Posted February 15, 200916 yr Baxter Village is a traditional neighborhood development (TND) neighborhood. It boasts the rear-loaded garages, small lots, shared common space, town center, and other New Urbanist principles. Located (GoogleMap) about 10-15 miles outside of Uptown (aka downtown) Charlotte, Baxter Village is in between I-77 and Lake Wylie. Check it out... 1. 2. 3. The dog came with us... 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Nice little common area for the residents. 10. Love the porches 11. 12. 13. Milk delivery available here 14. Commercial area that is actually quite functional and well designed. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Nice looking building 21. Lots of South Carolina flags here. Not too sure what that was all about. 22. Same spot, just looking down the street. 23. 24. Gotta love these porches. 25. 26.
February 15, 200916 yr Looks like a New Urbanist Mobile, AL. "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
February 15, 200916 yr Very nice-looking community, excellent photos. Looks very upscale; I wonder how the community will weather the bank collapse that's beating up Charlotte.
February 15, 200916 yr Looks expensive That's one of the two problems I have with communities like this. The other is that they're typically far out, but in reality where are you going to get this much land for a development like this near the center city? The price points are high because the liimited availability of this quality of product. If this were the standard then I think you would see prices become more reasonable.
February 15, 200916 yr The builers in Baxter were and are primarily: Saussy Burbank (local) David Weekly (National private out of TX) Beazer (mostly built the TH's) Custom Pulte has a section of TH's under construction right now...that aren't great IMO. All have strict architectural guidelines to adhere to to help create the TND experience (hence, increased cost) We were there on a Saturday AM and there were actually quite a few people out and about, more so than were represented in Rando's pictures. While the Charlotte job market is hurting right now (the arrogance of "it doesn't happen here" is gone), other than a slowdown in sales it's unlikely that it will impact Baxter. In fact because home prices never really took off in Charlotte, the foreclosure rate is still very very low (relative to other places)...hopefully it stays that way. While B of A and Wachovia together employ 34,000 (only 3% of workforce..recognizing the ancillary jobs that depend on the bank that may also evaporate) there is also a lot more to Charlotte than banking...and people are continuing to move here...to the tune of 60,000 per year. I suspect that that'll be lower in the next few years...but not negative. You can get a TH in Baxter in the low 200's and we saw some resales for SF in the mid 400's. The custom stuff is 500K+. It is a little Disneyish (ala Celeberation) but Baxter has been very well executed and to me "feels" better than Celebration and many other TND communities that I have seen. Vickery in ATL (Rando has a thread on this as well) is also well done but it's pricepoint is much higher , its much further out, and it's not nearly as completed...also Hedgewood Homes the majority builder there has gone belly up.
February 15, 200916 yr Pro's Great housing designs. Small lots with alleys behind (ala NKY). Con's Off the side of the highway in the middle of nowhere. No traditional grid system, some curvy versions, but there are still way too many trees and open areas between the different pockets of this development. Hopefully that gets (or has been) filled in.
February 15, 200916 yr Its suburban Charlotte...not really the middle of nowhere...although it looks that way on the map. Fort Mill (municipality where Baxter is located) has exploded over the past 10 years due to its proximity to NC, lower taxes and great schools. New development anywhere requires a certain percentage of open space (usually 25% plus) so you are going to have tree saves and preserved land everywhere...Many of these trees are located near creeks and their buffers (100' from top bank in most locations) are necessitated by municipalites to preserve water quality....also the topography in some of these areas suck, so they left them preserved and created a network of walking trails.
February 15, 200916 yr Nicely done, it seems to embody New Urbanist principles better than alot of developments using that name.
February 17, 200916 yr Nicely done, it seems to embody New Urbanist principles better than alot of developments using that name. My thoughts as well. Looks to be well executed, with a lot of greenspace, and expansion that seems to be continuing. Where was the downtown at -- near the interstate interchange?
February 17, 200916 yr From the map he linked to, it looks like the downtown is right off the interchange, on Market St., which also acts as the gateway to the neighborhood.
February 17, 200916 yr From the map he linked to, it looks like the downtown is right off the interchange, on Market St., which also acts as the gateway to the neighborhood. That's correct, although I would hesitate using the term "downtown" to describe it. It's more like a neighborhood business district.
February 17, 200916 yr I am not a fan of this type of development across the S Carolina border for the Charlotte area. IMHO, it is the tip of the iceberg that is going to lead to Atlanta-esque sprawl. Although Charlotte thankfully is not plagued by the surburb laden layout of Greater Cleveland, it has places like Fort Mill, Huntersville, Concord, Matthews, etc. But worse than the Cleveland suburbs, there really is a disconnect between these communities and the City of Charlotte. Come to think of it, the light rail might be having a anti-urban effect by promoting/encouraging growth away from Uptown. Charlotte's inner-city has such potential for new development but it may never be fully realized because of these cookie cutter neighborhoods and condo associations that surround Lake Norman and to the South. Those areas are where a lot of the young Charlotte residents are moving to. I also think that Charlotte has only so much growth potential because of its proximity and similarity (in terms of strengths) to Atlanta. Like Atlanta, it has its infrastructure and water supply limitations. Unlike Atlanta though, it has an inner-state rival in Raleigh (the best city in NC IMO). If I were to ever move back to NC, it would be to Raleigh, not Charlotte. Raleigh's location can't be beat, right smack between the mountains and the beach and an easy cruise to I-95 to go either direction along the east coast. Also, its economy is heavy into government and research. Plus, it has a designated ghetto (Durham) just to its northwest (j/k).
February 18, 200916 yr I didn't note any urban style development along the light rail further than about a mile from Uptown, at least not yet. So I don't know if it could be said to be having an anti-urban effect. Rather, I saw it as the thing that is anchoring a much needed urban, but not Uptown neighborhood.
February 18, 200916 yr I am not a fan of this type of development across the S Carolina border for the Charlotte area. IMHO, it is the tip of the iceberg that is going to lead to Atlanta-esque sprawl. Although Charlotte thankfully is not plagued by the surburb laden layout of Greater Cleveland, it has places like Fort Mill, Huntersville, Concord, Matthews, etc. But worse than the Cleveland suburbs, there really is a disconnect between these communities and the City of Charlotte. Come to think of it, the light rail might be having a anti-urban effect by promoting/encouraging growth away from Uptown. Charlotte's inner-city has such potential for new development but it may never be fully realized because of these cookie cutter neighborhoods and condo associations that surround Lake Norman and to the South. Those areas are where a lot of the young Charlotte residents are moving to. I also think that Charlotte has only so much growth potential because of its proximity and similarity (in terms of strengths) to Atlanta. Like Atlanta, it has its infrastructure and water supply limitations. Unlike Atlanta though, it has an inner-state rival in Raleigh (the best city in NC IMO). If I were to ever move back to NC, it would be to Raleigh, not Charlotte. Raleigh's location can't be beat, right smack between the mountains and the beach and an easy cruise to I-95 to go either direction along the east coast. Also, its economy is heavy into government and research. Plus, it has a designated ghetto (Durham) just to its northwest (j/k). So you'd want to be in Raleigh because it is closer to places you'd rather want to be outside or Raleigh? Personally, I can't stand Raleigh...great diverse economy, but talk about a soulness suburban mess. One stat I recently read states that Charlotte already has worse sprawl than ATL...relative to their varying sizes. Population density for Greater Charlotte is less than Greater ATL...I forgot where I saw that but it stuck
February 18, 200916 yr That would be one reason.... yes. When I lived in NC (triad area), I enjoyed having the option of going to the Outer Banks one weekend and to Asheville the next. The combination of mountains and beaches gives NC an asset not many other states can boast.
February 19, 200916 yr The city of LA can boast both, and they're only about an hour apart (without traffic).
February 19, 200916 yr Let's see...as could: Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, SF/SJ/Oak, DC, Baltimore, Richmond... probably the only cities worth a damn (in my 3 minute analysis) at least...not including the Pacific NW..bc those really arent beaches in the traditional sense... I can't stand Raleigh for Raleigh though...drives me crazy, although I know a lot of people really like it there and I could see why they might...it really is a great place to raise a family.
February 19, 200916 yr True, but none of those can you really do the whole surf and ski in the same day thing as you can in LA.
February 19, 200916 yr I didn't say it was the only spot on earth where you could get to both. The issue was why I would possibly want to live in Raleigh before Charlotte. Not sure where all this Boston, Richmond, SF, etc. talk came into play. Maybe my comment that NC has both of those assets and most (not all) states don't? Regardless, I certainly never said there weren't other cities that were closer to both.
February 19, 200916 yr Yah...you're right...you did say "not many"...so even if you do include those cities mentioned it still defines "not many".... That being said, so could Charlotte, although the mountains would be closer than the beach...2 vs 4
February 20, 200916 yr Looks exactly like Daniel Island or I'On in Charleston. http://www.danielisland.com/Real-Estate/barfield-park.aspx http://www.ionvillage.com/architecture.html Many of the newer developments in the Charleston region are also emulating this style.
February 21, 200916 yr ^It's really anywhere where there is new development to speak of. You can find this in Indy, Cbus, and a couple other areas. It just so happens that most of the modern-day development has occurred in the south. The Midwest and Northeast would be lucky to have this kind of suburban development.
February 21, 200916 yr ^It's really anywhere where there is new development to speak of. You can find this in Indy, Cbus, and a couple other areas. It just so happens that most of the modern-day development has occurred in the south. The Midwest and Northeast would be lucky to have this kind of suburban development. It's blah to me. It just doesn't appeal to me.
February 21, 200916 yr ^It's really anywhere where there is new development to speak of. You can find this in Indy, Cbus, and a couple other areas. It just so happens that most of the modern-day development has occurred in the south. The Midwest and Northeast would be lucky to have this kind of suburban development. It's blah to me. It just doesn't appeal to me. Let's call places like Baxter Village and really any place that adheres to New Urbanism what they really are - better ways to build suburbs. If you're into urban living it's real easy to see how this could fail to exite you. I will say this, if we had been building suburbs like this since the 50's, our country would be in a much better spot.
February 22, 200916 yr Let's call places like Baxter Village and really any place that adheres to New Urbanism what they really are - better ways to build suburbs. If you're into urban living it's real easy to see how this could fail to exite you. I will say this, if we had been building suburbs like this since the 50's, our country would be in a much better spot. Exactly.
February 22, 200916 yr Let's call places like Baxter Village and really any place that adheres to New Urbanism what they really are - better ways to build suburbs. If you're into urban living it's real easy to see how this could fail to exite you. I will say this, if we had been building suburbs like this since the 50's, our country would be in a much better spot. Exactly. I still don't buy that. It' all looks so plastic, pre made and super planned. Its' to "matchy-matchy" I don't want to look out and see the same house. It's like living on the set of wisteria lane! There is just something about these types of neighborhoods that makes my skin crawl.
February 22, 200916 yr So are you saying that this is no better than the typical suburban track home subdivision? This has sidewalks, small lots, public spaces, tree-lined streets, varied architecture, small setbacks and rear-loaded garages. I understand the Wisteria Lane comment, but to say that it's no better than the typical suburban crap seems to be a bit much.
February 22, 200916 yr So are you saying that this is no better than the typical suburban track home subdivision? This has sidewalks, small lots, public spaces, tree-lined streets, varied architecture, small setbacks and rear-loaded garages. I understand the Wisteria Lane comment, but to say that it's no better than the typical suburban crap seems to be a bit much. UR, maybe it's our age differences and where we grew up. To me these all look to sterile and similar. It's reminds me of a planned vacation package. There doesn't seem to be any individuality or uniqueness. Instead of selling the neighborhood, they appear to be selling a "lifestyle" that only appeals to certain people. I can't put my finger on it, but these types of developments just don't appeal to me.
February 22, 200916 yr ^I understand all that, but maybe I'm looking at it from more of a technical perspective. I consider neighborhoods that have sidewalks to be better than those that don't in that regard. Tree-lined streets are better than not. Small lot sizes with small setbacks are better than large lots with large setbacks. Neighborhood parks are better than no parks at all with large backyards as the alternative. When I break it down like this, I consider this neighborhood to be better than the typical suburban development. With this said, it will never live up to the character of older suburban neighborhoods like Cincy's Hyde Park or Cleveland's Shaker Heights.
February 22, 200916 yr ^I understand all that, but maybe I'm looking at it from more of a technical perspective. I consider neighborhoods that have sidewalks to be better than those that don't in that regard. Tree-lined streets are better than not. Small lot sizes with small setbacks are better than large lots with large setbacks. Neighborhood parks are better than no parks at all with large backyards as the alternative. When I break it down like this, I consider this neighborhood to be better than the typical suburban development. With this said, it will never live up to the character of older suburban neighborhoods like Cincy's Hyde Park or Cleveland's Shaker Heights. I agree with all you wrote in your first paragraph. I am not trying to compare these types of neighborhoods to Shaker, et al. It's more personal taste/choice. There are very few homes built after 1946 I like.
February 22, 200916 yr Fair enough...and I accept your apology. :wink: :laugh: HUSH! :whip: Damn Whippersnapper! Give up the moonshine and hanging out with those hicks down south! If you keep it up, before you know it, you'll be come one of them!!
February 22, 200916 yr For an urban neighborhood in an urban setting, I would wholeheartedly agree with the small setback argument. Put this development on 7th street and I love it. Put it in Fort Mill, SC and I don't care for it. This is not urban. It's about as ubran as the golf-course community where my friend's parents bought in Cary, NC. Their house is connected to the next and they have a very small setback. Doesn't make it urban. Those features have much more to do with making the developer as much $$ as possible than creating an urban atmosphere.
February 22, 200916 yr While small lot sizes and setbacks do help a developers bottom line (if they can sell it), they also promote pedestrian activity, human interaction and a closer-knit neighborhood. It's not the proximity to the urban core that makes Shaker Heights so wonderful, it is the design/layout of the community that makes it what it is. It has found that proverbial balance and achieved success. The same can be done out in the 'burbs if the same attention to detail is paid. When walking around Baxter people were outside talking with their neighbors, sitting on their front porches, children were playing in the streets and common areas, and there was a genuine sense of community realized by the residents that lived there. It's not about creating an "urban" or "suburban" atmosphere. It's about creating a neighborhood built upon the foundations that make great communities.
February 22, 200916 yr There doesn't seem to be any individuality or uniqueness. Instead of selling the neighborhood, they appear to be selling a "lifestyle" that only appeals to certain people. I agree with you, but I think that this is a type of community that can age gracefully. As the houses get older the owners are going to upgrade in different ways, different types of siding or roofs will go on, and 40 years down the road you'll have a community that looks more 'real.' At least that is the way I envision it. The important part is all the building blocks are there to make this a place that's worth a damn. I think the ideal way to do this sort of development is to lay out the roads, design and put in the business area, and then sell lots individually to homeowners. As long as you have a type of form-based zoning in, and don't allow owners to buy more than one lot (so they can have a bigger yard), you have the exact same development with a lot more variety in housing. Unfortunately, I really don't see this as being feasible to a developer. Now if they could have just moved it a little closer to the city. I know somebody said it wasn't out in the sticks, but it sure looks like it.
February 23, 200916 yr While small lot sizes and setbacks do help a developers bottom line (if they can sell it), they also promote pedestrian activity, human interaction and a closer-knit neighborhood. It's not the proximity to the urban core that makes Shaker Heights so wonderful, it is the design/layout of the community that makes it what it is. It has found that proverbial balance and achieved success. The same can be done out in the 'burbs if the same attention to detail is paid. When walking around Baxter people were outside talking with their neighbors, sitting on their front porches, children were playing in the streets and common areas, and there was a genuine sense of community realized by the residents that lived there. It's not about creating an "urban" or "suburban" atmosphere. It's about creating a neighborhood built upon the foundations that make great communities. Don't get me wrong, it's got some great attributes. I just don't like those attributes in Fort Mill. This is not Cincinatti where building over the state line is within one urban fabric. It is not even like building this type of development in the Heights or Lakewood areas of Cleveland. This cannot be called "inner-ring". It is sprawl.
February 24, 200916 yr 21. Lots of South Carolina flags here. Not too sure what that was all about. Baxter Village is in South Carolina, and South Carolinians love their (our) flag. :) I'm a bit conflicted about these New Urbanist developments, particularly those that are built outside of any pre-existing urban context. On the one hand, it's better than the ubiquitous cookie-cutter subdivisions named for the trees that were mowed down to build it. On the other hand, it's self-contained and lacks connectivity with its surroundings. I mean it's right next to I-77 for goodness sake. Unfortunately, this is about as good as it's going to get for Fort Mill, at least in the foreseeable future. The town is just flat-out committed to sprawl. It's all about the tax dollars, good design principles be damned. From all of the crap popping up along I-77 and in close proximity to it, you wouldn't even know that the town actually has a traditional downtown. It's got the potential to be something special, but sadly, I don't think it ever will be.
February 25, 200916 yr 21. Lots of South Carolina flags here. Not too sure what that was all about. Baxter Village is in South Carolina, and South Carolinians love their (our) flag. :) It is in South Carolina isn't it. Weird. :-D
February 25, 200916 yr I was thinking about this lately. But I wonder how many people would WANT to live in this type of development. My guess is many, but suburban home buyers are just not offered this type of housing when it comes to most parts of the United States. Not really sure. My parents live in a suburban neighborhood that's within walking distance to a relatively urban downtown. All their neighbors (and my parents) talk about is wanting to dump their homes for a postage stamp sized yard, a generous front porch, and modest square footage. Even a rowhome would suit. But they can't have that. It's just not being built. At least not yet in their community.
February 25, 200916 yr Looks expensive The price points are high because the liimited availability of this quality of product. If this were the standard then I think you would see prices become more reasonable. I wish this was the standard for sprawl development.
Create an account or sign in to comment