Comments on: Why 315 is Unique

By: Hagus

Hagus — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:14:39 +0000

I think we should have buffer zones like David suggested. That would solve a lot of problems. The city has every right to change zoning. They may have a law suit but I can’t imagine any way they would loose. I have a C-2 property behind me (the AT&T training center). It’s 5 or 6 acres $$$. If AT&T got smart they would sell it and move somewhere cheaper. This property was first a farm owned by William “Sly” Howard’s family and then the Oakhurst Baptist Church expansion. It currently looks like a church and is no real nuisance to the R-60 around it but when it sells someday there will be another 315 Ponce fight. If we change the zoning on it now it would have no adverse effect on AT&T except maybe property value but its value would still be very high especially compare to what they paid for it in +-1995.

By: oh plu-lees...

oh plu-lees... — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:02:15 +0000

stucco is cement. it has been around for centuries. it is a great material for quality building. sythetic similarities? – not so much. don’t let ignorance mislead the flock.

By: Josey

Josey — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:01:45 +0000

Just make Stucco illegal and most will be happy.

By: David

David — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:14:14 +0000

Atlanta and environs has a terrible history of preservation. One of my favorite games to play as I drive around is What was there? So much was torn down in the name of progress or what people thought was right which seems to change about every 15 years.

Hope I answered your question about where I stand on these issues Scott. II really don’t find anything attractive about buildings like this proposed one or the Artisan. Just too much like suburban anywhere to me. I don’t really think anyone’s going to be having the discussion about either of these buildings that you and dec are having about 315 in it’s all it’s Miesian glory.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 23:53:32 +0000

Fifi, I was speaking of Decatur’s original context in the sense of how buildings behaved historically, not as a parcel by parcel comparison. Obviously homes maintain a different relationship with the street than businesses do.

DM, don’t get me wrong. The building on the other side of town with J Christopher’s is a good example of a modern building that also does a fairly good job of holding the corner (i.e succeeding both architecturally and urbanistically). I’m not for the wholesale destruction of anything out of hand but, when confronted with a building that may be more of an achievement or lasting success in one regard than another, I see nothing wrong with evolving to address the deficiencies. All things considered, I think the current proposal at 315 comes fairly close. Not that I don’t understand your concern about the landscape and other exterior design elements. I do. But city making is a long term proposition. We celebrate our achievements; we learn from our mistakes. There’s honor in both.