ad

67 Comments

  1. 1

    Thomas Porter

    This project comes nowhere near to meeting the spirit of PC-2 zoning and the properties are economically feasible as currently zoned. PC-2 zoning is too dense for this area. Further, plans as submitted would require several variances if approved. PLEASE DENY.

  2. 2

    MKK

    So, according to the 2nd drawing, we will have to turn left on Dresden going north?

  3. 3

    The Brookhaven Post

    Condition 18 explains ingress and egress as: “18. The subject property shall be limited to a single full access curb cut/driveway on Dresden Drive, a single right-out only curb cut/driveway on Caldwell Drive, and a single full
    access service drive (no parking deck access) along Parkside Drive.”

  4. 4

    It\'s been nice....

    Awful, from Peachtree to Kaleidoscope, Dresden will look like Lindbergh – ugly and a heat island where we will be stuck in traffic – calling the Realtor now before my selling price decreases. God help those of you that stay. Ask your friends in other areas of town where this has already happened…. there is a reason why one apartment building pops up next to another where single family homes have sold out in less than 5 years.

  5. 5

    lkaye

    Very disappointed and concerning that Brookhaven Community Development would even consider such a high density project on a two-lane street – across from another [disgusting] high density unit. And to state that the Tag Office causes traffic is absurd and that moving the tag office will “offset a large percentage of traffic Dresden Village would bring, effectively making increases in traffic negligible.” Seriously. You can write that with a straight face? The traffic on Dresden has little, if anything, to do with the Tag Office. This is another developer tactic to minimize the impact their project will have on the existing community, traffic, environment, school system, water system, etc. It is horrid. One red t-shirt may not be enough…..

  6. 6

    Dave

    The trees in the rendering look HUUUUUGE!

  7. 7

    Dan

    This needs to pass. It will make Brookhaven a more liveable and walkable destination in the NE metro area and help boost MARTA usage. It will also increase revenue for Brookhaven. Make it work council people!

  8. 8

    Charlie Walker

    Fantastic project. This is exactly what being urban means and we should embrace it. Perfect use for this land. The naysayers opposing this project are the same people people from Brookhaven Fieldsthat oppose everything.

  9. 9

    Dan

    Thanks Charlie this is what Brookhaven was destined to be. Everybody just needs to get on board and ride the new Brookhaven liveable, walkable development train!

  10. 10

    Eddie E.

    In what universe?

    The ‘conditions’ should have included “build this in another city”.

  11. 11

    Bob Sorrentino

    I don’t know about those “Brookhaven Fields” people. But this Ashford Park resident has always been pretty vocal about what I would like to see: something that remotely looks like the Kaleidoscope mixed use, not something that more than quadruples it’s density. I just don’t see how cramming in 50% more apartments per acre than MARTA is even asking for will enhance that area for the community. I think something that follows the proven formula we have there would be awesome.

  12. 12

    Jennie

    I live in an apartment on Dresden and would not like to see any more apartments. What I would like to see is something that I could buy. I love the area and moved here to get out of Midtown with the hope that Brookhaven could be my new “home.”

  13. 13

    Sarah M.

    Charlie Walker – What makes you say that Brookhaven Fields opposes everything? I live in Brookhaven Heights and from what I have seen I’d say that the Brookhaven Fields people have helped a lot in getting better end results and protections for their neighborhood and the surrounding neighbors many times on several occasions. That’s not being naysayers, that’s being involved and caring about the community.

  14. 14

    Jennifer

    I think they super imposed the drawing over the existing google view – that tree will be sawdust long before they start building.

  15. 15

    Jennifer

    I hope you can find something – this is a GREAT community!

  16. 16

    Friend of BF

    Thank you to everyone that has worked so hard to stop this type of development. Something will be built here and with your passion it will be far better than without it. The “Dresden Tunnel” is not what that should be. Doesn’t look very walkable or pedestrian friendly to me.

  17. 17

    Charlie Walker

    It’s just seems like that. No malice intended. Most of the complainers didn’t even live here when that neighborhood was bringing in their McMansions. And most didn’t live here when Village Place was built.

    Those of us who were remember how much we opposed that. But it came. As well as the parking deck in the backyards of Camile Dr residents. And so did your McMansions.

    But now somehow that’s the new basis for comparison. Perhaps you should consider this new development will be looked upon as the next basis for comparison.

    Consider the irony in what you are all whining about. Truth is. You deserve it on some level. So you all moved in to the neighborhood and now you “own” it and you are its new “voice”.

    So are the days of our lives.

  18. 18

    GLWTO

    Dan – “This is what Brookhaven was destined to be.” Try putting this all down Johnson Ferry or Ashford Dunwoody and see what kind of a response you get.

  19. 19

    Dan

    Sarah you are right, it is actually Brookhaven Heights that opposes everything. Your neighborhood has a reputation and is well known for thinking only of itself.

  20. 20

    Sarah M.

    So you are just throwing in the towel and being vindictive? You obviously stayed. What would you truly like to see? Gradual smart growth or just to hell with it all, let it run amuck?

  21. 21

    Charlie Walker

    Sarah, I have an elderly mother who has been here for 60 years. I live with her to take care of her now and I’m going no where. But you need to understand how rediculous you all sound to those of us who usually do not speak out but we’re the victims of your McMansions and your developments like Village Place.

    The shoe is on the other foot now. How does it feel?

    So don’t come here being all righteous and high and mighty. You and your neighbors created this mess and now you get to live in it.

    This is a good project. And I would be willing to bet the farm if the developer wanted to copy and paste the Village Place development on the spot Dresden Village is proposed, you and your neighbors would opposed it too with just as much passion as you oppose this one.

    I’m going to bed. Think about what I am saying. It’s true and you know it.

  22. 22

    Saul

    GLWTO, you got that right. The D1 Angel is protecting D1 from all the intrusive development like what’s being proposed on Dresden and surrounds.

  23. 23

    Michael James

    I have been involved in a few of the projects in this area and stood in opposition with people from Historic Brookhaven, Ashford Park, Brookhaven Heights, Skyland, and Drew Valley. I don’t see any connection to Brookhaven Fields being a community that opposes everything. They just seem to be one of the neighborhoods within the current area with the most activity asking for development that isn’t suitable or compatible for the area. I appreciate all of their efforts.

  24. 24

    Terrell Carstens

    I’ll take your bet, Charlie. I’ll even come pick you up, take you to lunch, show you my home and the homes of the people that have been working on this so hard. We do not live in McMansions, we have been here for years, many of us prior to Village Place. I think it only fair that you know that. Sleep well.

  25. 25

    Rollo

    Word. Power to the people. The city leaders are the ones who should be ashamed of themselves. Losers.

  26. 26

    Jennifer

    Charlie,
    I’m a Brookhaven Fields resident and have met with all of the developers to extend the message that the community has provided. The average resident want to see development – there are a few that do not but they are the exception as you are the exception wanting high density. For the most part – somewhere in the 80% number, the desire is to see what has been the vision and what was sold as being the overlay. We WANT to see Dresden developed as a community village. We WANT to see true mixed use, not just apartments and retail. We WANT to have a vibrant walkable corridor. We ask that our city representatives understand that the Overlay needs to reflect these wants. What we don’t want is to see our neighborhood auctioned off to the highest bidder and have it look like Lindbergh. We don’t think that there should be anything higher than 3 stories on Dresden below Apple Valley and we don’t think that the densities being proposed are in line with a vibrant neighborhood village community. We don’t think that the “mistake” in density for @1377 and Rosewood should be used against us when we have been told over and over that if the city had been in place they would not have been approved. There are plenty examples of 2 over 1 village mixed use developments. I have been pulling images for some time now of ones that I have found including a few here in Atlanta – like the Kirkwood development. Take a look at them here: http://www.wearebrookhavenga.com/mixed-use-examples.html.

    We are not NIMBY’s and never have been, we are concerned citizens that want to stay in Brookhaven because of what makes it special and are willing to fight to keep it. We have more than enough options for Urban High Density living that those who want it can choose but are quickly destroying the options for those of us that want to live in a suburban/urban neighborhood.

  27. 27

    Jennifer

    Charlie,
    For the record – I’m a 3rd generation Brookhaven Fields resident and we own two of the oldest homes in the neighborhood. Sorry to disappoint you.

  28. 28

    On the Record

    A mixed use development would be an asset to the community. The density should be a transition from the Village to MARTA. 20 -30 units / acre would accomplish that compromise. Put rental apartments over retail on Dresden, underground parking in the center with open public green space on top of the parking deck, and attached ownership town homes fronting Caldwell.

    Now that’s a winning design !!!

  29. 29

    Rollo

    People would still be complaining. The Problem: That Overlay.

    Have a look see everybody. This project is overlay compliant.

    #trashtheoverlay

  30. 30

    Betty Cox

    With all due respect, maybe you (a group of neighbors) should buy the property and put what you want there? I mean really!?

  31. 31

    Matt H.

    The MARTA project is 30 units per acre. What’s your stance on that coming to Brookhaven? And it has all the things you mention above. Thanks.

  32. 32

    Jimbo Tucker

    District 1 will have its chance to get pissed. Ashford Green is coming. Just wait. But I do have to say that these Dresden developments are close to MARTA. That’s where the density should be. May not be the best project and respectfully understand the pushback from the community there. BUT, something will go there. This looks like a pretty good use of the area. But thats just me. Kudos to those who are investing so much of their time in the community to shape it how they would like to see it. Relax. Dresden Village won’t pass. Because the political chord has been struck and with 29 variances that is the city knowing these developers cannot put this there with the density the conditions dictate. I am sure if they decide to stroll on down to Chamblee they won’t only get to develop it there, they may even get a tax abatement. Thats they new cliche thing to do there.

  33. 33

    Eddie E.

    Let the City Government decline the increased density, multiple variances and clear misuse of the property so the imaginary ‘value’ evaporates and maybe we will!

  34. 34

    Jennifer

    Marta is a different beast simply because of size, infrastructure, & taxpayer funding. Many do want a mixed use development but there is a ways to go before it will be a slam dunk.

  35. 35

    Kelley

    ^ what she says!

  36. 36

    MMK

    I was talking about Dresden itself. On the 2nd image, there is one lane on Dresden with a turn left arrow.

  37. 37

    Saul

    I think you underestimate the power of D1 and the D1 Angel. Come what may, but rest assured, it will be on our terms.

  38. 38

    Kelley

    We moved back recently to raise our family. I grew up in Brookhaven and want to preserve its character. Charlie doesn’t like “McMansions” so he wants to make everyone as unhappy as he is.

  39. 39

    JWC

    That “development” is so ugly and crude it reminds me of 1940s-style Soviet architecture. The Dresden side in particular is not only not inviting or people-friendly, it’s hostile. It’s a monument to enclosed square-footage. Approving that monstrosity is basically to say we have no standards here in Brookhaven, so come on down and dump the least imaginative and least creative thing you can on us, we’re so pitiful we’ll put up with anything.

    And by the way, who is the “Staff” identified in the story, and what are their qualifications?

  40. 40

    Best quote ever

    I guess the city staff didn’t hear that “we are the desired prom date and we have standards”.

  41. 41

    Karen Dernavich

    So much to digest with these plans and Staff’s recommendations. Come on out and join us in Ashford Park on Saturday Morning for bagels and coffee as we “Connect the Dots”. Meet your neighbors and families that are striving for Smart Development on Dresden! We may not agree on every detail, but the more we talk and unite, the stronger our message and greater our ability to influence what eventually happens. https://www.facebook.com/events/1145650195492592/

  42. 42

    Susan

    “Staff is recommending the project be approved, with 29 conditions”

    Obviously someone told staff to find a way to make this project work.

  43. 44

    Joe

    Or someone told staff to kill the project without killing the project, the developer has said multiple times that they can build with much less density than the 56 units an area.

  44. 45

    Anthony

    I found this interesting – Support letters in the agenda package.
    3 of the letters are from or on behalf of some of the sellers and none live in Brookhaven, one is from the Pres. of Harrison Construction which had to tear the front porch off of a home he was building on Trentwood Place for a code violation, another prev. worked for the Hilton Head Home Builders Assoc. and is a member of NAHB, and the other 2 I suspect have some personal relationship to the developer. So much for any real connection to the community.
    This project is just to big for our “Village” and needs to be stopped. They need to listen and consider what we have asked for from the beginning? A combination of housing options and to lower the density. The retail portion has never been an issue.

  45. 46

    bldvl89

    MARTA is the anchor of the Overlay – seeking 31 units/acre. Density supposed to taper w/in Overlay east along Dresden. @1377 and Rosewood are screaming examples of what not to put on Dresden (and they both predate Comp Plan and Cityhood).

    I’d be leery of setting precedent for a PC2 rezoning on Dresden – thats the high intensity/high density stuff thats got everyone in an uproar – but failing that, there’s no continuity or compliance w the Comp Plan in giving these guys MORE density than what MARTA seeks.

    We’re also still talking “fringe area” adjoining a residential ‘hood, so I believe great deference will still be given to local govt (ie city council and planning commish) decisionmaking, that Connolly will have to show more than just lack of best economic use to prove a constitutional deprivation.

    Connolly has to get under 30 units/acre to have any prayer of not having these hearings flooded in red.

  46. 47

    Learn to cook

    The supporters seem to have a common basis for their support, a new restaurant. Can’t get much more selfish than that.

  47. 48

    Jennifer

    The developers reached out to me and assured me that they would not require a left turn. The road will be bi-directional with the turn lane.

  48. 49

    Bob Sorrentino

    Interesting article. Note this quote from it “Land prices and construction costs went up so much, the only thing you could build was high-end apartments”

    By granting high densities in desirable areas, you basically lock in the outcome of mono-cultural apartments because the high density will drive up commercial land prices so much that is all that can be built. By keeping the density balanced, you can promote access to a diverse range of residential options.

  49. 50

    Eric Robert

    The property is mostly zoned PC2 with some O&I . There won’t be any detached homes built here. Though there are good options for that inside the surrounding neighborhoods that you should check out.

  50. 51

    Eric Robert

    I haven’t followed this closely so don’t have an opinion other than I agree with the notion expressed by others that the MARTA development should be the highest zoning density and everything else should be step down/transitional/lower density. However these two lines from the article raise a question:

    1. – current zoning for much of the property is “PC-2 – allowing the development of 155 multifamily units (48.6 units per acre) and 35,000 square feet retail” this does not include a smaller triangular property that is zoned O&I that the current proposal seeks rezoning of.

    2. For the current proposal “the most significant condition of approval [from the planning staff] is one that limits the project density to 45 units per acre with a maximum of 155 units in total. ”

    So isn’t this an improvement over what could be built without rezoning? Same amount of apartments but you take out the O&I parcel. Or is the bet that someone else will build something less dense if the zoning is left as is?

  51. 52

    bldvl89

    45 units/acre is CDD saying Connolly can have the density that was on the parcels before they (the property owner) killed their own prior PC-2 zoning granted by DeKalb when they carved out and rezoned a parcel for Dixie Moon restaurant . . .

    It’s bad precedent for whenever the next developer circles around to the Terwilliger site looking to drop a 30 unit/acre project there.

    What I don’t understand is how how Village Park Place (Haven) and Village Place Brookhaven (Kaleidoscope) and Village Townhomes (B’haven Dental) and Brookhaven Townhomes (Parkside Park) – all b/t 10-15 units/acre, all true mixed use, all built within the established models of “compact development” espoused by the Urban Land Institute – suddenly became not economically viable for the Overlay.

    All this high intensity, oversized Big Boy stuff is supposed to go around MARTA, Peachtree Rd and Buford Hwy (“Priority Redevelopment Areas” in Brookhaven) – not right next to neighborhoods of single family homes (in this case, Ashford Park, though the consequences of such large scale development will also be felt south of Dresden).

    That claustrophobic “canyon” of apartments in this article looks like anything but a village.

  52. 53

    Matt H.

    “Connolly has to get under 30 units/acre”

    Good luck with that.

  53. 54

    Della Mann

    Bldvl89,

    It is prob because the property owner of those most of those developments was Dan Woodley. He the guy who develope it. For years he let them get run down and was even called a slum lord. Then came in and rezoned his own property to build those.

    He did not have to buy it. Several of the homes were derelict and some even condemned by the county.

    He got the zoning because he made it such an eyesore people wanted something or anything done.
    11 of his 14 homes in the block between Appalachee and Ellijay were condemned by the county.

    He owned those and they were rentals. There was one house next door to me when I lived on Caldwell that had a tarp for a roof for years that he owned.

    Maybe that’s how? Seems logical.

  54. 55

    Eddie E.

    I just had a thought.
    Is the red line at the top of the ‘artist’s rendering’ the right-of-way for the Brookhaven Monrail?

  55. 56

    yakety-yak!

    Ah-ha! Now you might just be onto something!

  56. 57

    Still Disgusted in Ashford Park

    On a certain level I am sympathetic to Charlie’s point of view. I do not agree with his conclusions but I do think he has a point. What about the neighborhoods ? Not just on the periphery but the lots that are/have been/still are being essentially clear cut for Mcmansions. Where is the outrage/pushback on that ? I for one, ( resident since the early 90’s) would much prefer the existing lowly ranch house as a neighbor with old trees rather than the new “clear cut and bulldoze Mcmansion”. Responsible and neighborly “live with the existing landscape and design around it in-fill housing” vs the free for all and irresponsible profit making machine for builders. Where is that list of CAND4 supporters ? Will anyone leak it ?

  57. 58

    One of the Curious

    Of more interest is the list of C4ND financial supporters that paid for that manipulated Carl Vinson Brookhaven is good to go study.

  58. 59

    lkaye

    Ah….must be Dan Woodley…..

  59. 60

    lkaye

    How disgusting of you, Dan. Absolutely horrific.

  60. 61

    lkaye

    which neighborhood do you live in?

  61. 62

    skin in the game

    Probably since he owns some of the property.

  62. 63

    Dan

    Must be. Because there is only one Dan in Brookhaven.

  63. 64

    Eric Robert

    Thanks Blvd – though i don’t totally understand about the Dixie Moon Restaurant, are you saying they lost their PC2 zoning when that happened?

  64. 65

    Still Disgusted in Ashfor Park

    Maybe I should have my over .5 residential acre lot rezoned (due to some form of hardship) to accommodate a liquor store, hip hop night club and gas station. If you don’t like it you should buy my property instead. Zoning laws – What are they Good for ? Absolutely nuthin, Say it again.

  65. 66

    BusBoy

    Yeah, just what we should strive for, an over populated tenement row. Walkable maybe, livable not. All the areas developed like this in Atlanta Metro are going down the drain. Put a lid on these incredibly lousy, parasitic, developments. Enough of this ridiculous,”walkable, livable, Millennials , we’re so with the times, etc.” nonsense. It’s all about the money and greed, talk clown somewhere else.

  66. 67

    Kelley

    Does the zoning go with the application?

Comments are closed.