ATLANTA | Development Thread V

[RocketSurgeon]

Oh God... I guess I'll be ducking out of this thread for the next 50 or so pages.

[Buck]

TAKE IT TO THE ATLANTA SUBFORUM IN A NEW THREAD. Any subsequent non-development posts will be deleted.

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

I dislike Fuqua developments mainly because of the complete lack of thought done for the traffic flow. If we are going to be graced with developments with heavy focus on the auto then the developer should at least devote some effort to making moving into and out of the development as easy as possible. Even worse is that his developments tend to be so auto dependent that one would rather drive between stores in the same development than walk. Although the Buckhead Target and Dick's is nice so it seems it can be possible for him to develop decent proposals (maybe the zoning there forced it)

[Verge]

Originally Posted by GeorgiaPeanuts

I dislike Fuqua developments mainly because of the complete lack of thought done for the traffic flow. If we are going to be graced with developments with heavy focus on the auto then the developer should at least devote some effort to making moving into and out of the development as easy as possible. Even worse is that his developments tend to be so auto dependent that one would rather drive between stores in the same development than walk. Although the Buckhead Target and Dick's is nice so it seems it can be possible for him to develop decent proposals (maybe the zoning there forced it)

Fuqua's site planning is awkward and basically suburban in its outlook (the Morningside project is the only exception that I have seen)-- Ineptly disguised big box stores meant to meet the letter of the zoning laws but in no way the spirit. The 17th Street project is a good example-- auto oriented big boxes surround surface parking on the block interior with some token storefront (probably strip-shopping center architecture) facing the street--
Insipid and insidious in concept it is simply an urbanity killer-- How exactly does he get away with it?

[Dettmann1]

Originally Posted by Verge

Fuqua's site planning is awkward and basically suburban in its outlook (the Morningside project is the only exception that I have seen)-- Ineptly disguised big box stores meant to meet the letter of the zoning laws but in no way the spirit. The 17th Street project is a good example-- auto oriented big boxes surround surface parking on the block interior with some token storefront (probably strip-shopping center architecture) facing the street--
Insipid and insidious in concept it is simply an urbanity killer-- How exactly does he get away with it?

I'm may be in the minority here, but the bashing of how that proposed site plan is laid out is kind of a head scratcher. Now Fuqua has done some crappy development, but he's also come up with some pretty good sites too. You know the Target center in Buckhead? That was Fuqua and several of his sites come out decent. While there is a sea of parking at the lindbergh site, that place was a dump before he came in. He's also the one developing the site along Piedmont and the one in Decatur that looks half decent. So lets take a second here and separate the Developer from the site plan....

How many of you guys have been out to that site and observed what is around it? Based on the existing site, I say this is a pretty decent layout. Is it perfect, definitely not, however, it is decently laid out. The layout shows two curb cuts: 1 on Northside and 1 on 17th, which is probably all he would get since Northside is a GDOT Road. You have the train tracks to the south, so your chance of getting anything dense against that is probably slim to none. The site has been split into a north half and south half by an access drive. On the south half against the train tracks he has the following:
Single family homes in one half of it and a rather large apartment building in the other half. Based on the elevations on that site, that is probably the best you can do.

Now north of that drive you have a commercial center. Is it dense? No. However, my guess it the south half will be sold off and the top will be owned by Fuqua and a land lease to tentants. When demand warrants, he can then redevelop that top half into something that is more dense, but for the time being he puts in street fronted retail with parking in the back and no big box.

Can someone please tell me how there is something wrong with that? Because based on what is around this corner, the entire layout is a huge step up and probably what the market at that corner can support.

Some of you guys live in a fantasy land where everything should be dense and should be pedestrian oriented. While I love development like that and love the changes that have happened to Atlanta over the past 10 years (Moved here in 2003), you have to realize that developments have to make economic sense as well since someone has to put up the money and has to make a profit. Cities like DC, NYC, SF, LA, Chicago all have different urban development because Developers have to pay such a high price for land, they had to cram every single SF of development they can out of it to earn a profit. In Atlanta, they don't have to do that, and can't really do that because who is going to underwrite a dense commercial corner right there? If I was a finance guy, I sure as heck wouldn't. So can you guys take a second and realize not every single development in this City is going to be a Five story apartment building built to the lot line or a 20-30 tall building. There are places in this city that warrant that, however this site is not one of them. And Please do not point to Atlantic Station and hold that up as some sort of amazing development. That thing took ten years to come to fruition plus the Governor's help and one of the loosest underwriting markets we have ever seen.

[scania]

Originally Posted by dettmann1

i'm may be in the minority here, but the bashing of how that proposed site plan is laid out is kind of a head scratcher. Now fuqua has done some crappy development, but he's also come up with some pretty good sites too. You know the target center in buckhead? That was fuqua and several of his sites come out decent. While there is a sea of parking at the lindbergh site, that place was a dump before he came in. He's also the one developing the site along piedmont and the one in decatur that looks half decent. So lets take a second here and separate the developer from the site plan....

How many of you guys have been out to that site and observed what is around it? Based on the existing site, i say this is a pretty decent layout. Is it perfect, definitely not, however, it is decently laid out. The layout shows two curb cuts: 1 on northside and 1 on 17th, which is probably all he would get since northside is a gdot road. You have the train tracks to the south, so your chance of getting anything dense against that is probably slim to none. The site has been split into a north half and south half by an access drive. On the south half against the train tracks he has the following:
Single family homes in one half of it and a rather large apartment building in the other half. Based on the elevations on that site, that is probably the best you can do.

Now north of that drive you have a commercial center. Is it dense? No. However, my guess it the south half will be sold off and the top will be owned by fuqua and a land lease to tentants. When demand warrants, he can then redevelop that top half into something that is more dense, but for the time being he puts in street fronted retail with parking in the back and no big box.

Can someone please tell me how there is something wrong with that? Because based on what is around this corner, the entire layout is a huge step up and probably what the market at that corner can support.

Some of you guys live in a fantasy land where everything should be dense and should be pedestrian oriented. While i love development like that and love the changes that have happened to atlanta over the past 10 years (moved here in 2003), you have to realize that developments have to make economic sense as well since someone has to put up the money and has to make a profit. Cities like dc, nyc, sf, la, chicago all have different urban development because developers have to pay such a high price for land, they had to cram every single sf of development they can out of it to earn a profit. In atlanta, they don't have to do that, and can't really do that because who is going to underwrite a dense commercial corner right there? If i was a finance guy, i sure as heck wouldn't. So can you guys take a second and realize not every single development in this city is going to be a five story apartment building built to the lot line or a 20-30 tall building. There are places in this city that warrant that, however this site is not one of them. And please do not point to atlantic station and hold that up as some sort of amazing development. That thing took ten years to come to fruition plus the governor's help and one of the loosest underwriting markets we have ever seen.

totally agreed!

[clexmond]

Originally Posted by Dettmann1

Some of you guys live in a fantasy land where everything should be dense and should be pedestrian oriented. While I love development like that and love the changes that have happened to Atlanta over the past 10 years (Moved here in 2003), you have to realize that developments have to make economic sense as well since someone has to put up the money and has to make a profit. Cities like DC, NYC, SF, LA, Chicago all have different urban development because Developers have to pay such a high price for land, they had to cram every single SF of development they can out of it to earn a profit. In Atlanta, they don't have to do that, and can't really do that because who is going to underwrite a dense commercial corner right there? If I was a finance guy, I sure as heck wouldn't. So can you guys take a second and realize not every single development in this City is going to be a Five story apartment building built to the lot line or a 20-30 tall building. There are places in this city that warrant that, however this site is not one of them. And Please do not point to Atlantic Station and hold that up as some sort of amazing development. That thing took ten years to come to fruition plus the Governor's help and one of the loosest underwriting markets we have ever seen.

I don't buy your arguments. Take a look at the development in the immediate area: http://devmap.io/cities/atlanta/developments#?zoom=16&lat=33.78928611934776&lng=-84.40958976745605

We have 1331 units proposed or under construction in the immediate area (2-3 blocks radius), all of which are urban, street-facing 4+ story apartment projects. Nearby is also White Provision which developed a significant amount of retail without resorting to the inward facing, surface parking crap we see here. So, please explain why, at the confluence of two major arteries (17th & Northside) and surrounded by rapidly increasing density, Fuqua has to resort to this type of development while every other intown developer is successfully delivering (and profiting on) significantly more pedestrian-friendly and urban projects.

[RocketSurgeon]

Originally Posted by Dettmann1

...he puts in street fronted retail with parking in the back and no big box. 

Can someone please tell me how there is something wrong with that?

Nothing on that site plan shows the retail being accessible from the street. I'll be a lot more accepting if that turns out to be inaccurate. It's not the density I mind; it's that it caters entirely to cars. Wanting that block to be pedestrian friendly isn't a fantasy. It's in an area where a lot of people walk, and all of the other new development takes that into account. There's no reason why this shouldn't too. Anything else is just bad design.

Take that plan, make its entire perimeter accessible to pedestrians, and add paths inside that people can use without being backed over by cars, and I'll be satisfied. Without that, it's shit

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by Dettmann1

I'm may be in the minority here, but the bashing of how that proposed site plan is laid out is kind of a head scratcher. Now Fuqua has done some crappy development, but he's also come up with some pretty good sites too. You know the Target center in Buckhead? That was Fuqua and several of his sites come out decent. While there is a sea of parking at the lindbergh site, that place was a dump before he came in. He's also the one developing the site along Piedmont and the one in Decatur that looks half decent. So lets take a second here and separate the Developer from the site plan....

How many of you guys have been out to that site and observed what is around it? Based on the existing site, I say this is a pretty decent layout. Is it perfect, definitely not, however, it is decently laid out. The layout shows two curb cuts: 1 on Northside and 1 on 17th, which is probably all he would get since Northside is a GDOT Road. You have the train tracks to the south, so your chance of getting anything dense against that is probably slim to none. The site has been split into a north half and south half by an access drive. On the south half against the train tracks he has the following:
Single family homes in one half of it and a rather large apartment building in the other half. Based on the elevations on that site, that is probably the best you can do.

Now north of that drive you have a commercial center. Is it dense? No. However, my guess it the south half will be sold off and the top will be owned by Fuqua and a land lease to tentants. When demand warrants, he can then redevelop that top half into something that is more dense, but for the time being he puts in street fronted retail with parking in the back and no big box.

Can someone please tell me how there is something wrong with that? Because based on what is around this corner, the entire layout is a huge step up and probably what the market at that corner can support.

Some of you guys live in a fantasy land where everything should be dense and should be pedestrian oriented. While I love development like that and love the changes that have happened to Atlanta over the past 10 years (Moved here in 2003), you have to realize that developments have to make economic sense as well since someone has to put up the money and has to make a profit. Cities like DC, NYC, SF, LA, Chicago all have different urban development because Developers have to pay such a high price for land, they had to cram every single SF of development they can out of it to earn a profit. In Atlanta, they don't have to do that, and can't really do that because who is going to underwrite a dense commercial corner right there? If I was a finance guy, I sure as heck wouldn't. So can you guys take a second and realize not every single development in this City is going to be a Five story apartment building built to the lot line or a 20-30 tall building. There are places in this city that warrant that, however this site is not one of them. And Please do not point to Atlantic Station and hold that up as some sort of amazing development. That thing took ten years to come to fruition plus the Governor's help and one of the loosest underwriting markets we have ever seen.

Because we already have suburban strip malls and large parking lots in 99% of the metro area...why can't urban development be urban in the central core of the metro or city? Why do we need more suburbs in the city? That's why people live in the core...so that they can walk to places via walkable development and get away from the suburbs...not so developers like this bring the suburbs to them...makes 0 sense.

That's proper urban planning. No wonder people from all around the world and country don't desire to live in this city and they all desire to live in the places you mentioned. Because they planned correctly in their hay days. Atlanta already knows what sprawl does....why create more sprawl especially so close to the urban core.

[briantech]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

why create more sprawl especially so close to the urban core.

Correct. Sprawl created the problems Atlanta has as a metro region. We (in the city) are tired of it. Don't bring that shit in town any more. It's that simple.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by Dettmann1

I'm may be in the minority here, but the bashing of how that proposed site plan is laid out is kind of a head scratcher. Now Fuqua has done some crappy development, but he's also come up with some pretty good sites too. You know the Target center in Buckhead? That was Fuqua and several of his sites come out decent. While there is a sea of parking at the lindbergh site, that place was a dump before he came in. He's also the one developing the site along Piedmont and the one in Decatur that looks half decent. So lets take a second here and separate the Developer from the site plan....

How many of you guys have been out to that site and observed what is around it? Based on the existing site, I say this is a pretty decent layout. Is it perfect, definitely not, however, it is decently laid out. The layout shows two curb cuts: 1 on Northside and 1 on 17th, which is probably all he would get since Northside is a GDOT Road. You have the train tracks to the south, so your chance of getting anything dense against that is probably slim to none. The site has been split into a north half and south half by an access drive. On the south half against the train tracks he has the following:
Single family homes in one half of it and a rather large apartment building in the other half. Based on the elevations on that site, that is probably the best you can do.

Now north of that drive you have a commercial center. Is it dense? No. However, my guess it the south half will be sold off and the top will be owned by Fuqua and a land lease to tentants. When demand warrants, he can then redevelop that top half into something that is more dense, but for the time being he puts in street fronted retail with parking in the back and no big box.

Can someone please tell me how there is something wrong with that? Because based on what is around this corner, the entire layout is a huge step up and probably what the market at that corner can support.

Some of you guys live in a fantasy land where everything should be dense and should be pedestrian oriented. While I love development like that and love the changes that have happened to Atlanta over the past 10 years (Moved here in 2003), you have to realize that developments have to make economic sense as well since someone has to put up the money and has to make a profit. Cities like DC, NYC, SF, LA, Chicago all have different urban development because Developers have to pay such a high price for land, they had to cram every single SF of development they can out of it to earn a profit. In Atlanta, they don't have to do that, and can't really do that because who is going to underwrite a dense commercial corner right there? If I was a finance guy, I sure as heck wouldn't. So can you guys take a second and realize not every single development in this City is going to be a Five story apartment building built to the lot line or a 20-30 tall building. There are places in this city that warrant that, however this site is not one of them. And Please do not point to Atlantic Station and hold that up as some sort of amazing development. That thing took ten years to come to fruition plus the Governor's help and one of the loosest underwriting markets we have ever seen.

Sorry But I have to respectfully disagree-- This stuff is what I do for a living and I can assure you that this site plan is considerably less than mediocre-- there is higher density and more urbane stuff being built all around this site. Fuqua hires mediocre architects (most of the time) and dictates less than urbane goals for his projects-- He is a suburban formula oriented developer than does not understand urban environments-- And yes everything built in the core of the metro area should be pedestrian oriented-- that as how you build a city worth living in -- and I'm not backing down on that one. Ever.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by briantech

Correct. Sprawl created the problems Atlanta has as a metro region. We (in the city) are tired of it. Don't bring that shit in town any more. It's that simple.

Yes-- what you said-- residents of this city need to stand up and say hell no to this kind of poor development--
Stop making excuses, this stuff may be temporary but 20 or 30 years is a long time--

[Ant131531]

It wouldn't be hard to reconfigure the plan into a more zero-lot urban development. If you have to put up another parking garage, so be it, but that's much better than surface parking space. At least color the garage decently and maybe put a small retail space at the bottom of it.

[scania]

Originally Posted by Verge

Yes-- what you said-- residents of this city need to stand up and say hell no to this kind of poor development--
Stop making excuses, this stuff may be temporary but 20 or 30 years is a long time--

Speak for yourself. Where this is located, I see nothing that major wrong with the layout.

[joecool]

Originally Posted by briantech

correct. Sprawl created the problems atlanta has as a metro region. We (in the city) are tired of it. Don't bring that shit in town any more. It's that simple.

agreed!!!!!!!

[sunking1056]

There is simply no defending this style of development. Not in this location...nor Lindbergh...not glenwood park.... Not only are developments like this not adding to our urban fabric, they are aggressively anti-urban and anti-pedestrian. They are regressive and they are trash. No excuse for this in 2014.

[Libertarian]

You guys sound like Luddites. After many years nobody else is showing up to develop these pieces to your standards. Atlanta has lots of unused space in which to try different things. If you prefer the legacy pedestrian experience there's Midtown and Downtown.

[clexmond]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

You guys sound like Luddites. After many years nobody else is showing up to develop these pieces to your standards. Atlanta has lots of unused space in which to try different things. If you prefer the legacy pedestrian experience there's Midtown and Downtown.

Fuqua is the Luddite here, refusing to embrace the new, a more sustainable and livable type of development. Far from "try[ing] different things", Fuqua is using the same old formula that we've seen lead to the sprawl that currently chokes metro Atlanta. Single entrance / exit, gated single family subdivision, surface parking dominated, inward facing retail, and apartments with no active uses along the street is the exact formula you see repeated across the entirety of the suburbs.

[scania]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

You guys sound like Luddites. After many years nobody else is showing up to develop these pieces to your standards. Atlanta has lots of unused space in which to try different things. If you prefer the legacy pedestrian experience there's Midtown and Downtown.

Agreed!!! What in the world is so urban about most if not all of Northside Dr???

[scania]

Originally Posted by clexmond

Fuqua is the Luddite here, refusing to embrace the new, a more sustainable and livable type of development. Far from "try[ing] different things", Fuqua is using the same old formula that we've seen lead to the sprawl that currently chokes metro Atlanta. Single entrance / exit, gated single family subdivision, surface parking dominated, inward facing retail, and apartments with no active uses along the street is the exact formula you see repeated across the entirety of the suburbs.

It's clearly not your style, but the development is totally livable.