Comments - Benefits of Developments

6. What do you see as the benefits of new developments?
increasing propety values for existing landowners
None
Added tax base and continued increase in value of property in county for benefit of all. Need to be sure the new developments fully pay for themselves in relation to initial and ongoing costs of support and infrastructure.
none for me
tax base increased
None
More excellent people with talent, energy, and resources reside as our neighbors and help build this county as the best place to live in the nation.
Development has the potential of creating fresh ideas and creativity. HOWEVER. . . see 7.
There are none unless they bring with them plenty of capital to modernize access to and egress from the subdivision.
new property to be taxed
at the present time, as a developer, plenty. as a ciitzen not much. history has shown new developments do not pay their way. I an tired of picking up the pieces.
?????
Land owners get fair value. Community gets fresh faces with new ideas, talents, and varied interests. Steady growth keeps the whole area vibrant.
some new and interesting people
Slow sustained growth of population will eventually attract more and varied services
More taxes
Not much if anything.
I can't think of any. It seems there are always many existing homes for sale, so why do people feel they have to build new homes and take up rural land, while others are available.
from (#5) question- 30 houses clustered with open space. The benefits of new developments are CCR's so there are no dead cars in the front yard, underground utilities to eliminate power poles. They are inevitable, we have to make the best of them.
Nothing
To provide housing for the growing demand in the valley. To upgrade the housing supply. New housing provides the type of product that the current buyers are looking for using the current building codes and requirements.
To line the developers pockets.
More tax dollars spent to improve existing areas in the valley.
None
nothing but income from taxes
there are no benefits, unless developers pay their full way. Projects must be small and must bring something to the community besides people.
If planned correctly, with proposer lot sizes, open space, restrictive covenants on size and quality of homes, these new developments within the county could be a real asset. Improved/expanded services, increased retail options, and a more diverse culture.
affordable housing for families to remain in the valley if they can
Rapid economic growth for the county, fortunes for the landowners and developers.
Nice, beautiful homes in a well managed area. Parks and recreation facilities available. The increase in population will probably force businesses to improve their outward appearance and will, for certain, bring additional businesses into town.
PUD's tend to bring in development in a more orderly way with more attractive homes. Otherwise there is a tendancy to have a really nice home next to a broken down shack.
1. More diverse social, cultural, and economic base. 2. Increased tax base.
Economic benefits to home construction and vendors who sell to that industry. Additional economic benefits to merchants who have more customers.
None, really.
Bringing more diversity to the valley
A larger tax base for the community.
We have already set the standard. One can not say to one you can have more and to another you are limited. The rules were broken too long ago to allow anything else. By allowing 5 acre limits and such we are setting the county up for litigation as there are too many examples of homes long in exisitance on smaller parcels by having a name or paying for the favor.
There are no benefits of growth in the County. The Cities should be allowed to grow into the county. This reduces the cost of growth. Water, sewer, police, etc. are real expences the could be saved. Wasatch County wants to be a city at the expence of the tax payer of the incorporated areas of the county. The benefits of letting the cities grow in the the county whould certainly keep the unincorpated area RURAL.
It is the trend for our area. Too many places are under development to limit growth of those who have not sold out yet. Maybe all the impact fees will help build better roads and services we don't get living rural.
New growth will help to broaden the ideas of those who have only seen one way.
development brings change and change is good. It makes you appreciate what you have so you stand for theose things that mean the most to you.
I don't think that it is a benefit it just means that people found a new place to develop.
None
Developers monetary gain. The wealthy move into their dream homes and the less fortunate are on waiting lists to apply for housing assistance.
Not any benefits.
More tax dollars
I don't see benefits. The more houses that are built, the less our house is worth and the more saturated the housing market is
none
none, we have enough.
increased property tax revenue for the county/ The are benifits if the developor puts in parks, trails open to everyone
More property taxes for the county.
large one acre lots often become unkept and cluttered, half acres are large, but can be kept looking nice. New developments benefit housing needs.
none Big box forces businesses out..
Lower Tax
New talent to the vally people with life experance that can give us insigned adds some tax base maybe some new bussness.
Increased tax base to be used on community projects, improvements, etc. Higher standard for property aesthetics. New people and new businesses to add to local diversity.
New poeple moving into the area
gives and option for the people that grew up here to find a home to start of their own.
add to tax base
Very little
economic growth, new people with new ideas
Easier to buy drugs with more people, more people would speak spanish
tax revenue
Very little.
Hopefully more diversity a few better services. Small businesses are more likely to stay in business. Hopefully enough people to improve the High School

School Enrollment Projection by Grade

Addendum: Census figures indicate growth may slow in future due to decreasing percentage increase for 0 to 5 age group:
 

	Total	%	number	avg
2014	27,714	7.9%	2,189	438	0 to 5
2010	23,530	9.9%	2,329	466	0 to 5
2014	27,714	32.9%	9,118	507	0 to 18
2010	23,530	33.9%	7,977	443	0 to 18
2014	27,714	25.0%	6,929	533	6 to 18
2010	23,530	24.0%	5,647	434	6 to 18

Notice the actual number for the youngest age group, as well as the % of population, DECREASED from 2010 to 2014 .  These may have been reflected in the kindergarten enrollment last year of 420.  These relatively lower figures flow through the education years.  (note also grade 7 at 422, as another anomaly.)

****Click here for an School Enrollment Calculator***, to allow YOU to predict the growth and incoming Kindergarten enrollment, based on entered 2104 enrollment figures. (and these figures will also change)

Projection of growth are NOT simply 'if we have had a 3% growth in the past, it will continue at 3%' It, obviously, varies year to year and grade to grade. Certainly, the school district has a more sophisticated system, than simply the graph presented, which is not a straight 3%.  

But a table is far more illustrative.  Notice the enrollment figures for last year (base), while the average grade enrollment may be 460, or so, the range goes from low 420's in 1^st and 7th grade to 498 in tenth.  
Even with assuming a 3% (or any number you'd like to put in the calculator) the annual increase varies from 4.7% to to 0% over various years – depending on the individual grade size as it flows through the years.

We can guess (or forecast) the incoming Kindergarten, but, generally the grade enrollment flows through the years.   BUT, as usual, please remember that Efficient Utilization of schools is a far better, quicker and SAVES a great deal of Taxpayers Money (Fiscal Responsibility)

-->

Growth Rate		3.0%	Enter YOUR guess
	You can also modify the Kindergarten enrollment, if you have a crystal ball
		Any changes made will remain, until the next change
Grade	base	next yr.	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4	Year 5	Year 6	Year 7	Year 8	Year 9	Year 10
K	450	450	400	475	470	450	480	485	500	485	485
1	421	434	464	412	489	484	464	494	500	515	500
2	474	488	447	477	424	504	499	477	509	515	530
3	495	510	503	460	492	437	519	514	492	525	530
4	436	449	525	518	474	506	450	535	529	506	540
Elem	2,276	2,331	2,338	2,342	2,349	2,382	2,411	2,505	2,529	2,546	2,585
		2.4%	0.3%	0.2%	0.3%	1.4%	1.3%	3.9%	1.0%	0.6%	1.6%
5	477	491	463	541	533	488	522	464	551	545	522
6	495	510	506	476	557	549	503	537	478	567	561
Mid	972	1,001	969	1,017	1,091	1,038	1,024	1,001	1,028	1,112	1,083
		3.0%	-3.3%	5.0%	7.2%	-4.9%	-1.3%	-2.3%	2.7%	8.1%	-2.6%
7	422	435	525	521	491	574	566	518	553	492	584
8	495	510	448	541	537	505	591	583	533	570	507
Int	917	945	973	1,062	1,028	1,079	1,157	1,101	1,087	1,062	1,091
		3.0%	3.0%	9.2%	-3.3%	5.0%	7.2%	-4.9%	-1.3%	-2.3%	2.7%
9	461	475	525	461	557	553	521	609	600	549	587
10	498	513	489	541	475	574	570	536	627	618	566
11	439	452	528	504	557	489	591	587	552	646	637
12	464	478	466	544	519	574	504	609	604	569	665
High	1,862	1,918	2,008	2,050	2,108	2,190	2,185	2,340	2,384	2,383	2,455
		3.0%	4.7%	2.1%	2.8%	3.9%	-0.2%	7.1%	1.9%	-0.1%	3.1%
	6,027	6,194	6,288	6,472	6,575	6,688	6,778	6,947	7,029	7,102	7,214
		2.8%	1.5%	2.9%	1.6%	1.7%	1.3%	2.5%	1.2%	1.0%	1.6%
Line 2 is the estimated growth Rate for the entire period
Line 6 is the estimated size of incoming Kindergarten class
Col B is the enrollment from the previous year, moved up one grade
Col D – L automatically moves each grade enrollment up one year.
Projections are automatically calculated from the previous year, adjusted for the growth rate