ATLANTA | Development Thread V

[Sbgt92]

Originally Posted by Verge

Not the best design in the world...

You're being polite. It's a very disappointing design in a city trying to escape from a very weak architectural history. As a profession we should be doing much better.

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by Sbgt92

You're being polite. It's a very disappointing design in a city trying to escape from a very weak architectural history. As a profession we should be doing much better.

Where did you come up with that one? I don't look around and see a "very weak architectural history" in Atlanta, but I guess we each see what we want to see. Some are overly critical and hate everything while others can find something positive in almost anything. I think the brick building will fit in nicely with Buckhead and be timeless in a sea of aging glass buildings.

I totally agree with the person who said it would look obnoxious in Pensacola but classy in Buckhead, but we could at least wait for the final product before hating on it. I guess that would be too intelligent though?

[sbrptree]

Originally Posted by pica

We can hope; the style certainly feels about 20 years old, and like something I'd expect to find on the gulf coast.



It's an unfortunate reality that because of the way we fund our government down here, it takes far, far longer to secure funding to pay for these projects than it does to design them. It sounds like they've got the money now, though.

Same issue in Reynoldstown with the Beltline—some of my neighbors act suspicious of the Beltline, as though it's anything other than a lack of money that's prevented it from being built until now.

Juniper IS going to happen - City Council just approved the funding. Regarding the BeltLine....trail components are happening as they are cheaper and easier fund. Transit is a different story; however, if the MARTA/COA referendum passes in Nov...BeltLine transit is top on the list.

[themaguffin]

.

[RocketSurgeon]

Originally Posted by TarHeelJ

Where did you come up with that one? I don't look around and see a "very weak architectural history" in Atlanta, but I guess we each see what we want to see. Some are overly critical and hate everything while others can find something positive in almost anything. I think the brick building will fit in nicely with Buckhead and be timeless in a sea of aging glass buildings.

I totally agree with the person who said it would look obnoxious in Pensacola but classy in Buckhead, but we could at least wait for the final product before hating on it. I guess that would be too intelligent though?

If that tower had been built in 1930 and was in danger of being demolished, I think some of the people who dislike it would be boiling over with rage and scrambling to save it. I have a theory that if you handed someone drawings of various buildings without any information about who built them or when, they would have completely different opinions about them. They might not even know how to react without the help of trigger words like "historic" and "Novare."

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by RocketSurgeon

If that tower had been built in 1930 and was in danger of being demolished, I think some of the people who dislike it would be boiling over with rage and scrambling to save it. I have a theory that if you handed someone drawings of various buildings without any information about who built them or when, they would have completely different opinions about them. They might not even know how to react without the help of trigger words like "historic" and "Novare."

LOL!

[ATLcubs]

Random thought, but last night I was driving home Northbound on the connector and Square on Fifth looks hella good. I knew it was a nice looking building but I hadn't seen it the way I did last night. I can't wait to see how their downtown project turns out, because SQ5 looks spectacular.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by RocketSurgeon

If that tower had been built in 1930 and was in danger of being demolished, I think some of the people who dislike it would be boiling over with rage and scrambling to save it. I have a theory that if you handed someone drawings of various buildings without any information about who built them or when, they would have completely different opinions about them. They might not even know how to react without the help of trigger words like "historic" and "Novare."

You would have to be utterly delusional to not be able to tell the difference from a pre-war building to some faux traditional style built in 2016. It's ridiculously obvious, this blind taste test theory would fall flat.

[arctk2014]

Originally Posted by RocketSurgeon

If that tower had been built in 1930 and was in danger of being demolished, I think some of the people who dislike it would be boiling over with rage and scrambling to save it. I have a theory that if you handed someone drawings of various buildings without any information about who built them or when, they would have completely different opinions about them. They might not even know how to react without the help of trigger words like "historic" and "Novare."

Perhaps it's the very faux take on "traditional" architecture that bothers most of the critics on here. Had they hired architects like Atlanta's very own Historical Concepts firm you'd have mostly everyone happy with the design (even those who are looking for more modern high-rises) because they would at least be trying to detail the proportions properly. Based off the renderings it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to pull this off with EIFS brick (like the Brookwood Condos).

Today's laymen are still able to tell the difference between an older building with intrinsic value and newer construction methods trying to fake "traditional" styles. If you're going to go traditional design it properly traditional.

[alco89]

Originally Posted by ATLcubs

Random thought, but last night I was driving home Northbound on the connector and Square on Fifth looks hella good. I knew it was a nice looking building but I hadn't seen it the way I did last night. I can't wait to see how their downtown project turns out, because SQ5 looks spectacular.

You must have been sitting in some of that good ol' Connector traffic if you were able to steal a view of SQ5 going northbound. I totally agree with you though!

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

CODA filed for its Land development permit last week.

Coda - Land Development
Land Development for High Rise office building with ground floor retail and 5-story underground parking structure

Good to see another development with underground parking.

Also that derelict Skyline Lindbergh property looks to be on track to be replaced by a development likely called Broadstone Morosgo. ("Broadstone Morosgo, LLC" is the property owner)

residential rental community of 244 residential units

I doubt it will be a high-rise, as there was unused land behind the skeleton of Skyline Lindbergh that it will probably include.

[BunkyWay]

Originally Posted by GeorgiaPeanuts

Also that derelict Skyline Lindbergh property looks to be on track to be replaced by a development likely called Broadstone Morosgo. ("Broadstone Morosgo, LLC" is the property owner)



I doubt it will be a high-rise, as there was unused land behind the skeleton of Skyline Lindbergh that it will probably include.

Can you post an image of the render of Skyline Lindbergh so we know what could have been?

[AtlantaMustang]

Originally Posted by BunkyWay

Can you post an image of the render of Skyline Lindbergh so we know what could have been?

http://images.lmgtfy.com/?q=skyline+lindbergh

Would have been a great project to have up there compared to everything else around it.

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

Originally Posted by BunkyWay

Can you post an image of the render of Skyline Lindbergh so we know what could have been?

[Pemgin]

http://news.wabe.org/post/private-developer-built-georgia-states-newest-dorm

WABE story about Piedmont Central, the newest dorm building at GSU. Interesting quote from Mark Becker at the end, saying there's no more plans to build student housing. I wonder what that means for the just announced tower across the street.

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by Pemgin

http://news.wabe.org/post/private-developer-built-georgia-states-newest-dorm

WABE story about Piedmont Central, the newest dorm building at GSU. Interesting quote from Mark Becker at the end, saying there's no more plans to build student housing. I wonder what that means for the just announced tower across the street.

The tower across the street is a private development for student housing, not associated with the university or its dorms.

Edit: It does have me wondering about the proposed GSU development. I figured there would be student housing along Capitol Ave.

[Pemgin]

Originally Posted by Street Advocate

The tower across the street is a private development for student housing, not associated with the university or its dorms.

Edit: It does have me wondering about the proposed GSU development. I figured there would be student housing along Capitol Ave.

Yeah, but so is Piedmont Central. I guess he meant everything but private development. Just seemed confusing.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by Sbgt92

You're being polite. It's a very disappointing design in a city trying to escape from a very weak architectural history. As a profession we should be doing much better.

Extremely Polite...

[daharris80]

Originally Posted by Pemgin

Yeah, but so is Piedmont Central. I guess he meant everything but private development. Just seemed confusing.

Yes Piedmont Central involves a private developer, but there are a number of key differences.

Piedmont Central is a PPP. The university is a partner in the facility. Likely owns it with the developer having rights to income over a number of years. Essentially this is a financing mechanism to get the dorm out of the ground. For those at GSU this will be "on campus" housing. I'd imagine room and board would be collected with tuition through the university.

The new tower proposed has no relationship to the university. A private developer is speculating on the demand in off-campus housing geared towards students. The university has no control on how much of this private activity occurs except for the implications of its policies on campus housing, costs, requirements, etc.. They can drive and limit demand but they can't control supply.

[Newnan_Eric]

Originally Posted by daharris80

Yes Piedmont Central involves a private developer, but there are a number of key differences.

Piedmont Central is a PPP. The university is a partner in the facility. Likely owns it with the developer having rights to income over a number of years. Essentially this is a financing mechanism to get the dorm out of the ground. For those at GSU this will be "on campus" housing. I'd imagine room and board would be collected with tuition through the university.

The new tower proposed has no relationship to the university. A private developer is speculating on the demand in off-campus housing geared towards students. The university has no control on how much of this private activity occurs except for the implications of its policies on campus housing, costs, requirements, etc.. They can drive and limit demand but they can't control supply.

This is indeed the case. My company works with Corvias and that is their business model. GSU retains ownership.