Atlanta Project Thread 2006 II - Page 5

Andrea · #81 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terminus

The mos foolish thing about this is that TCR doesn't even really want to do buildings that tall, but they neighborhood has now taken a position that the only development they will support is NO development. As such, there is no compromise potential.

This relates to what I was commenting on in the thread about Mary Norwood's proposed legislation to limit highrises. There is a very powerful element in Atlanta which is strongly opposed to projects which increase density and/or urbanization.

Atlriser · #82 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 5:55 PM**

I hate saying it, but I witnessed the same CRAP during the SPI-22 vote last week in Grant Park. The immediate neighbors wanted to limit the height along Memorial to 28' eventhough the whole city's max minimum is 35'. I spoke against it saying my house was 34' so I couldn't even have built my home by them under what they were purposing.

After the meeting, I had about 5 of the people follow me outside and call me a liar about the height of my house and so forth. I was dumbfounded at how ugly and hateful they could be but it's opened my eyes even more to the ignorance of the community most of the time. I even attempted to have them follow me back to my home and see for themselves but they all just kept attacking me. I can't wait for the meeting Thursday because I'm bringing pics and plans of many homes in the neighborhood that are over 28'......idiots idiots idiots!

Mason should move forward because the city nor neighborhood has attempted to reach an agreement. I'm discovering people think it should be exactly what they want or nothing at all even if it means empty lots with vagrants and crime....it's sickening and exhausting listening to the same stupid crap over and over from these people.

phantom · #83 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 6:27 PM**

Just a quick note regarding the development along Peachtree between 10th & 11th:

The final tenant of the short strip at 11th, the convenience store between the former Taste of India & the former Velvet has posted notice that its landlord, Dewberry is forcing it out, and it will close on 9/25/06.

phantom · #84 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 6:28 PM**

Another quick note for implosion junkies:

D. H. Griffin is planning to implode the 615 Peachtree building at 0800 on Saturday, September 30th.

kardon · #85 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantom

Just a quick note regarding the development along Peachtree between 10th & 11th:

The final tenant of the short strip at 11th, the convenience store between the former Taste of India & the former Velvet has posted notice that its landlord, Dewberry is forcing it out, and it will close on 9/25/06.

what are they actually doing with that location...IMO thats a huge eye sore on peachtree st

gttx · #86 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 6:59 PM**

I thought that Vision was opening up over there.

mayhem · #87 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 7:20 PM**

The owner of Vision bought Compound.

gttx · #88 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayhem

The owner of Vision bought Compound.

So will Vision NOT be moving across Peachtree to that retail strip? If not, what would Dewberry be kicking tenants out for? Perhaps Midtown Square will happen after all...
(don't get your hopes up though)

Andrea · #89 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 9:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantom

Another quick note for implosion junkies:

D. H. Griffin is planning to implode the 615 Peachtree building at 0800 on Saturday, September 30th.

Only in Atlanta would something like this be allowed to happen.

joey · #90 Posted **Sep 11, 2006, 9:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttx

So will Vision NOT be moving across Peachtree to that retail strip? If not, what would Dewberry be kicking tenants out for? Perhaps Midtown Square will happen after all...
(don't get your hopes up though)

Maybe he is ramping up for something big on that property. The ABC was all abuzz last week about Dewberry hiring some hotshot PR guy -- could this be why?

ATLBlaxican · #91 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 4:44 AM**

I was riding home from G-State last night and for some reason, I just now realized how diverse, unique and amazing our buildings are at night. So, quick POLL: Which are your top 3 skyscrapers at night???

For me 1.1180 Peachtree 2. Four Seasons 3. Bank of America Plaza

I did notice that while Buckhead maybe booming, at night it is quite dull compared to Midtown and Downtown. I hope 3344 Peachtree and the Mansion change that. I also noticed that most of the residential towers have extremely boring or non existent lighting effects. None or Novare’s projects stand out, and I remember that the rendering of Spire made it appear to be quite prominent, but that’s not the case. I hope the Atlantic takes after the Four Seasons. The Renaissance Hotel looks much better with the new logo and white signage (I just wish they would do so kind of effect with the blank side). Suntrust looked stunning with its beacon light breaking up in the fog/smog. Westin simple, yet beautiful and One Atlantic, just classic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So this leads me to my last question, Why are so many lights left on in office buildings??? Is it for cleaning purposes, maintenance, or visual purposes??? I’ve always wondered and this seems to be the place to ask. Thanks in advance!

austin356 · #92 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 6:55 AM**

This is one part of Atlanta that I really despise; despise very deeply. We really need to stop this cancer that is eating away at our great, ever changing, city. Atlanta is nothing, absolutely nothing without change. We dont have the foundation that similiar size metros have, but we do have a better hope for the future. That is our strength and to limit that is just foolish; something I will not be apart of.

Andrea · #93 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 12:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austin356

This is one part of Atlanta that I really despise; despise very deeply. We really need to stop this cancer that is eating away at our great, ever changing, city. Atlanta is nothing, absolutely nothing without change. We dont have the foundation that similiar size metros have, but we do have a better hope for the future. That is our strength and to limit that is just foolish; something I will not be apart of.

It comes down to the hard work of politics. That includes personal voting, of course, and as a threshold matter that means choosing to live within the city limits.

But it's far more than that. It takes years of campaigning, fundraising, going to endless meetings, door to door canvassing, establishing phone banks, writing checks, lobbying, speaking to civic associations, polling, serving on countless comittees and boards, building relationships with voters and other political leaders, and so forth. That's how people make their voices heard. Mayor Franklin and Councilwoman Norwood have done that, and there are obviously a lot of people who support them.

While I don't agree with the Mayor or with Councilwoman Norwood on these various building bans, I acknowledge that they have shown a lot more committment to the city than I have.

smArTaLlone · #94 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 3:49 PM**

I saw in one of the papers Mezzo has a different rendering.

ATLmangum · #95 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 4:37 PM**

Does anybody have any updates on Onyx? I heard that they had fenced in the area but I don't know is anything else has happened?

Chris Creech · #96 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 4:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlriser

I hate saying it, but I witnessed the same CRAP during the SPI-22 vote last week in Grant Park. The immediate neighbors wanted to limit the height along Memorial to 28' eventhough the whole city's max minimum is 35'. I spoke against it saying my house was 34' so I couldn't even have built my home by them under what they were purposing.

That same group is also hitting the NPU-W meetings. They're kinda fanatical and framing it so that if you oppose the height restrictions you're being anti-neighborhood.

It's supposed to come up this next meeting, and I'm thoroughly prepared to get blasted for mentioning that Memorial is an ideal route for mid-density and maybe later trolley and transporation.

That strip of North Grant Park north of I-20 is pretty isolated and cut off, I don't really think it's realistic to maintain I-20 to the Cemetary as low-density single-family.

stitchuno · #97 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by joey

As much as I want to see the Beltline developed as a transit corridor, I say good for him. All along he's been offering to donate corridor land, and while he's the owner of all of that section's property, he's strangely been excluded from all sorts of meetings to shape it. If the other Powers that Be didn't see this coming, I'm shocked.

Yes, there was some concern that not enough of a ROW was being donated to handle transit and trails, and that height/density was too high in specific areas, but that's remediable with negotiations, something a number of other groups were apparently unwilling to engage him in. Instead, it appears to me that people were so strong in their "NO" convictions to his proposals that no one ever came to the table to discuss with an open mind.

I went to the public hearing on the Mason proposal last night and was shocked at how intense these NIMBYs were. Most seemed to have no interest in working on a proposal to have some sort of development occur. I did have a couple of questions that maybe some of you here would maybe be able to answer:

1. These people kept talking about keeping the promise of the original proposal of the beltline. They said that Mason's development was not in line with the original plans. I thought that the intent was to increase density around key nodes of the beltline. There really is no better area to do this than in Midtown at 10th and Monroe. Am I mistaken in my thinking?

2. On a side note, there was discussion about increasing the area of sidewalk coverage inside the city limits. A pro-Mason citizen suggested that an increase tax base from the development would allow the city to spend money on projects like this. I heard a few grumbling NIMBYs say that sidewalks are each property owners responsibility and that this guy was crazy. What is true about building sidewalks in the community?

atlantaguy · #98 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 4:54 PM**

^Some of these people are starting to sound more like bananas than nimbys!

slinkster65 · #99 Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 5:10 PM**

My first post, but I have been lurking for a while.

I couldn't find the story on teh AJC website, but it was in the Sunday paper. Said they are getting ready to rezone an area around the Chattahoochee (close to 285) for a copuple of 18-20 story condos. They said this would be in East Cobb, but to me this seems more like the SE part of Cobb than true East Cobb. Just thought I would put this out there.

Also, Norwood would hurt the city with that proposal IMO. If you live ina condo, etc. downtown, you should expect that at some point your view might be blocked. I know some people who have moved there from around where I live in Cobb, and they didn;t move for the views. A view might be nice, but...

SteveD · #**100** Posted **Sep 12, 2006, 5:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by stitchuno

2. On a side note, there was discussion about increasing the area of sidewalk coverage inside the city limits. A pro-Mason citizen suggested that an increase tax base from the development would allow the city to spend money on projects like this. I heard a few grumbling NIMBYs say that sidewalks are each property owners responsibility and that this guy was crazy. What is true about building sidewalks in the community?

Partly true...homeowners are not responsible for building sidewalks, but, once built, they ARE responsible for maintaining them. That is, if you get, for example, differential settlement, or a tree root, which creates a tripping hazard out in front of your property, it is your responsibility to repair that hazard. That's my understanding, at least. I'd welcome comments from anyone who may be able to fine tune that.