What's wrong with Atlantic Station? (Atlanta, Millen: cul-de-sac, subdivision, shopping center)

[Nairobi]

There's like a page worth of me debating big box retailers being located in AS...not seeing how you don't understand that that was my major beef. As a matter of fact, I don't even remember bringing up the word "organic". That was you.

I'm guessing that now you see why I was hesitant to reply to your last post.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by Nairobi

There's like a page worth of me debating big box retailers being located in AS...not seeing how you don't understand that that was my major beef. As a matter of fact, I don't even remember bringing up the word "organic". That was you.

I'm guessing that now you see why I was hesitant to reply to your last post.

Well it was hard to determine what *the* major complaint was about AS, although it's obvious the big boxes were *a* complaint. If I was mistaken from the outset, I don't see why you'd be hesitant to simply offer a friendly correction. It's easy to miss people's points and talk past each other when it comes to impersonal forms of communication like message boards.

At any rate, the Target and IKEA aren't at the heart of the development, don't really define it in a major way, and are located along the fringes of it. For most people who visit AS, I'd venture to say you could remove the Target and IKEA and they wouldn't even know they're gone. As I stated, your criticisms have merit, but the big boxes don't impact the overall character, feel, and function of the development for the majority of patrons as much as you're implying.

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

Well it was hard to determine what *the* major complaint was about AS, although it's obvious the big boxes were *a* complaint. If I was mistaken from the outset, I don't see why you'd be hesitant to simply offer a friendly correction. It's easy to miss people's points and talk past each other when it comes to impersonal forms of communication like message boards.

At any rate, the Target and IKEA aren't at the heart of the development, don't really define it in a major way, and are located along the fringes of it. For most people who visit AS, I'd venture to say you could remove the Target and IKEA and they wouldn't even know they're gone. As I stated, your criticisms have merit, but the big boxes don't impact the overall character, feel, and function of the development for the majority of patrons as much as you're implying.

We'll agree to disagree, but It most certainly does affect it, in my opinion. As it was brought up earlier, Millenium Gate is one of the main "attractions" of AS, and off in the distance you can see IKEA. Just like that, the urban atmosphere is ruined. I'm most definitely not the only one who recognizes this.

But if we want to pretend that no one ever visits this part of AS, then I guess we can.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by Nairobi

We'll agree to disagree, but It most certainly does affect it, in my opinion. As it was brought up earlier, Millenium Gate is one of the main "attractions" of AS, and off in the distance you can see IKEA. Just like that, the urban atmosphere is ruined. I'm most definitely not the only one who recognizes this.

But if we want to pretend that no one ever visits this part of AS, then I guess we can.

You said it best: "off in the distance." I've actually spent time at the Millenium Arch and the adjacent park (and even snapped a couple of shots); IKEA had absolutely no bearing on how I perceived my immediate surroundings, mainly due to the distance between it and the core of AS. One could look at the site map and see that IKEA would do little to affect the character and feel of the commercial core of AS, the part that most people visit. As a matter of fact, it could just as well have been built independently of AS given its spatial separation from the bulk of AS. Furthermore, if you're visiting AS and you're accessing it from the Connector like most people, there's really no need to go down to IKEA unless you're actually patronizing the store. Honestly, both it and the Target come across as afterthoughts in terms of how they are spatially related to AS as a whole.

I'm not saying that no one goes to the IKEA, but it really does function as a stand-alone building with very little relation to the rest of AS. Would it be better if something truly urban was built there? Of course; that goes for anything. But what I'm saying is that it doesn't negatively impact the urbanity of AS quite as much as you're suggesting because it is, as you so aptly put it, "off in the distance."

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

You said it best: "off in the distance." I've actually spent time at the Millenium Arch and the adjacent park (and even snapped a couple of shots); IKEA had absolutely no bearing on how I perceived my immediate surroundings, mainly due to the distance between it and the core of AS. One could look at the site map and see that IKEA would do little to affect the character and feel of the commercial core of AS, the part that most people visit. As a matter of fact, it could just as well have been built independently of AS given its spatial separation from the bulk of AS. Furthermore, if you're visiting AS and you're accessing it from the Connector like most people, there's really no need to go down to IKEA unless you're actually patronizing the store. Honestly, both it and the Target come across as afterthoughts in terms of how they are spatially related to AS as a whole.

I'm not saying that no one goes to the IKEA, but it really does function as a stand-alone building with very little relation to the rest of AS. Would it be better if something truly urban was built there? Of course; that goes for anything. But what I'm saying is that it doesn't negatively impact the urbanity of AS quite as much as you're suggesting because it is, as you so aptly put it, "off in the distance."

"Off in the distance" doesn't mean "way over yonder". It's close enough that it's noticeable. I've already acknowledged that AS has its urban aspects.

The fact remains that both IKEA and Target are a part of the development, so we're really just debating opinions here. It's your opinion that the big box stores aren't an issue, but I don't share that opinion.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by Nairobi

"Off in the distance" doesn't mean "way over yonder". It's close enough that it's noticeable. I've already acknowledged that AS has its urban aspects.

You can see plenty of suburban stuff while being physically located in an urban area. Such things being within viewing distance shouldn't determine how you feel about your immediate surroundings.

The fact remains that both IKEA and Target are a part of the development, so we're really just debating opinions here. It's your opinion that the big box stores aren't an issue, but I don't share that opinion.

No, it's my position that the negative impacts that IKEA and Target have from an urban perspective are minimal due to their location within the development, whereas you believe they are major only because they are a part of it.

[ATLTJL]

If you live above the 8th or 9th floor in any of the midtown condos and have anything other than a south facing view, you are going to see something like Stone Mountain, the king and queen buildings at Perimeter, lots of trees.....not "way out yonder," but a very prominent part of the view.

So does that mean that these building are not urban?

There is just no pleasing some people. It's moot point, though, because I don't recall AS ever marketing itself as being a completely urban center. That's not even what it's supposed to be. How could it be that, anyway? It's a manufactured live/work/play area on an enormous swath of land. If it was wall to wall skyscrapers, it would be bigger than midtown, which took years to develop.

Personally I don't see what the problem with Target is at all. If you told someone who lived in SoHo or Chelsea that the basement of one of the buildings is now a huge Target, I bet they'd be thrilled to have it and not have to go to Harlem, or Queens, or Jersey or wherever the nearest Target is. Well, isn't that where Target is in AS? It may as well be in the basement, it's so far out of the way that you really have to know it's there to ever find it.

As for Ikea? It's way down the road. Ikea is probably physically further from the movie theater and Twelve Atantic Station than Brooklyn Height is from the World Trade Center.

People tend to forget how large Atlanta is landwise. Really, no area is completely densely packed in an area as large as Atlanta. Maybe Chicago, certain parts of Manhattan.....nothing else in the U.S. And I don't think that we really want to be anything like Beijing or Seoul. So it's really unfair to think that Atlanta should be developing like these places. We're still only the 8th largest metro area in the country, and I think we're way ahead of Philadelphia, Dallas, and Washington which are all technically more populated than we are (as far as metro area goes).

So to say that a development in midtown Atlanta....and not even in the heart of midtown.....is not urban enough would be as silly as me going to Times Square and saying it's too dense and not suburban enough. Why would I expect something to be something other than it is and something that would not fit in where it is?

In summation, if you want to say I don't like Atlantic Station because the condos aren't luxury enough, or the restaurants aren't very good, or the sidewalks aren't wide enough.....whatever, these could be valid points that make some sense. But to say that the entire experience is ruined because you can see an Ikea store down the road or that it has a Target in the development, I mean, it's just an assinie argument. You're entitled to have an assinine opinion, and clearly you do. Just don't expect anybody else here to share it.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

So to say that a development in midtown Atlanta....and not even in the heart of midtown.....is not urban enough would be as silly as me going to Times Square and saying it's too dense and not suburban enough. Why would I expect something to be something other than it is and something that would not fit in where it is?

That's a good point. I mentioned earlier that this particular site is physically constrained, and that's probably why it was an industrial site to begin with. Being that it borders a traditional neighborhood to the south (and the residential portion of AS connects to it), an interstate to the east, and an industrial area to the northwest, I think AS serves as a good transitory development as it were. On its own, I seriously, seriously doubt that this area would have developed into anything reasonably urban--an extension of the residential neighborhood to the south at most, but nothing as commercial and mixed-use as AS.

I do think the big box argument that Nairobi makes has some merit, but it all depends on the form and function. There are indeed some truly urban big box stores out there. I wouldn't call the AS Target completely urban, I do like how it is essentially accessible to pedestrians and even has some open space fronting it.

[Nairobi]

Two good articles that basically echo some of my opinions on Atlantic Station:

Flooring The Consumer: Atlanta's Atlantic Station - A Lifestyle Center

Atlanta's Atlantic Station: The Suburbs Come to the City | Newgeography.com

...so, yeah. I stand by my MERIT-FULL view of it essentially being a mega-lifestyle center.

Let's leave the discussion back at my original post, without worrying why I have this opinion and without dissecting each of my thoughts and trying to realign them with yours!

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Nairobi

...so, yeah. I stand by my MERIT-FULL view of it essentially being a mega-lifestyle center.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between a "lifestyle center" (when it's done like Atlantic Station) and any other shopping district.