Jump to content

Clayton & Johnston Co


IBruton

Recommended Posts

Just saw this in the N&O.

N&O article

"Mixed-use projects also let developers create self-sustaining communities rather than islands of suburbia, said Linwood Jones, owner of Southwind Surveying, a local engineering company behind both Village at Cleveland Springs and Summerwind Plantation."

"Such arrangements maximize the use of land, Hines said."

Johnston County is undergoing a large growth phase. this growth is converting rural farmlands into suburban neighborhoods. Please read the article first and then state whether you agree or disagree with the statement quoted above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 18
  • Created
  • Last Reply

"In most cases, it's difficult to mix commercial with residential," he said. "If you go into an existing residential community, you'll get some resistance" trying to drop a shopping center or commercial plaza amid homes.

But if the plan includes a commercial project from the outset, it can become a community's drawing card, he said."

I think the main problem is that the term "mixed use" has gotten away from its traditional meaning of a fine-grained, fully integrated community, and is now used to refer to planned developments where there are segregated pods of commercial and residential which may be in close proximity to one another, but that are not truly "mixed"

In my mind, a truly mixed use development will not include a "shopping center," whether dropped into a residential community or not, but rather an area of street-level retail with housing and offices or services above, walkable streets, and access to transit.

I have not seen the proposals for the neighborhoods mentioned in the article, but I suspect that they will be, essentially, isolated suburban developments with no access to transit, no jobs internal to the development that would keep residents from having to drive up I-40 to work in Raleigh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main problem is that the term "mixed use" has gotten away from its traditional meaning of a fine-grained, fully integrated community, and is now used to refer to planned developments where there are segregated pods of commercial and residential which may be in close proximity to one another, but that are not truly "mixed"

In my mind, a truly mixed use development will not include a "shopping center," whether dropped into a residential community or not, but rather an area of street-level retail with housing and offices or services above, walkable streets, and access to transit.

I have not seen the proposals for the neighborhoods mentioned in the article, but I suspect that they will be, essentially, isolated suburban developments with no access to transit, no jobs internal to the development that would keep residents from having to drive up I-40 to work in Raleigh.

Hear, hear! I believe urbanesq has nailed it.

Here are some of the things that catch my eye in the article:

"County officials are happy to see more mixed-use planned developments, which must be a minimum of 100 acres. Such projects mean less piecemeal growth in the county."

Making a mixed-use project a minimum of 100 acres sort of misses the point. One of the benefits of mixing uses in a compact area is that it creates synergy and energy among the uses that make them more self-supportive.

"Neotraditional" was long ago hijacked by the development community and now that name is slapped onto just about any subdivision if a developer thinks it will sell more houses. The same is now happening with "mixed-use." If you apply for a building permit and build two uses, that becomes "mixed use."

Articles like this just demonstrate how poorly the media, the development community, and indeed local governments that make the rules- actually understand anything other than suburban development.

Here's my litmus test for labeling a project mixed-use:

1. Is there any multi-story building with offices above and street-level retail below in the project?

2. Is there any multi-story building with residential above and street-level retail below in the project?

3. Is there any attempt to reduce standard parking requirements based on the opportunity for shared parking and the ability to complete trips within the project on foot?

If the answer to 1 is yes, but the others are no, then in my mind, it is a mixed-use project, but only marginally so. The answer of yes to either 2 or 3 is a much more affirmative indication of true mixed use.

I predict that the stuff in Johnston County will be more suburban schlock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Riverwood development in Clayton off of Covered Bridge rd. is a nice mixed development project which boasts. Single Family Houses, a main street type feel with retail on the bottom and condominiums rising above in the northern row house type feel. A elementary and middle school and I believe a highschool at some point. It's really something else. And all on what used to be farmland it's really a nice area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've all heard about the rapid growth that's been going on in southern Wake County lately. When I-540 is completed (if its ever completed lol), this trend is sure to accelerate even more. Residents in Clayton speak out against rapid high density growth to town leaders. The article can be read here:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/growth/st...p-9241346c.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Riverwood development in Clayton off of Covered Bridge rd. is a nice mixed development project which boasts. Single Family Houses, a main street type feel with retail on the bottom and condominiums rising above in the northern row house type feel. A elementary and middle school and I believe a highschool at some point.  It's really something else. And all on what used to be farmland it's really a nice area.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good to hear; I'll have to check it out.

If the development is self-contined enough that people can actually shop there without getting in their cars, and can walk/bike to work without having to out on I-40, then I'm willing to say it's a true mixed-use, neo-traditional development, even without a transit connection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"In most cases, it's difficult to mix commercial with residential," he said. "If you go into an existing residential community, you'll get some resistance" trying to drop a shopping center or commercial plaza amid homes.

But if the plan includes a commercial project from the outset, it can become a community's drawing card, he said."

I think the main problem is that the term "mixed use" has gotten away from its traditional meaning of a fine-grained, fully integrated community, and is now used to refer to planned developments where there are segregated pods of commercial and residential which may be in close proximity to one another, but that are not truly "mixed"

In my mind, a truly mixed use development will not include a "shopping center," whether dropped into a residential community or not, but rather an area of street-level retail with housing and offices or services above, walkable streets, and access to transit.

I have not seen the proposals for the neighborhoods mentioned in the article, but I suspect that they will be, essentially, isolated suburban developments with no access to transit, no jobs internal to the development that would keep residents from having to drive up I-40 to work in Raleigh.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Always nice to see other folks think like yourself B)

I have always had mixed (no pun intended) feelings about Meadowmont and Southern Village in Chapel Hill. My gut says 'wow this is cool', but you have not really added anything to Chapel Hill, but more so created two new small towns that are sort of independant. While walkable, by virtue of their sidewalks, they are certainly not urban even with the inclusion of some decent looking condos above retail. Anyone else have thoughts on these two places?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always nice to see other folks think like yourself B) 

I have always had mixed (no pun intended) feelings about Meadowmont and Southern Village in Chapel Hill. My gut says 'wow this is cool', but you have not really added anything to Chapel Hill, but more so created two new small towns that are sort of independant. While walkable, by virtue of their sidewalks, they are certainly not urban even with the inclusion of some decent looking condos above retail. Anyone else have thoughts on these two places?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I share your views compeltely. I think they're really neat, and cool to look at, but aren't really integrated urban places; and never will be. We have a friends who love living there, but also a friend who is moving out of one of them to an historic neighborhood in another community because it, in his words, is not an "ensouled" place; meaning that in spite of the lip service to urbanism in some of the design elements, it's just a new subdivision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of another article a while back in which newcomers to Johnston County complained of farm equipment holding up traffic on the two-lane roads during rush hour. It stated that an ongoing joke among the agriculture community there was "It's nice to know you're number ONE", referring to drivers giving the equipment operators the middle finger. :lol:

Other newcomers complained of odd odors, like manure. I believe now real estate companies have to tell potential Johnston County homebuyers that this is indeed a rural county and they will have to deal with crowded two-lane roads, odd smells, and slow farm equipment.

Leaders in Clayton have a great opportunity to establish a responsible pattern of growth. I'm glad they are taking into consideration the impact it will have on the land, etc. Perhaps things will turn out alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Interesting little article about Clayton's small area plan.

On Monday, the Clayton Town Council adopted a small area plan with guidelines for the corridor that stretches roughly from the intersection of Amelia Church Road and N.C. 42 West to the interchange of N.C. 42 with the future U.S. 70 bypass.

The town's plan gives a blueprint for the area, including a village center, big box retail, hotels and a mix of residential types -- all interconnected by roads as well as sidewalks and biking paths.

"The value of that is you're creating an integrated, livable community where people have less dependence on the automobile," Town Manager Steve Biggs said.

Developers are already complaining.

Cindy Szwarckop of Stewart Engineering, who worked with Pantlin on the project, said a small area plan is a great idea in theory, but the challenge is that the plan does not honor property lines.

"Unless you can control all these properties, you can't put in what the small area plan asks," she said. "You'd have to wait to assemble all the pieces."

Let's hope the town of Clayton sticks with its vision, and makes developers follow their plans, instead of the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I can tell you they are expanding their wastewater treatment plant, interconnecting the wastewater system with Raleigh, buildind a "grey" water reuse system with a capacity of 238,000 gallons per day at Pine Hollow Golf Course and making plans to build a whole new WWTP years from now on the Neuse River.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.