is in NY. Pre-Civil war single family dwelling. The very highest end of the market price scale ranging from $1.5M- $40M

[Carry_Okie]

Slums of the future.

Pork for big developers. Real estate racketeering by government regulation. Fatter loans for banks. A life of toil to pay for it all when none of it was necessary.

Fascists.

[detsaoT]

The plan was assembled by the Blueprint Project, and the goal of its "preferred scenario" is to shift the region toward higher-density home construction as a way to reduce sprawl, transportation congestion, smog and other perils of uncontrolled growth. The Blueprint Project is a joint effort by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, a regional transportation planning body, and Valley Vision, a coalition of regional leaders that focuses on planning for the area's future.

Wait a second, I'm confused...

Townhomes provide for higher population density (more people per land), right? I should know, I live in one (suburbs of Fairfax County, VA).

Higher density population leads to an increase in traffic, right?

So tell me, how again does this "smart growth" approach lead to lower levels of smog and congestion? Lord knows that these "smart growth" folk will never ever allow the county government to build any more roads, so where in the devil will this "higher density" population drive?

Watermelons, all of 'em.

[Amerigomag]

The thought never crossed the minds of these idiots to just stop issuing building permits.

As prices rise slums are renovated, properties are improved, overcrowding is relieved, ag land is preserved and Mexico's poor are forced to return home.

Gentrification. Ain't it great.

[lemura]

So tell me, how again does this "smart growth" approach lead to lower levels of smog and congestion.

Public transportation, my man. While I'm opposed to any gov't incentives regarding transportation preferences, it's obvious that as land prices continue to increase in price, density will increase and centralized transportation will become competitive/preferable.

Let the market work itself out. In 50 years, personal autos could become too inconvenient/expensive for commuting to work in major urban areas. If so, let the people decide, not some pencil necked geeks in urban planning depts.

[lewislynn]

The thought never crossed the minds of these idiots to just stop issuing building permits.

They should have done that before the place you live in was built...or do you live in a cave?

[detsaoT]

I'm all for "letting the people decide." Unfortunately, "smart growth" proponents never allow this to happen. Here in Northern Virginia, our streets are becoming completely gridlocked (it takes me an hour to drive now what took a half hour 2 years ago), because our counties are unable to build new roads or expand the roads they have. Oh, and "public transportation" goes nowhere I need it to (though there is a plan to put a Metrorail station out here towards Dulles, but it's been "in the works" since 1975, so Lord knows when they'll actually start working on it), so it's not like I can just catch the subway when traffic's too heavy.

[Amerigomag]

The structure I reside in was built before Fresno County required building permits outside the limits of incorporated cities ... circa 1897.

The land, originally about 400 acres, has been in my family for about 120 years. My Great grandparents immigrated from South America (legally) in the 1880s.

Had California not be been eager to accommodate the post WWII rift raft and more recently Mexico's poor it would still be a quaint, rural, desert area on the west coast with much the same qualities as eastern Washington or southern Utah. Too bad.