ATLANTA | Development Thread V

[kamden99]

Also noticed the billboard at 7th & Peachtree has been removed. I assume this means that plans for the new tower in that lot are progressing.

[shivtim]

A land disturbance permit was filed today for the proposed Pollack Shores apartment building at 16th and Spring in Midtown:


Also demolition permits filed for 1989-1999 Cheshire Bridge Road (Alfredo's, an auto-repair shop, and a couple of other things). Apartments planned for here as well.

[sakau2007]

Originally Posted by shivtim

A land disturbance permit was filed today for the proposed Pollack Shores apartment building at 16th and Spring in Midtown:

Shouldn't 1270 Spring be between 12th and 13th streets, as opposed to 16th?

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by kamden99

Also noticed the billboard at 7th & Peachtree has been removed. I assume this means that plans for the new tower in that lot are progressing.

I heard this project starts Q1 2016 so I guess within the next 2 months or so...we should see an official groundbreaking. Quite sad all of these newer projects are getting off the ground faster than Eviva. Eviva is going to miss out on the rental boom if it doesn't get started soon. This wave of development in Midtown will surely bring down effective rents in a few years.

Had they started a year and a half ago, they would have had pioneer's advantage. It's been close to a year and a half since the last apartment project was completed in Midtown(131 Ponce) so there's an exploding demand waiting for these projects to be completed, but they continue to fool around so they're going to miss out if they don't hurry.

Btw, has anyone notice how blazing fast Azure on the Park is going? Seriously, at the rate it's going, it will be done in 7 or so months. Clearly, the developer knows what I'm talking about when it comes to quickly getting into the Midtown market before this wave of projects are completed.

[joecool]

I am literally going to cry is Eviva get cancelled

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

Billboard at 7th and Peachtree was removed a while ago. I think they removed it when the property was sold; at least before it was presented to DRC the billboard was already gone.

[foxmccleod]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

I heard this project starts Q1 2016 so I guess within the next 2 months or so...we should see an official groundbreaking. Quite sad all of these newer projects are getting off the ground faster than Eviva. Eviva is going to miss out on the rental boom if it doesn't get started soon. This wave of development in Midtown will surely bring down effective rents in a few years.

The foundation drawings were issued today for 811. They should be going in for the permit ASAP.

[Triptychtwo]

Originally Posted by foxmccleod

The foundation drawings were issued today for 811. They should be going in for the permit ASAP.

They are planning on applying for the permit before going in front of the DRC again?

[RocketSurgeon]

Originally Posted by kamden99

Also noticed the billboard at 7th & Peachtree has been removed. I assume this means that plans for the new tower in that lot are progressing.

That was actually removed a long time ago, but I saw a sign by Skyhouse last weekend that said something about utility work... I figured it meant those power lines on 7th will be removed... that might be something.

Originally Posted by Triptychtwo

They are planning on applying for the permit before going in front of the DRC again?

It could just be for demolition now, there are a lot of things to remove from the lot. They already went through the DRC so unless the character of the design has changed significantly they should be confident it will be approved again.

I'm not sure why everyone is so worried about that project, it has never been said that it was canceled, it was just being redesigned because of a lot boundary issue... that takes a long time to do.

[1lifealex]

Originally Posted by sakau2007

Shouldn't 1270 Spring be between 12th and 13th streets, as opposed to 16th?

No it's 16th next to the Amli site.

[Frankster87]

Originally Posted by 1lifealex

No it's 16th next to the Amli site.

I think the question was more philosophical in nature. I've heard a transplant before complain that our addresses did not line up with the streets.

I.e. 850 Peachtree St. lying between 6th and 7th street, rather than half way between 8th and 9th (Peachree Pl).

[1lifealex]

Originally Posted by Frankster87

I think the question was more philosophical in nature. I've heard a transplant before complain that our addresses did not line up with the streets.

I.e. 850 Peachtree St. lying between 6th and 7th street, rather than half way between 8th and 9th (Peachree Pl).

Oh ok I see

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by RocketSurgeon

It could just be for demolition now, there are a lot of things to remove from the lot. They already went through the DRC so unless the character of the design has changed significantly they should be confident it will be approved again.

I'm not sure how much control the DRC ultimately has over what gets built. There was one where the DRC approved a building for 9 stories and the city subsequently increased it to 23 and made other changes.

[Ant131531]

I always looked at the DRC as more of a recommendation type of committee, but ultimately, it's the city that hands out the permits and can decide whether or not the developer can build there or not. Plenty of times, developers have changed their buildings to suit the DRC's suggestions or recommendations. With Midtown being such a hot market right now, DRC does hold a key amount of influence. The city likely works with the DRC closely. Developers really want to build in Midtown so most of the time, they will update their schematics accordingly to match the DCR's ultimate vision of what they want Midtown to become. The Midtown DRC probably holds less influence during times where the submarket isn't so hot, particularly during 2008-2012.

[Ant131531]

Also, as mentioned on the top of this page, 1270 Spring, The new Cheshire multi-family project, and the JPX project across from the Fox have begun the permitting process.

https://www.bisnow.com/atlanta/news/mult...ers-take-multifamily-steps-forward-55057

We should see all three projects groundbreaking within the next 3 months.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

I always looked at the DRC as more of a recommendation type of committee, but ultimately, it's the city that hands out the permits and can decide whether or not the developer can build there or not. Plenty of times, developers have changed their buildings to suit the DRC's suggestions or recommendations. With Midtown being such a hot market right now, DRC does hold a key amount of influence. The city likely works with the DRC closely. Developers really want to build in Midtown so most of the time, they will update their schematics accordingly to match the DCR's ultimate vision of what they want Midtown to become. The Midtown DRC probably holds less influence during times where the submarket isn't so hot, particularly during 2008-2012.

I think that's a good assessment, Ant. Developers want their projects to go smoothly and getting a seal of approval from the applicable DRC definitely facilitates the SAP process.

[RobMidtowner]

[QUOTE=bryantm3;7310390]

Originally Posted by Tuckerman

agreed; however, i think it would be advantageous to plan transit around atlanta's multiple nodes of activity. unless corporations are moving to locations where the employees don't have access to MARTA, i don't see a gain for perimeter as a loss for atlanta— it's connected directly to it via subway and the whole metro will benefit from the added jobs. what we have to do is ensure that people all over the metro have the ability to live in an area they can afford that has a relatively convenient job commute; that means both densifying suburban areas and connecting them to transit.

Sorry to be a pessimist but if you guys honestly think people who are going to work at this new development will actually ride MARTA, you're fooling yourselves. It's just not a viable alternative for most people. I wish it was, believe me, I'm not advocating for people to drive more. But in areas with good MARTA coverage (ie. midtown and downtown), most people still drive. I have done surveys for my job and the most I've seen is something like 12% using alternative modes of transportation. So developments like this, even on top of MARTA stations, still add hundreds more vehicles to the roads during peak hours and create more congestion. I don't think edge cities should be abandoned, but unless the infrastructure is already there or planned to be built in the future, developments like this only add to the problem. And this is something edge cities around Atlanta are notorious about. Ego before sensibility and I completely understand the nearby residents being upset by this.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by RobMidtowner

Sorry to be a pessimist but if you guys honestly think people who are going to work at this new development will actually ride MARTA, you're fooling yourselves. It's just not a viable alternative for most people. I wish it was, believe me, I'm not advocating for people to drive more. But in areas with good MARTA coverage (ie. midtown and downtown), most people still drive. I have done surveys for my job and the most I've seen is something like 12% using alternative modes of transportation. So developments like this, even on top of MARTA stations, still add hundreds more vehicles to the roads during peak hours and create more congestion. I don't think edge cities should be abandoned, but unless the infrastructure is already there or planned to be built in the future, developments like this only add to the problem. And this is something edge cities around Atlanta are notorious about. Ego before sensibility and I completely understand the nearby residents being upset by this.

Of course everyone won't take MARTA. But many will. And you are fooling yourself if you don't think a higher number of people won't take MARTA than the office project down the street.

Density like this is helping to solve our transportation problems. Sprawl and wider highways only make it worse.

Demand will ensure this office space gets built. It's not like it goes away and people stop moving to Atlanta because this tower doesn't get built (At least you better hope we don't kill Atlanta's growth with NIMBYism). The space just gets built elsewhere / in a different form. It is better to have it all in one place next to a transit line than dozens of smaller locations further away that force people to have to drive, and drive further distances.

This flawed logic of thinking density is bad for traffic is exactly what has made traffic so terrible. If you don't build a large office in downtown in 1950, you build a few smaller ones in Buckhead. If you don't build it in 1980, you build a few smaller ones in Perimeter. If you don't build it today you end up with a few smaller ones in Alpharetta. Each notch ups the number of miles a person spends on the road each day. It is a philosophy that Atlanta has followed for decades and been a failure. Time to shift towards another approach.

[RocketSurgeon]

Originally Posted by jsvh

This flawed logic of thinking density is bad for traffic is exactly what has made traffic so terrible.

The benefits of density are to give people choices on getting around and to use land sustainably. It won't help or hurt traffic much in the long term, not in a free market. The problem is less that we're building too much, and more that people have a remarkably high tolerance for paying for luxuries with long commutes. Most New Yorkers don't even have a car, but that city has severe traffic problems like any other. Induced demand keeps traffic constant.

There's little difference between density happening in Perimeter or Midtown. Traffic in Midtown is already bad on roads commuters use to get to freeways. There's a tighter grid, but most people skip that and go straight to 75/85 to leave town. It looks nicer on a map but it's the same situation on the ground, and that situation is common to just about every city center in the world. It would be crazy for any area with transit and mixed-use density to stop building just because traffic gets bad.

[1lifealex]

Top 25 cities in the United States where households don't own cars. 1.New York City, New York 55.7% [3]
2. Newark, New Jersey 44.17% [3]
3. Jersey City, New Jersey 40.67% [3]
4. Washington, D.C. 36.93% [3]
5. Hartford, Connecticut 36.14% [3]
6. Baltimore, Maryland 35.89% [3]
7. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 35.74% [3]
8. Seattle, Washington 34.91% [3]
9. Buffalo, New York 31.42% [3]
10. New Haven, Connecticut 29.74% [3]
11. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 29.45% [3]
12. Paterson, New Jersey 29.32% [3]
13. Chicago, Illinois 28.85% [3]
14. San Francisco, California 28.56% [3]
15. Cambridge, Massachusetts 27.72% [3]
16. New Orleans, Louisiana 27.32% [3]
17. Yonkers, New York 27.05% [3]
18. Miami, Florida 26.71% [3]
19. Syracuse, New York 26.56% [3]
20. Rochester, New York 25.32% [3]
21. Elizabeth, New Jersey 25.21% [3]
22. St. Louis, Missouri 25.17% [3]
23. Cleveland, Ohio 24.57% [3]
24. Bridgeport, Connecticut 23.77% [3]
25. Atlanta, Georgia 23.58% [3]