HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southeast > Atlanta


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2019, 8:29 PM
MARTAisSmarta MARTAisSmarta is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triptychtwo View Post
I'm surprised they didn't have to bury the power lines on the backside of this development, they must have gotten permits approved prior to the change of midtown zoning regulation update...unless they are planning on doing this as part of the Juniper Complete Streets project?
Is there a new regulation required power lines to be buried?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 2:32 AM
Triptychtwo Triptychtwo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARTAisSmarta View Post
Is there a new regulation required power lines to be buried?
Yep. All lines (except one) are buried along 7th. Juniper are still above ground.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 2:31 PM
RocketSurgeon RocketSurgeon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 941
This project predates the zoning change, they are not required to bury lines.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2019, 5:23 PM
joecool's Avatar
joecool joecool is offline
Ahhhh KELLY CLARKSON!!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketSurgeon View Post
This project predates the zoning change, they are not required to bury lines.
So I would assume everything that is currently under construction must do this? This is just Midtown? Does this include West Midtown? Buckhead?
__________________
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted May 8, 2019, 1:40 PM
trainiac's Avatar
trainiac trainiac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta - Grove Park
Posts: 1,058
Westbound 7th Street was open this morning! First day in two years

Congrats to the folks at Hanover for completing the job!!
__________________
Atlanta history blog
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted May 8, 2019, 9:14 PM
Metrophile Metrophile is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by trainiac View Post
Westbound 7th Street was open this morning! First day in two years

Congrats to the folks at Hanover for completing the job!!
First week day, at least. It is a damn nice building, indeed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:20 PM
smArTaLlone smArTaLlone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,558
Loudermilk has acquired the office and retail space.

Quote:
We are excited to announce the acquisition of 881 Peachtree, a mixed-use project developed by Hanover located in Midtown. LCO originally sold the site to Hanover and has executed its option to purchase the office + retail component upon completion. 881 Peachtree will provide an incredible new location to @wework who is utilizing the entire office portion, including a rooftop terrace. Now curating active retail space.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bxx7qq0lOLE/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2019, 9:52 PM
(four 0 four)'s Avatar
(four 0 four) (four 0 four) is offline
i ain't no bubba
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,669
Very pleased with how this turned out...

__________________
"I hate small towns because once you've seen the cannon in the park, there's nothing else to do." Lenny Bruce
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 10:56 AM
Martinman Martinman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,605
Agreed. It's a really nice project overall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 1:03 PM
DNR's Avatar
DNR DNR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 474
Development Above the Office Portion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by (four 0 four) View Post
Very pleased with how this turned out...

Does the office portion of this project allow for any development above it, or was the office building built in such a way that it could easily be dismantled to allow for another high-rise development within it's footprint?

Of course this would only work if there were enough excess parking already available in the Hanover garage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 1:32 PM
atlantaarchitect atlantaarchitect is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNR View Post
Does the office portion of this project allow for any development above it, or was the office building built in such a way that it could easily be dismantled to allow for another high-rise development within it's footprint?

Of course this would only work if there were enough excess parking already available in the Hanover garage.
I don't know this for a fact but I bet they needed the low rise office portion to achieve the F.A.R. (floor area ratio) maximums set forth by the midtown zoning code.

Unless the midtown zoning code is revisited, I'm assuming that low rise portion is required to stay as-is in order to achieve the height of the permitted residential tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 1:59 PM
Student Student is offline
Student
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by atlantaarchitect View Post
I don't know this for a fact but I bet they needed the low rise office portion to achieve the F.A.R. (floor area ratio) maximums set forth by the midtown zoning code.

Unless the midtown zoning code is revisited, I'm assuming that low rise portion is required to stay as-is in order to achieve the height of the permitted residential tower.
Can you explain this concept further?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 3:07 PM
robertjhajek robertjhajek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ormewood Park
Posts: 349
This is a rare instance in which the final product was better than the rendering IMO
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 3:20 PM
atlantaarchitect atlantaarchitect is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Student View Post
Can you explain this concept further?
Gladly - and again I'm just assuming this is the reason you see similar properties with both a low and high rise component (Azure, nine15 Midtown, Modera, etc.) - Midtown wasn't really intended for heavy density beyond the 20-30 story towers we see being built today. A standalone taller tower would require a very large lot, a change in the zoning code, or a variance which is often a costly and lengthy process.

The floor area ratio (FAR) is defined as "the relationship between the total amount of usable floor area that a building has, or has been permitted to have and the total area of the lot on which the building stands. The ratio is determined by dividing the total or gross floor area of the building by the gross area of the lot. A higher ratio is more likely to indicate a dense or urban construction. Local governments use FAR for zoning codes."

Most of midtown is classified as SPI-16. This zone tops out at a 5.0 F.A.R. This can be increased to up to a 10.2 F.A.R. with special bonuses that incentive good urban design (i.e. including retail, burying parking, green design, including a public park, etc.). An example: My 3 acre (130680 sq ft) lot allows me to build a 653,400+ square foot building at 5.0 F.A.R. while a smaller 1 acre (43,560 sq ft) lot tops out at 217,800 max square feet. If I spread my building's square footage out over a larger lot, obviously my F.A.R goes down and I can achieve a taller building.

If you google 'floor area ratios' you can find some nice diagrams that graphically explain the concept:

https://www.planning.org/pas/reports/report111.htm

The downtown CBD has much higher F.A.R.'s as it should.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 4:00 PM
Ant131531 Ant131531 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,981
Midtown was intended to be an "uptown district" similar to Upper East/Westside of Manhattan or Gold coast Chicago. That's why the FAR is limited. I think it's an outdated code and it's time to allow larger buildings in the area. It has 4 subway lines and a grid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2019, 5:34 PM
atlantaarchitect atlantaarchitect is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant131531 View Post
Midtown was intended to be an "uptown district" similar to Upper East/Westside of Manhattan or Gold coast Chicago. That's why the FAR is limited. I think it's an outdated code and it's time to allow larger buildings in the area. It has 4 subway lines and a grid.
Agreed - it's time to revisit. In retrospect we should've known what a catalyst for development GA Tech & Piedmont Park would be for urban growth in the city. I always struggle to explain to visitors that midtown is really downtown and downtown is for tourists, conventioneers, and sportsball - forgive my oversimplification. Our city is obviously not alone in that...
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southeast > Atlanta
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:36 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.