Trees for Daybreak

The street that I called home when I was a child was lined with trees. Any memory that I have while playing in my neighborhood includes these long-lived giants. They were planted long before I was born and will probably outlive me even if I live to be 100. The shade they gave during the hot summer months, the brilliant colors and piles of leaves in the fall, the climate and peace of mind that they provided was more valuable than any other amenity. Sara Ebenreck said that trees outstrip most people in the extent and depth of their work for the public good.

Considering these memories, I am glad that the landscape plan for Daybreak calls for the planting of 100,000 trees among the 4200 acres that will eventually make up the whole of the community. It is one of the major reasons that I moved here. Most of the trees in Daybreak are just getting started, but given time will grow to be the same green sentinels that I enjoyed in my old neighborhood.

This transformation will dramatically affect every aspect of life in Daybreak. For example, one of the main underlying philosophies of Daybreak is conservation and smart growth. We are building homes that are energy efficient, planting water-wise plants and reducing runoff among other things. All of these efforts will be reinforced by the planting of trees.

• "The net cooling effect of a young, healthy tree is equivalent to ten room-size air conditioners operating 20 hours a day."—U.S. Department of Agriculture
• "Landscaping can reduce air conditioning costs by up to 50 percent, by shading the windows and walls of a home." — American Public Power Association
• "The planting of trees means improved water quality, resulting in less runoff and erosion. This allows more recharging of the ground water supply." —USDA Forest Service

Trees help the environment in more direct ways as well. Especially in Utah, the temperature underneath a tree can be much cooler. By using trees in our neighborhoods, we moderate the heat-island effect caused by the heat radiated by pavement, buildings, and other hardscapes. The quality of the air we breathe is improved by trees as the leaves filter dust and other particulates. Trees also absorb other pollutants such as carbon monoxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide and recycle it into oxygen.

One of the most interesting affects trees have is on your pocketbook. Besides saving money by lowering energy costs, trees can increase the value of your property. A house with mature trees can be worth 5 to 20 percent more than homes of similar size and quality.

But when will these benefits be realized? While the full benefits will not be realized for at least a generation, proportioned benefits will be realized along the way. Depending on the growth rate of the variety of trees planted in Daybreak, some will take much longer. I personally look forward to a fall day 20 years from now when the trees are turning colors and the children are crunching the leaves under their feet. If you have any other reservations about planting trees in Daybreak, then just look at the two pictures below. The same street photographed at different times (no digital manipulation) one with trees and one without. Which street would you rather live on?

Daybreak Housing Market

The Salt Lake Tribune reported today that homes in the Salt Lake Valley have returned to 2006 levels. According to the median home prices in our zip code (84095), they are correct. If you look at a graph of median home values it is easy to see that we have peaked and that values have decreased since the second quarter of this year. With home values now on the decline, Daybreak, like all other areas, is experiencing a record number of foreclosures. These foreclosures are for every type of property from condos/town homes to 5,000 square ft. single family homes. So now we ride the downhill slippery slope. But how fast and for how long will the market decline? If you can answer that question, then you will probably become a millionaire soon. The market is always unpredictable. However, looking at common sense factors can help establish a good prediction.

One of the largest factors that needs to be considered is Daybreak's success. Daybreak has been steadily increasing its already large share of the new home market. Last year Kennecott Land boasted that for every 10 houses sold in the salt lake valley, one of them was located in Daybreak. This has now increased to one out of every seven new homes. Why? In a market where buyers can be picky, they are choosing a differentiated product. You cannot find a community like Daybreak anywhere else. Another factor to think about is the 7,500 tax credit for new home purchases. The deadline for this credit ends next summer. Buyers will want to take advantage of this for all of the reasons I stated in my previous post on the subject and will not want to miss it.

A third reason is the Village Center. I know, it is definitely late in becoming a reality, but now I can see the skeleton of a retail building being constructed every time I pass Oquirrh Lake. Once this part of Daybreak is finished I expect demand will increase even more. For those of you not familiar with the predominant religion/culture here in Utah, you should not factor out the new temple being built in Eastlake. This like everything else in Daybreak is arriving later than expected, but when complete it will definitely be a major attraction for LDS buyers.

While there are many expensive homes in Daybreak, you can find plenty of affordable options. Most buyers have found themselves priced out of the market, but with options in the 180 to 220 range, some of those buyers will consider Daybreak their best option. Another attraction is that unlike many developments, these townhomes and condos are interspersed with more expensive homes creating a community of variety instead of a mass of town home/condo clones.

Utah as a whole has always been behind the national trend. This would suggest that we have further to go before we see prices increase in a steady fashion. However, Utah's economy is better than most and has not had to wait while congress takes action. Instead, measures were already in the works to boost the housing market long before Utah arrived in a foreclosure "danger zone."

Given these conditions I am betting that Utah and Daybreak especially will have a slower decline that will not last as long as other areas of the country. Especially those homes that are in the low to mid 200s. A local realtor who calls himself Utah Dave brings up an interesting point for those buyers who are looking to upgrade their home. He reasons that while the market for starter homes is still fairly stable, the market for larger, more expensive homes has gone down quite a bit. The old adage "buy low sell high" could apply here. Sell your starter home at a decent price and buy your upgrade at a considerable discount. Not a bad idea.

For those of you who follow this blog regularly you will have noticed that I took a rather long break from writing any posts. I did this for two main reasons: my work has recently taken up much more of my time. I have also been working on integrating a new feature into this blog that will be very informative once complete. Stay tuned...

What is in a Name?

Most streets in Utah follow the grid system and are therefore generically named with numbers. It is only when you have entered the residential neighborhoods that you start to see names for the streets. Is it easy to name a street? Not if you live in a valley as big as ours. Each time a development is planned, its founders must struggle to find names that have not already been used somewhere else in the valley. The names must be submitted and go through several different entities to assess if the name is unique and practical. Most of the names submitted are rejected.

Some developers will get creative with their street names. This can be a good or a bad thing. Some will create theme neighborhoods. Names like oak circle, pine street, maple lane, and a dozen other trees will find their way onto the street signs. In the neighborhood just South of the University of Utah you will find that many of the streets are named after ivy league schools. You will find Cornell, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale for example. They can also get corny with the names as well. Apparently there is a neighborhood in California that named its streets after Star Wars characters. Vader Avenue anyone?

Some names are clever, Hemming Way, Ubinaranda Circle, and Willbea Road. Others just make you shake your head. How would you like to live on Finally My Way? So when I started to see words that I had never heard of before on the street signs in Daybreak, I thought that I would look up their meaning.

In Daybreak, a few of the street names are actually French. Mille Lacs means “thousand lakes” and Lac Vieux means “old lake.” Of course many of the names in Daybreak seem to be the average type of names that you would expect of a new development: Cold Canyon, Warm Canyon, Cool Canyon. However, there is a theme that most Daybreak streets have in common. Most of them are named after lakes or towns in the Midwest and Southern portions of the U.S. Degray? Lake Degray, Arkansas. Greer’s Ferry? Greers Ferry, Arkansas. Dardanelle? Dardanell, Arkansas. Coralville? Coralville, Iowa. In fact, most of the names seem to be concentrated in Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, California, Oklahoma, Michigan, Maine, Minnesota, and Oregon. Why? Who knows, maybe some of the planners of Daybreak left a small imprint of themselves by naming the streets after places in which they grew up or have fond memories. I can only guess. If someone knows, then please comment and enlighten us all. In the meantime I encourage you to look up the street you live on. You might find something hidden in plain sight.

Daybreak Down Payment Option: First-Time Home Buyer Tax Credit

While Utah has so far enjoyed a relatively small decline in the residential real estate market, many other states have not fared so well. With the strict standards in place for mortgage qualification and the lack of plentiful buyers home values have dropped quite rapidly. In light of this crises, the US government has made efforts to intervene and boost the economy. One of the facets of their efforts is the First-Time Home Buyer Tax Credit. For those who would like to purchase a home in Daybreak any time soon: listen up.

The First-Time Home Buyer Tax Credit is not an actual tax credit. A tax credit is when the government either reduces your tax liability or increases your tax return dollar for dollar. The name sounds like it is free money. It is not free money. However, this does not mean that you should not consider using this program. The First-Time Home Buyer Tax Credit is actually an interest-free loan. You pay the loan back via your taxes for the next fifteen years. At this point you may be asking - is it worth it? My answer is definitely yes.

If you understand the time value of money you will know that a dollar in 1993 was worth more than a dollar now in 2008. Why? Because it had more buying power. It could buy you more bread, electricity, even gas. (Actually then it could buy you about one gallon) That was 15 years ago. In short, while you will have to pay every cent back to the government in the next 15 years you will gain a lot of value with this deal.

The maximum amount that you can qualify for is 10% of the value of the home you intend to buy with a cap of $7500. So if you buy a home in Daybreak you will qualify for the full amount. You can even use the tax credit as a down payment for your new home if you work it right. You get the benefit of the tax credit after you file right? Yes, however, right now FHA financing requires a minimum down payment of 3.5%. On a $250k purchase that is $8,750. The FHA allows a buyer to borrow money from family for down payment. This means that a first time buyer could borrow the down payment from relatives, make a home purchase, then use the tax credit to pay back all or a portion of the borrowed funds.

If your still not sure, consider this: assuming an interest rate of 7%, the home owner saves up to $4,200 in interest payments over the 15-year repayment period. Compared to $7,500 financed through a 30-year mortgage with a 7% interest rate, the home buyer tax credit saves home buyers over $8,100 in interest payments. If you are still a little worried about the housing market in Utah consider this: if it goes down further and you are forced to sell, then you will not have to pay back the government for the tax credit "loan." So if you are on the edge, it would probably be a good idea to jump off before the July 1st, 2009 deadline.

Two Creeks in Herriman, Utah: A Disaster in Density

In an earlier post I mentioned housing density and how it impacts the surrounding community. The main point of the article was to show that density in and of itself is not a bad thing. However, if a dense development is not properly planned and located, it will almost certainly have a detrimental effect on the community.

When writing that article, I was not aware of the aspirations of a developer to build a high-density rental development in Herriman. Considering the proximity to Daybreak, this development will almost certainly affect those residents of Founders Park Village. Daybreak as a whole will be affected by this new development as the new high school for the area will be located adjacent to the development.

The new development will be called Two Creeks. Miller Timbergate Associates LLC appeared before the Herriman City government to gain approval for the first two phases of the project: Timbergate and Farmgate. These two phases will be dense. At around 20 units per acre, this will truly be the densest development around. Even Daybreak following the concept of new urbanism cannot claim densities as high as this development. Even if densities get higher in Daybreak in the future, they will be integrated into the community with a transect style of planning. Two Creeks is located near homes that are not even close to the planned density of nearby developments. Imagine your home next to multiple 4 story, 32 unit complexes. The Two Creeks plan suggests that the developer wants to develop his land his way without regard to the surrounding community in a piecemeal fashion that really doesn't fit.

The estimated population of the two approved projects is 1,696 people. With this many people, traffic is a real concern. However, this development will be located next to the proposed path of the Mountain View Corridor. By doing this, much of the traffic from the development will likely be dissipated. Not a bad idea right? Most local governments are in cooperation through Envision Utah to put higher densities next to the transit corridors. One problem with this plan is that it assumes that the Mountain View Corridor will be built and that when it is built that it will not be a toll road. If it is a toll road, I cannot imagine many of the residents of Two Creeks utilizing the road. TRAX is nearby, but these residents will be made to cross not only 118th South, but also the Mountain View Corridor to access it. Unless significant infrastructure is put in place to make this crossing safe, you will see additional problems. It will just be easier for them to hop in a car and drive. The location of this development, on the fringe of Salt Lake County, should also be a consideration as the price of gas would prevent the necessary long commute for many of these residents. Most of which are calculated to not have substantial financial means.

The traffic problem will only be exacerbated by the fact that the new area high school will be located literally within feet of the development. I wonder if all of the sports facilities that come along with the high school will be perceived as amenities for Two Creeks. Also, with the concentration of a lower socio-economic population you will have dual working parents and transient families. With many of the parents gone, I can imagine quite a few students hanging out in Two Creeks without supervision after school.

The single worst part of this development is that it will concentrate thousands of citizens of a lower socio-economic class. As stated in an earlier post about density this can cause a multitude of problems. Crime and social disruption will increase in this area with such a large concentration. This cluster will enable all of the myths that are associated with a higher-density development to have an opportunity to come true.

I have it from a good source that these units are meant for government Section 8 housing. The Section 8 program allows those who qualify to pay rents that are adjusted to their income. 30% of their income goes to rent. For example, if a low-income family made 1500 dollars per month they would spend about 450 dollars for rent each month. The government covers the rest. This program can truly help those in need, but the idea is to spread those who are on the program over a wide geographic area not concentrate them. We already have Section 8 families in our community, but they are dispersed.

So why is this happening and why now? With the housing market being in doubt there are many people waiting out the market in hopes to buy when the market starts to go up again. Other people cannot afford a mortgage as the new lending criteria prevents them from qualifying. So what do these people do? They rent. With Utah’s strong economy, there are more people moving to the valley in search of jobs and many will opt to rent for a variety of reasons. All of this combined has pushed monthly rents up 10% in the last year alone. The rental market is starting to look really attractive to a lot of investors. I would not be surprised to see a lot of developments pop up in various communities that are high density and haven’t been integrated properly. That is why people need to be more involved at the local government level about what happens in their community. I believe the Sunstone residents (just to the west of Daybreak) would agree with me as they seem to have attended the relevant meetings and have even appealed the approval of Two Creeks. Hopefully this mess will be stopped before it is too late.

Utah Obesity and Daybreak

The University of Utah recently released a study that compares rates of obesity with where people live. This study concluded that people who live in older neighborhoods are significantly thinner than residents of the newer suburbs. Most of these older neighborhoods were built before 1950, but considering the amount of building during the depression and the war, you will find that many of these neighborhoods had homes built in the first and second decade of last century. It was during this time that mixed-use communities were still legal before the separate zoning of commercial and residential. A prime example is the Yale / Harvard area of Salt Lake City. With village centers at 13th South and 17th East, 15th South and 15th East, and another nearby at 9th South and 9th East, most people can walk to the necessities of life. Schools are right in the middle of the neighborhood as well.

This study adds to the growing amount of literature linking obesity to non-walkable suburbs. People find it easy to say Americans are lazy and gluttonous, but the fact is that many U.S. communities simply are not designed for walking. Utah suburbs discourage walking because they are not very safe for pedestrians. Simple attributes such as sidewalks or traffic calming devices are not present. Another discouraging factor is when walking in a cul-de-sac you literally have to walk through a maze of secondary streets to reach most destinations. The only real direct route is to cut through yards. In the traditionally designed suburb, most destinations are not even within an easy walking distance of the homes. All of these factors play a role in discouraging pedestrians. This new study indicates that this active lifestyle is simply easier to achieve in communities that are walkable.

Virtually everything American society has done for the past 100 years has made it easier for us to be lazy. Early concerns about this were shown by the government with fitness and health campaigns being introduced in the early fifties. Currently, it is estimated that 17.1% of US kids Ages 2-19 Are Overweight. This sedentary lifestyle that correlates with obesity does not necessarily stop in childhood. This lifestyle is carried on to adulthood where almost two-thirds of all adults are overweight or obese. It is passed down through the generations, but this is not done solely by genetics. If you are overweight your child has a 40% greater chance of being overweight or obese. With so many opportunities to exercise in Daybreak, it is time that parents be an example to their children and lead a healthy lifestyle.

While Daybreak is cited in this study as being a model of healthy residential development, the study is only referring to the Daybreak that is planned. In an earlier post I talked about walkability in Daybreak. Daybreak is currently not a walkable community. This status will only change once the village center is up and running. With the giant district behemoth shopping center outside the gates, it will be difficult to entice residents out of their cars to visit local shops.

The Salt Lake Parade of Homes

The Salt Lake Parade of Homes officially opens this weekend and four of the thirty homes are in Daybreak. I have always enjoyed attending the parade of homes because you can find so many great ideas for when you remodel or build a home. Of course, if you talk to a friend of mine that attended the parade last year, then you will hear a little depression in the tone he uses to explain how great the homes were. He gets depressed because he compares these fully-upgraded homes to his humble abode. My suggestion: do not go unless you are truly looking to buy or are looking for ideas.

Daybreak has participated in the parade in the past, but the “star” home has never been located in Daybreak. The “star” home is the 10,000 square ft mansion that has luxury amenities and a great room so big that you could play basketball in it and fit 20 to 30 spectators. However, the Daybreak homes do provide a breath of fresh air when compared to the rest of the homes in the parade. First and foremost they do not feature a beige stucco exterior. In contrast they feature classic architecture with reasonable space defined for human scale. Massive two-story entryways that dominate the facade are not found in Daybreak.

Daybreak is a community that will let you do very little to the outside of your home. HOA restrictions are fairly strict. However, the inside of your Daybreak home is where personal style can really be displayed. Whether you want leopard print wallpaper or distinctly traditional decoration in your front room is completely within your discretion. So pop into a few of the homes featured in the Parade of Homes. While most of the exteriors look the same I have found that the interiors are finely decorated by interior designers who do not utilize a mass production style equal to the exterior. These interiors are well worth the time and expense.

Why There is Conflict in Daybreak

Some years ago when I was in college I attended the opening night of a summer blockbuster movie. This movie was a sequel and my expectations for this movie were high. I thoroughly enjoyed watching the previous editions of the series and expected more of the same. I expected the same authenticity, quality acting, special effects, and intensity. My excitement increased as the time drew closer to opening day. I watched the teaser, the trailer, and I even found a segment on the internet about the show. But when the final credits to the movie started to roll down the screen I felt a little cheated. It seemed as though the image created by the previews of the movie did not hold up to what the movie actually delivered. My expectations were created by the previous movies and the previews and teasers that advertised the show.

I realized that the advertising material for the show promised me one thing, but the actual movie delivered something completely different. To my surprise I found that one of my friends absolutely loved the show. I asked him if he had seen the previews before the movie and he claimed that he had not. This made me think a little bit more about conflict and expectations. I found that any time that I was in disagreement with someone or something, I had differing expectations from what was delivered or what others expected me to deliver. I felt this was particularly true with people. I even found that one of my favorite authors had written about it: "Expectation is the root of all heartache." - William Shakespeare.

With this in mind I have come to the conclusion that differing expectations is at the heart of conflict between Kennecott Land and other parties. The large amount of stakeholders who have an interest in Daybreak almost dictates that there will be conflict. These stake holders include Rio Tinto and their shareholders, residents of Daybreak, future residents of Daybreak, the City of South Jordan, New Urbanists, the Daybreak HOA, future commercial and industrial tenants, Salt Lake County government, the State of Utah government, the Jordan School District, Utah Transit Authority, various home builders, various contractors, the immediate surrounding community, Envision Utah, Peter Calthorpe and Associates, and various others. Kennecott Land is trying accommodate or at the least liaise with all of these stakeholders. All of them have somewhat differing expectations. To add to the complexity, all of the expectations held by these stakeholders do not match the expectations of key decision makers within Kennecott Land and Rio Tinto. In my opinion expectations are never quite the same. However, closing the gap between these expectations leads to less conflict and Kennecott Land tries to do this every day. So how well has Kennecott Land been able to do this? Let's look at several examples.

While developing Daybreak, Kennecott Land has had to work with an assortment of municipalities for zoning and planning purposes. The City of South Jordan was approached with the Daybreak plan years ago. From what I have heard this relationship has gone fairly well except for the obvious clash with regards to the Boyer development. Again, I think that this was a major difference in expectations. Salt Lake County has also worked with Kennecott Land for a few years on the plan for the West Bench. In this case, a major difference in expectations has terminated the joint planning team that was working on the West Bench project. In an earlier post, I wrote that this disagreement was the result of a lack of communication and creative bargaining.

Local residents of Daybreak can also attest that they have had many expectations that Kennecott Land has not delivered. In fact a poll conducted on Daybreak Daily.com indicates that about two-thirds of the homeowners in Daybreak are not satisfied with how Kennecott Land has addressed their concerns. The Beach Club on Oquirrh Lake was another one of those expectations. Residents still seem confused about the applicable laws that have blocked the fruition of the project. Essentially the project was put on the map of Daybreak and served as a teaser for future amenities. Another more recent point of conflict has been the landscaping of Founders Village. More conflict has recently come about the possible pool to be built in Founders Village as well. However, many of the expectations homeowners have been fulfilled and in some cases have been exceeded by Kennecott Land. Amenities that were never promised openly have popped up in Eastlake and expectations have been exceeded in a few other important areas.

One of the main reasons for these differing expectations is Kennecott Land ’s tendency to operate and develop plans with little or no dissemination of these plans to the community or residents. I can see why Kennecott operates this way as their business requires a certain amount of discretion, but this policy is the main reason why they have so many conflicts. If you ask the home builders of Kennecott Land’s plans they will tell you that they are likely the last people to know. Residents usually hear of changes and announcements through the community website (which is down right now) and newsletters, but as you can see with the conflicts above the communication is not thorough enough. In short, if Kennecott Land would like to ease some of the contentions inside and outside of the community they need to communicate their expectations more and solicit the specific expectations of various stakeholders. Residents and other stakeholders have expectations of the future of the Village Center , Oquirrh Lake , housing density, future amenities, and many other aspects of the community. While these expectations will never completely match, getting them as close as possible will lighten the friction between Kennecott Land and the various stakeholders of Daybreak.

The Future of New Urbanism in Utah

I received an e-mail from a reader not too long ago about my stance on New Urbanism. He insisted that New Urbanism did not have any place in the Utah suburbs. He further suggested that the movement was just a planning fad that would end with only a couple developments in the Salt Lake Valley carrying the banner of New Urbanism. In response, I have decided to post a picture of New Urban developments in the Salt Lake Valley. They are located throughout the valley in all four quadrants branching out from the city center of Salt Lake. While a couple already exist, the majority of these developments are either in the planning or construction phases. As you can see, New Urbanism is not a trend that will go away any time soon and considering the movement has been gaining momentum since the 80s, I do not think it is short term.

In looking at where development is occurring in Utah, the fringes of the community are still popular, but there is a growing trend that is the result of the energy crises. This trend uses transit as a lifeline to the surrounding communities. Numerous TODs (Transportation Oriented Developments) have started already and many more are planned. Any empty space near a proposed TRAX station has become prime real estate for these communities.

Many more New Urban projects are starting all over the state. Ogden, Layton, Farmington, Woods Cross, Park City, Heber, Lehi, Orem, Mapleton, Richfield, Cedar City, and St. George all have projects on the drawing board or being constructed. Of course, none of these projects match the scale of Daybreak or the West Bench which has many more communities planned, but this is clearly the new direction in development. This is by no means an exhaustive list. In fact, if anyone would like to inform me of other communities planned or being built in Utah, then please share. This list is merely what I could gather via the internet.

As for whether or not it belongs in Utah, I would like to refer to another comment that I received: "..let the free market reign." In Utah our demand is being pushed by our demographics. People want to start a family and own a place instead of rent. With housing and land prices going through the roof people need affordable choices. These choices need to save the owners money and time. With the option to ride mass transit, lower utility bills, and maintenance-free options, you can stretch your budget much further. New Urbanism will continue in Utah by choice. This choice has already been seen in the marketplace for housing and will continue well into the future.

Housing Density and NIMBYs

Housing density has been and will remain the most common disagreement with regards to new development in existing towns. The politics surrounding this issue can be fierce with strong emotions on all sides. The battle over density usually starts when a developer purchases land with plans to build medium to high-density residential. One resident will hear about the pending project and will rally the troops. This person is usually referred to as a NIMBY which stands for Not In My Back Yard. This neighborhood watchdog will then broadcast the message that an evil developer is trying to profit with a new development and does not care about its impact on the surrounding community.

This was the case with Daybreak and many other new urban communities across the nation. The question that I would like to ask most NIMBYs is this: how did you inform yourself about the topic of density and its effects? Some of them call on first-hand experience. The neighbors near many developments complain about the traffic that the development is causing. Of course while the infrastructure that will accompany the development is only starting these neighbors pass judgment by what they see immediately. This short-term, subjectivity should not be taken as fact, but many NIMBY’s present it as fact. Many NIMBYs that I have talked to use the words “its just common sense” all too often when trying to explain their information source. While I feel that common sense is a valid tool that cannot be underestimated, I also feel that it is sometimes confused with myth.

These myths are traditional in my opinion. Passed down through the generations and are added to with each new generation. The history of where these myths started reaches back as far as the 1800s. The US started as an agricultural nation and transitioned into an industrial nation with factories and mass production. This transition was accompanied by waves of immigration from Europe. Each new wave contained different ethnic groups that were overtly discriminated against. This discrimination clustered these immigrants into densely populated areas with the least desirable jobs. This segregation along socio-economic status lines resulted in the materialization of many of the myths that are associated with density.

Fast forward to the age of suburbia that started after World War II. Being enabled to travel long distances via automobile, people could more economically live in the suburbs and further segregate themselves. Zoning use ordinances specified separation of land use and from then on commercial could no longer coexist with residential. In many cases this meant separation of density as well. Fast forward again to the 70s and 80s where the government decided to build “project housing” which not only segregated people of lower socio-economic status, but actually concentrated them. Many of these were an immediate failure with rampant crime and social problems. The images created by these projects reverberated with further intensity in the media particularly in movies and television. The “inner city” was a dangerous crime ridden area only suitable for those “other” people. All of these events perpetuated the myths of density with a simple philosophy: guilty by association.

So what is the real story behind density? The best way to answer this question is to address the myths often cited by NIMBYs one at a time.

Myth: Density will lower the value of my home. Many things can lower the value of a home, but density is not by itself one of them. In fact researchers have conducted many studies on single-family housing that is located in proximity to dense residential developments. The conclusion of these studies is that there is not a significant difference in the appreciation rate of those single family homes located in close proximity to high residential developments and those single-family homes located further away. In fact the percentage of appreciation is 2.9 versus 2.7 percent. This is not a significant difference. However, if you have an apartment building located next to your home that is 5 stories tall, over 30 years old, the grass is browning, windows are broken, loud music is blaring from the windows, and the paint is literally peeling like a sunburn, then this will obviously lower the value of your home. Of course, if a single family residence was in the same state, then it would lower the value of your home as well.

Another myth is that dense housing will create more traffic. Obviously if you add more cars to an area you will have more traffic. However, research has proven that higher density housing decreases traffic per person. Single family detached homes average 10 car trips a day. Compare that to the 6.3 car trips per day made by people living in townhomes and condominiums. Density is also needed for public transportation to be feasible. The Mid-Jordan TRAX line would not extend to South Jordan at all if not for the density that will make up the Daybreak Town Center. This mode of transportation will bring an additional choice for transportation that is likely to be used considering gas prices. Daybreak further mitigates traffic by having most necessities within walking distance which encourages the two-legged commute.

The most prominent myth about density is that it creates crime. This claim is absolutely false. Numerous studies have been conducted and the conclusion is that per population, crime is the same in higher density housing as it is in single family housing. The perception of crime is perpetuated when the observer holds an entire apartment complex to the same standard as one single family home. So when three juveniles from the same complex commit a crime and the police show up at the apartment complex three times in one year, it is considered “crime ridden.” On the other hand if the police show up for a juvenile in a single family residence this is considered an “anomaly.” Crime research indicates that crimes increase in accordance with certain socioeconomic indicators such as education attainment, unemployment (particularly of males), and the poverty rate.

The final main myth is that dense residential housing is unattractive and is only desired by lower-income households. Considering the changing demographics and preferences of consumers, this assumption is not based in reality. This market appeals to empty-nester and first-time home buyers tremendously. As with anything in real estate it is all about location, location, location. You can buy a single-family home in some locations for half of the price of a town home in south Jordan. Considering that the average income earner in Utah currently cannot purchase high-density housing in many areas, I would have to say that it is not just the poor that are moving into condos and townhomes. If the housing has a good design and is well maintained it will attract quality residents who care about and participate in their community.

So who is winning this battle, the NIMBYs or the New Urbanists? The New Urbanists have the clear lead, but this depends greatly on where you live. In North Dakota and Oklahoma , the NIMBYs are holding their ground. If you live in Utah , Colorado , Texas , Florida , or California on the other hand, the New Urbanists are definitely ahead of the game. Since its inception in the early 80s, New Urbanism has grown at a phenomenal rate in most states. Locally, more and more new urban developments are popping up. They are called by different names such as smart growth or transit oriented developments, but they are the same with respect to density.

In fact, South Jordan will shortly be surrounded by these developments. With the Herriman Towne Center , Daybreak, Jordan River , and other future communities coming to light, New Urbanism will also be the future of development locally. A number of strong forces demand this density. Energy costs demand homes that are more efficient, smaller, easier to take care of, and closer to the necessities of life. Businesses now want to locate their operations in communities that are vibrant, walkable, and have transit nearby. Density is the vehicle that has to be used to accomplish these attributes. The government wants density as it allows for less expenditure on infrastructure per tax payer. Finally, people are demanding more density and they are voting with their feet. The success of dense New Urban communities speaks volumes about this demand.

Density will have its place in the future of South Jordan, but if not planned correctly it can cause problems. Density cannot be thrown in a community in a half hazard manner in order for the developer to make a buck. Instead it should be planned and integrated correctly according to transect planning and community needs. These new developments must feature good designs that are sensitive to the context of the surrounding community. These designs and features must be maintained by a community organization such as a HOA. I can see why many NIMBYs are opposed to housing density, but assumptions should not be made based on false associations of the past. To those NIMBYs who will fight till their last breath any development that has more density that 2 units per acre consider if your beliefs about density are actually true. Also consider if your energy might be better spent ensuring that these developments are integrated properly instead of trying to ban them all together. Density is here to stay. Instead of a battle of how many units per acre, we need to ensure that these units are built, maintained, and located in a fashion that will enhance the community for all of us.