Another key component to Sacramento's future success is planning for development. This is the second article discussing the
2035 General Plan Update released in August 2014.
According to city leaders, the city intends to "encourage compact, higher-density development..." (LU 1.1.1). Throughout the city, they intend to build up - not out. The premise behind such a proposal is that not enough Sacramentans live in multi-unit apartment buildings. Among the stated purposes for this requirement to increase density are: supporting transit, reducing vehicle trips, promoting pedestrian/bicycle friendly neighborhoods, and increasing housing diversity.
 |
| Sacramento's Big City Skyline |
Now I, personally, want to see Sacramento make the transition into "big city" status. There is currently estimated to be more than 475,000 residents in the City of Sacramento. There are only a handful of cities in California bigger than Sacramento, as reported by the
California Department of Finance. This places Sacramento as the 7th largest city in California, following: Los Angeles (3,904k), San Diego (1,345k), San Jose (1,000k), San Francisco (836k), and Fresno (515k).
 |
| A whole different "cowtown" world |
But, in order to break into big city status alongside northern California giants like San Francisco and San Jose, there must be fundamental change - change that has long been met with less-than-enthusiastic response from residents who like to think of Sacramento as a "cow town" (see
Here,
Here and
Here). There's something to be celebrated about having a reputation for nice people, slower pace, and urban farms and livestock.
When you get down to it, here's the crux of the argument for greater infill development and higher housing densities. The percentage of buildings with five or more units in Sacramento is about 22.5% - Now, compare this with Los Angeles (45.5%), San Diego (35.5%), San Jose (25%), and San Francisco (45.5%). It simply can't be said that the City's skyline rivals that of San Francisco, San Jose or Los Angeles.
City leaders have a schizophrenic vision of shedding Sacramento's cow town reputation in favor of tightly-packed residents, robust transit and non-motorized transportation options, while still promoting agriculture (lately with the "Farm to Fork" fad) and open space (LU 2.3.1). It makes one wonder whether they're trying to appease the voters (who like the "small town" feel), while still pushing a big city agenda.
Posts
