Can McMansions And New Urbanism Co-Exist?
Plans by the developers of Vermillion, a 400 acre New Urbanist community outside Charlotte, call for the addition of hundreds of 4,000 square foot homes to the original neighborhood of townhomes and small lot houses.
"One of the region's pioneering efforts in new urbanism is 'feathering out' from its high-density core and adding larger homes.
That seems at odds with the popular view of compact villages with condos on top of shops, but it's actually part of a larger vision, say the developers of Vermillion, a Huntersville project started nine years ago.
'New urbanism isn't just small houses on small lots and starter homes, although that's the way it came into the Charlotte market,' said Tom Low, who heads the local office of internationally known new urbanism pioneer Duany Plater-Zyberk & Co.
The Next Big Thing in the region will be the evolution of new urbanism, he believes."
A entry on the Charlotte Observer's Naked City blog also explores the question whether the developers are selling out New Urbanism principles, or simply adding diversity to the housing stock in response to market demand.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related News Stories
The New Suburban Ghetto - Dec 12, 2007
Raleigh Weighs Proposal To Limit Home Size - Nov 24, 2007
Art Meets TOD - Nov 02, 2007
Planned TOD Beats Long-Range Predictions - Sep 05, 2007
Reinventing A Downtown Civic Plaza - Aug 24, 2007
whoa
I also fail to see how that is anything but sprawl.
Yes, if done correctly.
New Urbanist communities should embrace a wide array of housing types and price ranges, including the McMansion. So long as the use of the McMansion is integrated with the rest of the community/street grid and sparingly sited (as opposed to the lazy repetition of the form which we are accustomed too), there should be no reason not to include large houses if they are in demand.
Too many conflicts to be NU
My 2¢:
I suggest looking at the blog that Charles is looking at to view the map for yourselves. This is not a NU development, but a developer's tag line (the developer isn't "selling out" NU principles at all - he's using the name to sell product). I'd be interested to see if you could do a NU on that particular parcel - you'd be better off using a transect and SmartCode and doing your best with the architectural treatments. Just a thought.
Plus, the oaks they are using are too big for the tree lawn and the setbacks, so their 'canopy' goal will be an issue in the future as the trees break the pavement and press into the building envelope.
Best,
D
Vermillion Doesn't Look Walkable
McMansions or not, it doesn't look like New Urbanism to me because it doesn't have a continuous street system. Look at the map in the blog: it seems to be separated into "pods" that require indirect trips that are too far to walk.
Charles Siegel
No
Unless you redefine New Urbanism (as the NC planners seem to be doing) to include all of those traditional, plastic suburban subdivisions that have already trashed the landscape.