ad

10 Comments

  1. 1

    Thomas Porter

    The neighborhoods have spoken loudly and clearly of their opposition on many levels, Community Development is recommending denial, it is many, many familie’s fervent hope that this is denied by the Planning Commission & then City Council.
    It has also been a terrible emotional drain on the neighborhood, PC-2 zoning will NEVER be right for this site. Please DENY – do not allow withdrawal!

  2. 2

    Riley OConnor

    Through the ramp-up to the City Council meeting where things will ultimately be decided, Terwilliger Pappas has been consistently trying to get a “group of citizens” to form a committee that will be used to choose what “improvements” are to be made to make this project acceptable to the community. These “improvements” come from a list which Terwilliger Pappas has drawn up, a list which is limited to a specific dollar amount, also chosen by Terwilliger Pappas.

    The first question to address is “who has the experience and knowledge to be qualified to address such a question?” The second question is “who would the community trust to divvy up the limited pool of funding for such “improvement?” And, of course, “would such a committee of citizens have the power of the law to enforce any such agreement?” Of course, having such a citizen’s committee helps the cause of Terwilliger Pappas by allowing them to show “neighborhood support” for their project. All of which is based upon Terwilliger Pappas’s values.

    When Terwilliger Pappas first suggested a five-story building of mostly apartments, the neighborhood defensive shields quickly went up. As they should have, since such a structure is out of scale with the balance of the neighborhoods and out of character with the neighborhoods. It has been rightly pointed out that Terwilliger Pappas is clearly the correct firm to be doing such a large project. But they should be doing such a project on Peachtree Road, not on Dresden Drive.

    Terwilliger Pappas is apparently being held captive by the notion that an assembled group of properties are worth far more than the market deems that they are worth. When this property group was first assembled, we were told that the property was “shovel ready” (to use the term of the day). Of course, it was not shovel ready, since it has remained vacant for a number of years. And you have to wonder how a free-market responds to such a problem. The current response has been that “nothing” has been done because the ultimate financing and resulting profit numbers at the end of the project don’t work out.

    We are told by Terwilliger Pappas that only financing for apartments is available, but the newspaper tells us that Atlanta is one of the tightest markets for housing sales (presumably for similar reasons). This is not the fault of the neighborhoods, which simply wants what is built to be congruent with the balance of the surrounding neighborhoods and not damaging to the property values and character of the neighborhoods. Perhaps in due time, the real estate market will rise to meet the benchmarks that have been proposed for the financial success of this proposed project. But not today.

  3. 3

    Nate

    Is demolition of Village Place included as part of the proposal in order to get the greenspace they continue to include in the rendering? Who are they trying to fool?

  4. 4

    Riley OConnor

    Most of the property in question is currently occupied only by trees. There is one building on the western portion of the assemblage that originally was a chiropractor’s office back in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Village Place is across the street.

  5. 5

    Riding the rails

    I think Nate is talking about the pretty green lawn that their rendering shows. Right now there is a building and sidewalk there … typical of the renderings showing lots of pretty landscaping that will not exist. Look at the recent developments in the area like the apartments next to Oglethorpe – they seem to have missed on the wide landscaping and green space…..

  6. 6

    Nate

    Yes, I understand that. My comment was meant in sarcasm. I was referring to the greenspace they depict in their rendering that is not possible because Village Place exists there currently.

  7. 7

    Kerry

    I sure hope the residents win. Look at the traffic it would add and it would be awful to have apartments looming over single family homes.

  8. 8

    Riley OConnor

    Terwilliger-Pappas emphasized that there would be no right-turn traffic from their parking deck onto Appalachee. They would build barriers that would prevent that. Fine and dandy until a neighbor pointed out that drivers could exit onto Dresden from the same parking deck and then turn right onto Appalachee. For every defense, there is usually a perfectly good offense.

  9. 9

    Riley OConnor

    There’s a lot of fantasy in all of those architectural renderings any way.

  10. 10

    bldvl89

    I applaud CDD and Ben Song for really doing their homework. They’ve recognized that the density of the surrounding properties within the BPOD (11-12 units/acre) is consistent with the accepted average for “compact development” espoused by multiple density studies surveyed by the Urban Land Institute (11-15 units/acre), and that what Terwilliger is seeking (a structure large enough to accommodate 60 units/acre) is going to stick out like a concrete wart, offensive to the Comprehensive Plan, the city zoning ordinance, and the adjoining single family homes of the BH-BF Character Area.

    Hope to see everyone reading this tomorrow night 7 pm at City Hall for the Planning Commission’s hearing on Terwilliger’s rezoning request. If you attend and are opposed to the rezoning, please wear red.

Comments are closed.