ATLANTA | Development Thread VI

[Verge]

Anthem looks a LOT better in these new renderings--

[Verge]

Originally Posted by jpk1292000

I don't love it but it's nearly as horrendous as the toilet clogger he's building west of Atlantic Station, where, at least in the last rendering I saw, a huge parking lot directly abutted the street as if the development was in Cherokee County.

Bad and worse?--

[1lifealex]

Originally Posted by Verge

Is this thing being build by 2 people?--
Slowest project I've ever seen. Whole high-rises have been build in shorter time periods. That said, its a nice design--

not giving an excuse for why this took so long to get built but this building is a lot bigger than some of the high-rises that was built tall doesn't always mean big

[arctk2014]

Originally Posted by 1lifealex

not giving an excuse for why this took so long to get built but this building is a lot bigger than some of the high-rises that was built tall doesn't always mean big

I believe the GC has been self-performing the work for this one as well.

[shivtim]

A couple of planning permits were filed yesterday for new condos on the Northeast corner of Krog and Edgewood.
"New construction of residential condominiums above integrated parking; renovation/addition of contributing structure at corner of Edgewood Ave and Krog St for commercial use" and "construction of buildings... that exceed 35 ft. in height."

Proposed site plan PDF. 87K sqft residential (49 units), 950 sqft commercial. Main (new) building would be 60 feet tall.

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by shivtim

A couple of planning permits were filed yesterday for new condos on the Northeast corner of Krog and Edgewood.
"New construction of residential condominiums above integrated parking; renovation/addition of contributing structure at corner of Edgewood Ave and Krog St for commercial use" and "construction of buildings... that exceed 35 ft. in height."

Proposed site plan PDF. 87K sqft residential (49 units), 950 sqft commercial. Main (new) building would be 60 feet tall.

While I'm glad to see new condos going in, I will be sad to see those murals go! At least the brick building (and presumably it's mural) on the corner will be staying. 49 units seems a bit small for the area though, no?

Also have to consider when the southwest corner of that intersection will be redeveloped.

[MARTAisSmarta]

Originally Posted by arctk2014

I believe the GC has been self-performing the work for this one as well.

The developer - Hanover - acts as a GC on this project, hiring the grader, concrete sub, stick framing, etc. Same hierarchy as the Broadstone Juniper job.

[shivtim]

Sigh. Commercial land development permit and building review filed for a self-storage facility at 924 Northside drive.

[shivtim]

525 North paid their development fees ($126K). Looks like this one is moving forward.

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by shivtim

Sigh. Commercial land development permit and building review filed for a self-storage facility at 924 Northside drive.

That is a critical location and an awful use. Are we too late on this parcel or can we push back?

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by shivtim

525 North paid their development fees ($126K). Looks like this one is moving forward.

IMO, very difficult to be excited about this project all things considered. 525 North was substantially a better proposal, even with the commercial offices included int he Crescent proposal. Hopefully we eventually see proposals on either side of Glen Iris just south of North Ave that make up for it, each of which should include retail.

[The Best Forumer]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

Star Metals

This project must happen!!! I think these renderings are new.

Whoa.... the first one is NICE!!!!

[Triptychtwo]

Originally Posted by Street Advocate

That is a critical location and an awful use. Are we too late on this parcel or can we push back?

As far as I'm aware this one is too far along.

But, I believe ordinance 17-O-1159 was just approved by the ZRB to prevent any future self-storage facilities in O-I, C-3, I-1, I-2 and MRC within the Beltline Overlay. This should prevent the ease of which these last three or four (including one on Monroe) have gotten approval.

[Neighbor]

Originally Posted by Street Advocate

IMO, very difficult to be excited about this project all things considered. 525 North was substantially a better proposal, even with the commercial offices included int he Crescent proposal. Hopefully we eventually see proposals on either side of Glen Iris just south of North Ave that make up for it, each of which should include retail.

Agreed, this building is total garbage. No restaurants or retail and the cheapest possible materials. 525 North was leagues better and provided more office right next to PCM which is already commanding the highest rent in the city. How on earth was the original developer unable to get funding???

[Martinman]

Originally Posted by Triptychtwo

As far as I'm aware this one is too far along.

But, I believe ordinance 17-O-1159 was just approved by the ZRB to prevent any future self-storage facilities in O-I, C-3, I-1, I-2 and MRC within the Beltline Overlay. This should prevent the ease of which these last three or four (including one on Monroe) have gotten approval.

That's great. These storage places are getting out of control.

RE: 565 North

It's ashamed that beautiful office proposal didn't make it.

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by Triptychtwo

As far as I'm aware this one is too far along.

But, I believe ordinance 17-O-1159 was just approved by the ZRB to prevent any future self-storage facilities in O-I, C-3, I-1, I-2 and MRC within the Beltline Overlay. This should prevent the ease of which these last three or four (including one on Monroe) have gotten approval.

This is absolutely ridiculous. As good as it is to review zoning and work on city design, shame on the planning department, city council, and the city in general for continuing to allow this 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 on a major planned transit thoroughfare. That's two storage units coming in at prime locations less than a mile form one another because they've been lacking the foresight or inability to deliver on limiting 🞵🞵🞵🞵 developments.

Edit: Pardon my rant. Seriously, if anyone on here works for or knows the planning department, it is not arduous. Use GIS to run an an analysis on industrial zoned properties and flag those industrial zoned properties that are within walking distance to the BeltLine, proposed transit infrastructure, and public parks. Then, write a moratorium to cease development at these locations until the zoning has been been updated and propose it to city council members ASAP.

[Verge]

Originally Posted by Street Advocate

This is absolutely ridiculous. As good as it is to review zoning and work on city design, shame on the planning department, city council, and the city in general for continuing to allow this 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 on a major planned transit thoroughfare. That's two storage units coming in at prime locations less than a mile form one another because they've been lacking the foresight or inability to deliver on limiting 🞵🞵🞵🞵 developments.

Edit: Pardon my rant. Seriously, if anyone on here works for or knows the planning department, it is not arduous. Use GIS to run an an analysis on industrial zoned properties and flag those industrial zoned properties that are within walking distance to the BeltLine, proposed transit infrastructure, and public parks. Then, write a moratorium to cease development at these locations until the zoning has been been updated and propose it to city council members ASAP.

If a use is allowed by zoning and it meets overlay requirements-- then there is no legal way to stop it-- Hence the moratorium and zoning changes. You cannot declare a moratorium retroactively BTW--

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by Verge

If a use is allowed by zoning and it meets overlay requirements-- then there is no legal way to stop it-- Hence the moratorium and zoning changes. You cannot declare a moratorium retroactively BTW--

They could have introduced a moratorium and had it approved well earlier within this development cycle, not to mention make it more encompassing. Their job is to protect and promote good neighborhoods and they continue to be steps behind.

[jnihiser]

The Willoughby:


Chamblee:


Memorial:




Centennial Park:






Belmont (this project is surprisingly nice):






New Hospital off of North Druid:

[arctk2014]

Originally Posted by Triptychtwo

As far as I'm aware this one is too far along.

But, I believe ordinance 17-O-1159 was just approved by the ZRB to prevent any future self-storage facilities in O-I, C-3, I-1, I-2 and MRC within the Beltline Overlay. This should prevent the ease of which these last three or four (including one on Monroe) have gotten approval.

FYI - Fuqua's project at Northside/17th street isn't in the BeltLine overlay.