Is Carmichael Headed Downhill?? (Los Angeles, Sacramento: middle-class, real estate, crime)

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by wburg

Indeed--not sure where all this "vacant land" supposedly was, Carmichael/Arden-Arcade was pretty much fully built out by the 1970s (I lived there in the seventies, there wasn't a lot of vacant land.)

Oh puhleeze. They were selling off parcels all the way down what is now Walnut Avenue and Mayhew Road, thanks to Sandy Smoley, Adrianna Gianturco and company. Capitol Christian Center got a great deal for their mega church.

Originally Posted by wburg

Of course, we could always run a streetcar, light rail or BRT down the middle of Watt Avenue, which would be cheaper than a freeway and promote denser growth along the business corridor.

Yah, that Arden / Del Paso and that K Street are just *booming*, aren't they?

The trolley fetish continues....and don't give me that lame response about a "Car fetish" either. Road access means real retail business, simple as that. That's why malls near freeways thrive. Real people shop in their cars--because there is room for the bags, groceries, and kids.

[wburg]

And nothing about running fixed transit down Watt would forbid people from using their cars, but the people who work in the stores wouldn't have to drive, nor would people doing things other than shopping.

It's none of my business what you do with cars in the privacy of your own home, but Sacramento's development has been directed outward entirely because of the freeway system--freeways encourage car-centric sprawl, and that growth inevitably takes away development pressure from central cities by directing it outward. As our highway system and sprawl pattern approaches its maximum limit, we are in fact starting to see transit-oriented development along light rail lines--including on K Street.

[MrWizard]

Originally Posted by wburg

And nothing about running fixed transit down Watt would forbid people from using their cars, but the people who work in the stores wouldn't have to drive, nor would people doing things other than shopping.

It's none of my business what you do with cars in the privacy of your own home, but Sacramento's development has been directed outward entirely because of the freeway system--freeways encourage car-centric sprawl, and that growth inevitably takes away development pressure from central cities by directing it outward. As our highway system and sprawl pattern approaches its maximum limit, we are in fact starting to see transit-oriented development along light rail lines--including on K Street.

+1. Ridership on the Folsom/Rancho light rail is very strong. It is working.

[SacTown11]

I live in Carmichael, have since 2001 and large parts of it have gone to crap. I live off of California Avenue, which is about the only decent area left in this craphole.

[MrWizard]

Originally Posted by SacTown11

I live in Carmichael, have since 2001 and large parts of it have gone to crap. I live off of California Avenue, which is about the only decent area left in this craphole.

What do you think are the crappy things?

[MD20-20]

By skeezy looking characters you mean non-whites? I'm long past being angry over statments like this, now it just makes me sad. That there are still folks out that respond like that, shows that theres a part of our society that just don't get it. I was raised in CA and raised my children in Carmichael and it was a pretty good place up till 5 or 6 years ago. Then things started to change, I started seeing the(skeezy people) walk past my house. I can't leave my garage door open anymore as I have had items stolen. Now I'm in the process of moving to Carson City NV. Didn't want to leave but felt I didn't have a choice.
MDN

[shelato]

Originally Posted by MrWizard

+1. Ridership on the Folsom/Rancho light rail is very strong. It is working.

Is it?


Light rail to Folsom opened on Oct 15, of 2005.

Folsom Grand Opening! - Sacramento Regional Transit

If you look at the census data for 1.4% of the people of Folsom commuted by mass transit in 2000 before light rail came to Folsom. Now compare that data with what happened after light rail opened in 2005 by looking at the census commuting data from 2005-2009 where after the several hundred million dollar light rail expansion the share of people commuting by mass transit went up to 1.6% of the population. Note gas prices were up significantly between 2000 and 2005-2009.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet...ng=en&-_sse=on

Folsom city, California - Selected Economic Characteristics: 2005-2009

http://therionorteline.com/2011/01/20/chart-of-the-day-–-gas-prices-at-the-pump-2000-2011-2/ (broken link)

Its really tough to argue that the money spent on building new transit rail lines has any impact on increasing the share of people on mass transit. If you look at the things that motivate people to use transit, mostly its the cost of parking. The primary impact of building new rail lines is to redirect some people from buses to rail and to make the bus lines that feed into the rail lines dramatically less productive as some of the bus riders decide to drive to light rail stations to avoid timely transfers and thus shorten there commutes. Transit by and large just doesn't work in low density areas where there is abundant free parking like along Watt Ave and generally means most of this region. If the region wants to encourage more people to use transit more often or just increase the mobility options of the poor people who are transit dependent then make it free or make it free to large groups of people like state employees, college students, people over 50, the disabled, children and people on public assistance or at least do that during non -peak hours when most transit lines are running mostly empty and have plenty of unused excess capacity. Mass transit has horrible fare box recovery ratios, so its not that it will cost RT all that much money. In a good year what RT receives in fares might only cover 25% of its operating cost. That figure doesn't including the cost of multimillion dollar expansions like building light rail out to Folsom which is currently mostly funded by RT's share of of the local sales tax and which I am basically arguing the share of that tax going to capital expenditures should be redirected to lowering fares for current riders.

[webdev]

Originally Posted by MrWizard

+1. Ridership on the Folsom/Rancho light rail is very strong. It is working.

I think in a few years people will be surprised to see the area south of rancho, folsom, eldorado hills and upward flourish quite a bit. Wait until Folsom starts developing south of 50. Area's like Carmichael, Fair Oaks are still nice places, but they are older neighborhoods. People will want to migrate to newer developed areas over time. Folsom has the luxury of Intel and all the employees and other business it brings. It's not state worker driven, although a lot of those state workers live in Folsom etc. The light rail in that area is used a lot.

[Mr. Opinionated]

Originally Posted by Aquaboy

Negative, I see some seriously skeezy whites!!

Its just that there are more displaced, unemployed, homeless, sleazy looking and even ex-con folks out there, some unable, or unwilling to find work. Its happening in varying degrees, all over the country, in some of the most unlikely places. Sign of the times. Sorry.

[Mr. Opinionated]

Originally Posted by Aquaboy

Burg: You have the most thoughtful posts here! But yes Sac. County may be in for a rough ride, with reduced tax bases and changing demographics. When I see window bars on my street it may be time to pull up stakes and get out of Dodge!

Yes I have learned so much about Sacramento from his straight-forward insight, which makes me also consider if I should remain here. But then where in California, would be any better, affordably?