[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SG-W:/ farmland protection in Kent County


Are you thinking of the SEMCOG study?

Fiscal Impacts of Alternative Land Development Patterns in Michigan: The
Costs of Current Development Versus Compact Growth (Final Report) - Jun

The MSU spin-off of that is here:


I've never actually seen that before or used the models so that might be
an interesting exercise.

In the interest of counter-points, here's some critique from our friends
at the Mackinac Center:


[full report: http://www.mackinac.org/archives/1998/s1998-06.pdf]

and the Home Builders Association:


I couldn't find the SEMCOG report online but you can order it from SEMCOG.

Andrew Mutch

On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 BLonik13@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 11/26/02 5:22:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> andrewimutch@yahoo.com writes:
> > I have yet to see a community where the development ever paid for the demand 
> > 
> They don't even stay the same; they always rise.  School construction is the 
> back breaker; without that, commercial/industrial development could pay for 
> residential expansion.  So the solution is 5,000 sq ft houses with one 
> bedroom!
> Someone (MSU?) a couple years ago did a comparison of taxes for typical 
> development v. saving 15% as open space (same number of units), and the 
> latter was cheaper.  Washtenaw Land Trust did a comparison of future costs 
> with different densities and preservation, and preservation was cheaper.  

smartgrowth-washtenaw:  Internet List and Forum for issues relating to
sprawl, smart growth, and preservation of the quality of life in Washtenaw

Postings to:  smartgrowth-washtenaw@great-lakes.net      For info, send
email to majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info