Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sacramento and some of its suburbs have been described at various times as shabby, ghetto, dangerous, etc. One such suburb is Rancho Cordova.
People are familiar with the old and dangerous parts. What about the new areas? Below is a mix of residential and commercial/retail in the emerging new areas of Rancho Cordova to the south of Highway 50.
Disclaimer:
I've researched the internet and have taken the pictures of homes and businesses from public property/public access. I have avoided including people, as much as possible, as well as situations in which people would expect a reasonable measure of privacy in these photographs. Pictures of the Anatolia Clubhouse are also available for public viewing on the internet. Additionally various forums on City-Data include pictures of homes and business which have been taken from public property
Those are nice pictures. If an area gets enough new growth at the right time, the new growth can transform the area. There definitely was a time when Roseville was a blue collar railroad town. Downtown Roseville was notable mostly for its biker bars, tattoo shops and flop houses. Growth definitely transformed that area. Similarly for a long time Folsom was known mostly for the State Prison and the community was populated by lots of families of prison guards. Both areas have been transformed by a lot of new growth and a lot of new employers.
But new growth doesn't always lead to prosperity. 30 years ago if you were to ask which neighborhood would be nicer, Folsom the area with a huge Prison or Natomas a community quite close to downtown surrounded by rivers on both sides, Natomas seemed like a safer bet. If you took pictures of the clubhouse in Natomas Park it too would be quite impressive.
What helped Folsom and Roseville is that in addition to growing really fast, they attracted big employers like Intel in Folsom and HP in Roseville while Folsom had some success in Waste Management growing so quickly that they too became a publicly traded company headquartered in Folsom.
There is also a certain amount of luck that matters. When Elk Grove was planning for all of its growth it originally was landing major employers, Apple had a plant, JVC and others. But for various reasons those plants closed and Elk Grove has struggled since then in attracting employers. But if Elk Grove had kept Apple and JVC and Folsom had lost Intel our perceptions of both neighborhoods might be inverted. Elk Grove might have been the upscale suburb and Folsom would be the neighborhood that never quite lived up to its potential.
Rancho Cordova has some potential. There is plenty of office space along highway 50. But in terms of actually attracting major private sector employers lately they have been coming up short. A lot of the insurance companies that were located along 50 have departed and nothing yet has replaced them, so the vacancy rate is still high.
Could a lot of new growth transform Rancho the way it previously transformed Folsom or Roseville? Yes. But it could also end up being another Natomas, Antelope or Elk Grove too, places that didn't quite live up to the planners dreams either.
Some good points about fotuitous timing, turn of events, and influx of employers spurring growth.
For example, the uncompleted mall in Elk Grove is in stark contrast to the Palladio in Folsom which was developed by Elliott Homes, a deep pocketed home builder, as well as the City of Folsom's cooperation in waiving fees eventhough both projects were initiated during the housing collapse.
One note about Rancho Cordova is the city has had eight consecutive years of operating in the black since incorporation. Wealthier suburbs such as Roseville and Folsom are struggling to maintain a balanced budget despite the growth and employment base
This has allowed Rancho to engage in projects to increase the quality of life for its citizens and maintain city services.
It's been slow and go for Rancho during this time but, considering its been able to weather this economic storm in the black and make improvements, the city should be well positioned to take off once the economy and employment improve.
I don't get all the positive Elk Grove comments. The place is a dump. So is Rancho.
Folsom, Roseville and EDH are OK, but the rest of the metro area, with small pockets here and there, is a dump compared to other similar sized cities in the interior of the country. When 1 out of 4 houses is owned by slumlords and given California's huge population of welfare moochers, all I see are gangbangers and wannabees in this metro area. Its terribly depressing.
I'm going to add that much of the "new" isn't all that nice to begin with. Look at parts of Natomas, built just a few years ago and falling apart, much like what you see in Elk Grove and Rancho. Poorly built, overpriced, ugh.
I'm going to add that much of the "new" isn't all that nice to begin with. Look at parts of Natomas, built just a few years ago and falling apart, much like what you see in Elk Grove and Rancho. Poorly built, overpriced, ugh.
Sorry, I guess we'll agree to disagree about Rancho... Homes were built or being built by Lennar, JTS Homes, Pulte Homes, US Homes, K. Hovanian and Elliott Homes. These are (or were in the case of those that consolidated) reputable home builders.
I don't get all the positive Elk Grove comments. The place is a dump. So is Rancho.
Folsom, Roseville and EDH are OK, but the rest of the metro area, with small pockets here and there, is a dump compared to other similar sized cities in the interior of the country. When 1 out of 4 houses is owned by slumlords and given California's huge population of welfare moochers, all I see are gangbangers and wannabees in this metro area. Its terribly depressing.
Wow, you are tough Bluevelo...EDH ranks as just OK? Well, having seen some new homes out of state in the same price range I can understand. However, California real estate is what it is.
It's been slow and go for Rancho during this time but, considering its been able to weather this economic storm in the black and make improvements, the city should be well positioned to take off once the economy and employment improve.
I see the potential for good things in Rancho but its unclear how things will work out in the future. Growth tends to be path dependent. One of the problems that N. Natomas has was the close proximity to S. Natomas. Because the development of S. Natomas in the 1980's and early 1990's didn't turn out great, it made it a harder sell to get people excited about moving to N. Natomas as that was built out during the past 10 years. Because the schools in S. Natomas weren't great, that created the self-fulling prophesy that schools in N. Natomas wouldn't be that great either. That parts of N. Natomas were part of the Twin Rivers School district and all of the problems in that district (with corruption and misconduct on the part of the school police) helped sustain and increase the narrative that the schools in Natomas just weren't that great.
Here I see similar problems in Rancho. To put it charitably Cordova High has lots of problems. To offset declining enrollment at Cordova High and because there just wasn't space at Folsom High at the time, Navigator Elementary was set designated as a feeder school into Cordova High. But because it was only new elementary school in comparison to the four existing and not very successful elementary schools that already fed into Cordova High: Cordova Meadows, Cordova Gardens, Rancho Cordova Elementary, and Cordova Villa elementary. The new development didn't transform Cordova High as much as it was transformed by Cordova High into something that looked a lot like the other elementary schools that fed into Cordova High. Today despite Navigator Elementary having a beautiful fairly new campus, its good school rating of 4 isn't that different from the other older elementary schools that fed into Cordova High.
More significantly it made it more difficult to inform people where the good schools are and are not in Rancho Cordova because there isn't an easy heuristic to remember like stay south of Folsom Blvd or S. of 50. Navigator Elementary is a relatively poor performing newer school that is both south of Folsom Blvd and south of 50.
The other issue is that the problems that Navigator Elementary neighborhood had will probably spread into the new Rio Del Oro development because the students who are move to the attendance districts in either the future Westbourgh or Mather High attendence areas will most likely attend Cordova High until there future high schools are built. Its tough to sell $500k homes even in neighborhoods with brand new elementary districts if the kids run the risk of being sent to Cordova High a school with some gang problems. So when the developers build these houses instead of building big expensive new homes like in Folsom, El Dorado Hills, Roseville, Rocklin and Granite Bay, the new homes will likely be smaller more entry level homes like in Natomas, West Sac, and a lot of what has already been built in Rancho Cordova. Again this makes it less likely that the new growth in Rancho Cordova will challenge the existing perceptions of Rancho Cordova as much as reinforce them.
I know you think that the schools in Anatolia are great and I take your word for it. But Anatolia is in the Elk Grove Unified School district. The Elk Grove Unified District has a many of the problems of the San Juan District or the Sacramento City District has some of the schools are good and some are not so good. But new home buyers generally don't have the time to review the relative merits and demerits of every individual school in a district and especially not in multiple districts and a lot of realtors don't spend as much time keeping up on this as you would imagine, so if their buyers ask about the schools their realtors will direct them to districts where its easier for the realtors to keep tract of good schools, like Folsom, Davis, Rocklin or Roseville.
The other problem again is heuristics. Without looking at a map, how many people can actually tell you where in Rancho Cordova does the Folsom-Cordova District end and where does the Elk Grove Unified School district begin. When people can't tell, they assume its all bad.
Now the biggest thing that could transform my expectations for Rancho is landing one or several large high knowledge added employers. The housing stock in Davis is pretty unremarkable. The schools are excellent and the housing prices are relatively high there because the major local employer is the University of California. HP was huge for Roseville and the entire highway 65 corridor. Intel is big for Folsom.
If the office space in Rancho is filled by low level back office workers for insurance companies and such then Rancho probably won't be changing much. But if that space is filled by higher value added work, that could create some strong local demand for nicer housing in Rancho and just generally upgrading the local labor force in Rancho.
Wow, you are tough Bluevelo...EDH ranks as just OK? Well, having seen some new homes out of state in the same price range I can understand. However, California real estate is what it is.
All you are paying for is weather. That's about it, and greed. Lots of Texas has weather that's just as good as California (better, actually, in that except in times of drought it rains more often, more variety), and you just don't see housing prices that are so damned high or houses that are so small and shabby for what you get.
I've lived in Iowa, South Dakota, Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and Mississippi. The suburbs in all of the metros I've lived in these places are far better than what Sacramento offers and far cheaper (and safer). California just has so many problems its amazing this place hasn't exploded into widespread urban violence and chaos (see LA - wait - its already happening there and throughout the Bay Area) everywhere.
I want to move, I *want* to move. But, having to pay child support, I just can't quit my job and move elsewhere and the economy is horrible...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
