But this is Chico, too

I’ve noticed that the new urbanism movement is being blamed for the far more prevalent phenomenon of higher density residential development.

I have reservations about new urbansim projects, but I think its designers and builders do a creative job of dealing with the need to work with smaller lots. Higher density development seems to be happening all over the state.

In conventional suburban neighborhoods, we’re seeing larger houses being built on smaller lots. People seem willing to sacrifice yards in order to have the extra den and family room and the three-car garage. Even in the priciest neighborhoods, the homeowners seem to be willing to be squeezed in alongside their neighbors.

In new urbanism developments, smaller lots have been paired with smaller houses, including row houses. The view from the street is of a harmoniously propotioned neighborhood. In conventional neighobrhoods, each house competes to assert its own identity.

But do we really want either alternative? Would it be so bad to have a tiny house on a large lot? That seems more in keeping with the Chico ideal. One of the reasons people choose to live here is because they don’t want to be packed in like sardines the way the are in the Bay Area and the East Coast. I think many residents would like it if Chico were a continuous suburb, from core to outskirts.

High density development is just too blatantly urban for Chicoans. We aren’t going to be dissuaded from the belief that this is a small town and that trees and other greenery should be more prominent than concrete and stucco. All of the new projects — whether they're new urbanist or high density suburban — seem wrong for us.