21 story tower proposed for Old Fourth Ward (Atlanta: 2014, condo)

[kgpremed13]

Originally Posted by Forhall

A city of single family homes means using available land inefficiently, which leads to sprawl. Imagine what Manhattan or Tokyo would like like with the same population if they had maintained even half of the single family homes? Manhattan would have to be about 200 miles across.

There is room for single family homes in Atlanta, but neighborhoods like old fourth ward, which are very close to the city "core" should have a lot more dense housing than it does currently.This condo helps accomplish that.

Some people want to live in the city and have a yard, should they not be able to because demand for the city is growing and building a bunch of condos would be more "efficient?" I think if a person owns the land they should be able to maintain whatever they want there, hopefully the people in O4W don't sell out, when you lose diversity its very hard to get it back. I think it would be sad if around the country intown neighborhoods close to the city core became an archaic thing of the past. But honestly, I think part of the reason sfh prices are skyrocketing in O4W are because the buyers know the lots are worth a fortune, and sooner or later some guy is gonna come knocking trying to buy their house for millions so they can build condos, townhouses, or something else.

[ATL Golfer]

Originally Posted by kgpremed13

There are houses selling for 700-800k in O4W, just because of the location.

Thank you for proving my point.

I like how when these threads come up half of the people on the board suddenly become expert city planners.

[joey86]

Originally Posted by kgpremed13

I think if a person owns the land they should be able to maintain whatever they want there...

Of course, but no one is forcing them to sell. They want to sell it to the developer.

[Moosehd]

I'm for it

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

I very for protecting SFH neighborhoods and I'm pretty sure posters on here know me as such

But this isn't a specific SFH part of the neighborhood, The area around Historic Fourth Ward Park was brownfield and warhouse

I'm against developers buying up Historic Single homes and razing them. Not developer buying up decaying brownfield, parking lots or warhouse area.

Of course. But, look at what I wrote above. The problem isn't the addition of the building. It's the specific location and how close it is to surrounding properties. It's just a bad design for that specific lot, not for O4W in general. If we are going to go the direction of having 21-story towers plopped into areas like that (several times taller than anything nearby), practically touching the surrounding properties, then it won't be long before we see the same type of building plopped into the middle of Inman Park. Some uber-urbanists might rejoice in seeing tightly-packed buildings crammed in everywhere leading to yet another packed concrete jungle, but many do not.

[joey86]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

If we are going to go the direction of having 21-story towers plopped into areas like that (several times taller than anything nearby), practically touching the surrounding properties, then it won't be long before we see the same type of building plopped into the middle of Inman Park.

Here is not there. Inman Park is a protected historic neighborhood, and the "middle" of it is not adjacent to the Beltline a future light rail line.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

"The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture."

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by ATL Golfer

Thank you for proving my point.

I like how when these threads come up half of the people on the board suddenly become expert city planners.

WTH? This is what you said:

Originally Posted by ATL Golfer

Million dollar condos in O4W? Good luck, you'll need it.

Unless they build with all cash (not happening) they won't get this off the ground. No bank will finance without presales. Hopefully there are no buyers dumb enough to put a deposit down.

So your (apparent) assertion was that a million dollar highrise condominium in O4W is a ridiculously inviable propostion.

His response:

Originally Posted by kgpremed13

There are houses selling for 700-800k in O4W, just because of the location.

Which was to say that developers are already demanding (and getting) prices in this ballpark, which happens to be true if you've been following the market.

So I wouldn't be crowing about some pyrrhic victory if I were you. Nor would I yet again be taking a position of imagined superiority over my fellow posters, since in this matter you are clearly wrong.

[Forhall]

Originally Posted by kgpremed13

Some people want to live in the city and have a yard, should they not be able to because demand for the city is growing and building a bunch of condos would be more "efficient?" I think if a person owns the land they should be able to maintain whatever they want there, hopefully the people in O4W don't sell out, when you lose diversity its very hard to get it back. I think it would be sad if around the country intown neighborhoods close to the city core became an archaic thing of the past. But honestly, I think part of the reason sfh prices are skyrocketing in O4W are because the buyers know the lots are worth a fortune, and sooner or later some guy is gonna come knocking trying to buy their house for millions so they can build condos, townhouses, or something else.

Then they should move to the suburbs. Again, no one is forcing anyone to sell. The people who want to have a yard in the city can do so, the problem is when they get angry that OTHER people are selling their home to someone who turns the "house with a yard" into dense multifamily housing. As you said, if a person owns they land they should be able to do what they want with it, which includes selling it to a developer.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by joey86

Here is not there. Inman Park is a protected historic neighborhood, and the "middle" of it is not adjacent to the Beltline a future light rail line.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

"The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture."

Are you seroous?

[ATL Golfer]

In what world do condos, even of similar square feet, demand the same price as their single family neighbor counterparts? I've flipped over 100 condos in Atlanta. Several in O4W. I have a little insight here.

The price point of a million dollars + is already lagging behind in sales vs other price points. Million + condos barely work in the ritziest parts of Buckhead.

How is the 10 yr old condo project above the W Hotel working out at that price point? This project will never come to fruition. This developer is just spinning their wheels.