Wrecking Ball Looms for Crum & Forster Building (Atlanta, Decatur: neighborhood, baptist)

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

Problem is...very little that is old is being preserved. That's the issue. Why do "old" cities have a charm that Atlanta lacks? Probably why European urban centers are much more livable.

There is still plenty of space to develop and save Atlanta's old urban core at the same time...but that opportunity has already been lost.

So having one, out of place building in a sea of mid and high-rise buildings adds charm?

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

So having one, out of place building in a sea of mid and high-rise buildings adds charm?

Certainly a last vestige of it is lost if torn down. And there's the reverse, tearing down one will remove the charm? Two...three...four...half of them...before you know it Sort of making the argument of "might as well tear them all down...we're past the point of no return".

[DTL3000]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

Problem is...very little that is old is being preserved. That's the issue. Why do "old" cities have a charm that Atlanta lacks? Probably why European urban centers are much more livable.

There is still plenty of space to develop and save Atlanta's old urban core at the same time...but that opportunity has already been lost.

It's kind of ridiculous to compare Europe to Atlanta like that. The C&F build is practically brand new(1928) compared to what's considered historic in Europe.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by DTL3000

It's kind of ridiculous to compare Europe to Atlanta like that. The C&F build is practically brand new(1928) compared to what's considered historic in Europe.

Ding ding ding.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by DTL3000

It's kind of ridiculous to compare Europe to Atlanta like that. The C&F build is practically brand new(1928) compared to what's considered historic in Europe.

We got the green light...swing that wrecking ball.

[cqholt]

So much of Atlanta's historic commercial buildings have been lost. Looking at photos of streetcars running along downtown streets and the great architecture that once stood along those thoroughfares sadness me. We replaced a lot of those beautiful buildings with open parking lots and ugly post-modern buildings of the 60's and 70's.

[Saintmarks]

I think saving the facade is a good compromise. Citing European cities saving older buildings is not a full comparison as this type of compromise is done there quite often. From my personal experience of living in London in the late 80s, I can remember several instance where a building was completely torn down except for the historic facade and rebuilt for an all new purpose. An entire block of the central commercial district of Kingston (the London borough we lived near) was redone like this, a modern indoor shopping mall went in behind the historic facades.

Sometimes old means decayed, ineffecient, poor plumbing, wiring, rot, unsafe materials. Old is not always better. If the historic, architecturally significant parts can be rehabbed and re-used with new, modern and efficient, then it is a win-win in my book.

[cittic10]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Please explain its historic significance. It is old. It was never used for anything special. There is a lot of old stuff out there. That alone doesn't mean it is historically significant. Tear it down and make way for progress and an investment in technology and the urban core of midtown.

Since when do you support large investments and expansions of the public sector and education?

It's an old building but it's a part of our heritage. Isn't that more important than some public university churning out science-lovin' libruls?

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by cittic10

Since when do you support large investments and expansions of the public sector and education?

It's an old building but it's a part of our heritage. Isn't that more important than some public university churning out science-lovin' libruls?

Large, private investment in technology is good for the city. Don't be confused. The Georgia Tech Foundation is the private endowment of Georgia Tech. This expansion of Tech Square is being funded largely with private dollars. I'm all for expanding Georgia Tech since it is the premier technology college of the southeast. Having that in Atlanta is an incredible asset that is overlooked by many.

Science loving libruls? If you spent 2 seconds on GT's campus, you'd quickly find that the school is very conservative.

I could care less about a building that some are trying to deem historic simply because it is kinda old, but not really old. Bulldoze that beyotch tomorrow and make way for progress.

Your post makes little sense.

[cittic10]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Your post makes little sense.

I couldn't agree more.



Although, are you sure you wouldn't rather have a big church built there?