Proposed demolition of Midtown landmark by GaTech

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by Andrea

Thanks, sprtsluvr. It is a fine church but they don't need to be tearing down historic properties willy-nilly.

It's also one of the most beautiful churches on Peachtree Street and one of my favorites...built in 1902.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/emeryjl/2264760737/

[smArTaLlone]

According to a church member, the reason they are proposing this is that someone is planning a residential project on the parking lot at 5th and Juniper so they expect that space to go away in the next couple of years.

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by smArTaLlone

According to a church member, the reason they are proposing this is that someone is planning a residential project on the parking lot at 5th and Juniper so they expect that space to go away in the next couple of years.

It's still no excuse for the demolition of historic homes. There are enough parking lots all over Midtown - we don't need more, especially at the expense of history.

[Andrea]

One can only wish people had jumped in like this in support of 615 Peachtree. It's tragic the way developers turned this grande dame of mid-century architecture into yet another vacant lot.

[MarketsWork]

Since communities are dynamic and not static, and I believe a reasonable trade-off is in order. Without parking for its members, St. Mark will eventually relocate, and Midtown will have lost a valuable neighborhood institution -- and less importantly, another beautiful historic building. In my opinion, three houses are worth the trade to keep an important community institution thriving.

[catlike]

Originally Posted by Andrea

One can only wish people had jumped in like this in support of 615 Peachtree. It's tragic the way developers turned this grande dame of mid-century architecture into yet another vacant lot.

We're due a moment of silence for this loss, aren't we? Heck, make it a moment for nearby buildings lost to parking lots, as well:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/216/5...5cb2df.jpg?v=0

Photo by Dennis Whitefield

[joey]

Markets, I'm a believer of reasonable balancing. I agree that it may not always best to have a bright-line rule that buildings and districts must always be saved in the name of preservation. The effect of such a policy would be to lock our cities in place based on older models (in the case of Atlanta, car-oriented 20th century ones). Cities become great by evolving, and I recognize that. For instance, I think a decent argument could be made that it's absurd to preserve the entirety of Home Park in its current model, and that instead saving certain representative sections while allowing for redevelopment of the rest, might be more prudent.

However, in this case, I don't see the need for the extra parking at that church at the expense of those buildings. To be honest, I'm not wedded to the buildings, because I think there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other similarly representative structures in the blocks to the east. But replacing them with mere parking works to set back the entire presence of the street and neighborhood.

The parking benefit, even idiosyncratically to the church, which presumably owns those lots, doesn't seem, to me, worth the cost, given the ample supply of parking nearby. Most church parking needs are on Sundays and after-hours on weekdays. I would be floored if an arrangement couldn't be worked out whereby the church would lease spaces in the Bellsouth deck between 4th and 5th Streets. It's a few-block walk, and hardly a terrible inconvenience. Several spaces could remain, closer (or be leased across the street in the surface lot) for handicapped parking.

The price the church could get from selling those homes (with the SPI-16 density they allow), I would presume, would be way in excess of the cost to lease spaces in nearby decks, even over a 30-year lookout.

[joey]

Originally Posted by catlike

We're due a moment of silence for this loss, aren't we? Heck, make it a moment for nearby buildings lost to parking lots, as well:



Photo by Dennis Whitefield

And for a church parking lot, no less.

[trainiac]

Originally Posted by joey

And for a church parking lot, no less.

Wow, I'd only seen old black and white photos of that theater. I had no idea it survived into the 80s. What a loss. Wasn't that the first Panovision theater in town or something? And to top it all off, I hate walking by that surface lot.... it's so dead

[smartymidtown]

Originally Posted by joey

The parking benefit, even idiosyncratically to the church, which presumably owns those lots, doesn't seem, to me, worth the cost, given the ample supply of parking nearby. Most church parking needs are on Sundays and after-hours on weekdays. I would be floored if an arrangement couldn't be worked out whereby the church would lease spaces in the Bellsouth deck between 4th and 5th Streets. It's a few-block walk, and hardly a terrible inconvenience. Several spaces could remain, closer (or be leased across the street in the surface lot) for handicapped parking.

The price the church could get from selling those homes (with the SPI-16 density they allow), I would presume, would be way in excess of the cost to lease spaces in nearby decks, even over a 30-year lookout.

As a member of St. Mark, I know for years they have tried to work out an arrangement with Bellsouth to use the decks. However, Bellsouth did not want to let St. Mark use the facilities since they typically do not have an employee on-site at the deck on the weekends. Maybe it will be a different story with at&t. For several years we have had an agreement with the parking lot on Peachtree and 6th for usage on Sundays. However about a year ago the church was told there would soon be construction on that site and we would be losing access to that parking, which lead the church to starting looking for alternatives. Unfortunately in Atlanta we are so spread out that driving is part of our lifestyle. If St. Mark does not find a solution to our parking situation, it will hurt the church.

Joey...which is worse, losing a few very run down houses or a historic church because we have to sell out to a developer? St. Mark wants to stay in Midtown and we have spent a long time trying work out a solution to our parking issues. We are open to suggestions and want to work with our neighbors; unfortunately we haven't found many options.

I have to remind everyone that the lot is only a temporary solution and does not fit the needs of the church. We have a plan to build a deck with classrooms on top (similar to All Saints on North Ave). The church is in the process of a major capital campaign to raise the funds. I am hopeful we will be able to start building in the next few years.

[joey]

Originally Posted by smartymidtown

Joey...which is worse, losing a few very run down houses or a historic church because we have to sell out to a developer? St. Mark wants to stay in Midtown and we have spent a long time trying work out a solution to our parking issues. We are open to suggestions and want to work with our neighbors; unfortunately we haven't found many options.

I really don't think it's a simple Choice-A-or-Choice-B arrangement. As an aside, I also don't necessarily think that there need to be as many churches in Midtown as there are (as the great mass of parishioners, by my estimation, don't live nearby). For its demographics, Midtown must be one of the most under-retailed and over-churched areas in the region.

I think, though, it would be very sad, as Midtown works to eliminate empty lots, for a civic institution to generate new ones (at the expense of otherwise atmosphere-generating historic buildings) merely so its outsiders can park their cars more conveniently.

Aside from the Bellsouth deck (which I'm not convinced couldn't be utilized if the two sides negotiated a high-enough rent to pay for a security guard for 4 hours on Sundays), there are public lots and decks at the Georgian Terrace, along W. Peachtree and Spring, at the Biltmore, at 5th and Spring, at Spire, and soon at Viewpoint. All of these are within a quarter-mile (5-minute walk), and most are within an eighth of a mile (2-3 minute walk).

For more creative options, arrangements could be made with GaTech or the 10th/14th-Street office building decks for parking, along with a shuttle that runs before and after services.

Even if the church couldn't make a group-parking arrangement, the income it would make from leasing or selling those homes could result in an enormous reduction in yearly dues for its members. That reduction in dues each member would enjoy could go toward Sunday parking fees if they have to park in random lots.

I don't deny that some of these aren't as convenient as the present arrangement, but the fact is, over the next decade, free/easy parking in Midtown is going to be come less and less "expected" -- tearing down those buildings now is somewhat shortsighted, in my opinion, and will leave a gash until the land is sold to developers later.

People like MarketsWork, I'm sure, will disagree with me on this, but if the church can't stay in Midtown for the sole reason that parking isn't available immediately next-door and nearly free, I don't know that Midtown's really the best place for it. Perhaps a mile or two away on Ponce, Peachtree, or Piedmont would be better.

[Andrea]

In this part of the country, we hold it to be self-evident that all people are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, including adjacent and preferably free parking.

[(four 0 four)]

Amen, Sister, amen!

[MarketsWork]

While Sunday morning is the peak period for churches' parking demands, it is not the only time that close-by parking is needed. Funerals are held at various times throughout the work week, and require dedicated parking that is readily accessible to the church. I believe the possible loss of St. Mark UMC would be a far greater loss to Midtown than any three adjacent homes. Once these old churches move out of Midtown, they will never be able to afford the increased land and building costs required to move back in. At a time when pedestrian accessibility is touted as the key to urban living, I believe it would be terribly shortsighted to force out a valuable neighborhood institution that is already within walking range.

[joey]

Originally Posted by MarketsWork

While Sunday morning is the peak period for churches' parking demands, it is not the only time that close-by parking is needed. Funerals are held at various times throughout the work week, and require dedicated parking that is readily accessible to the church.

A.) How does this diminish the fact that there is great availability in other public garages? There are rarely parking shortages, even during the day in Midtown, because the supply is so great. For instance, doesn't the BellSouth deck have visitor spaces that are available during the day for a basic parking fee?
B.) Why does it have to be adjacent, and not a 5-minute walk away?
C.) Why do funerals "require dedicated parking" (especially moreso than any other service?) What makes them different than weddings, baptisms, confirmations, or really, any ordinary service?

[BabydaddyATL]

Well I think if these people love their God and love the world he created for them, they would take public transportation and be kind to the environment. They shouldn't need any parking spaces. Maybe some new sandals though.

[AtlFan]

To express your position, in addition to signing the online petition, it is best to directly write (via both hard copy and email) GT's President:

Dr. G. Wayne Clough
President
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia 30332
wayne.clough@carnegie.gatech.edu

and send copies to The GT Foundation:

John B. Carter Jr.
Georgia Tech Foundation, Inc.
760 Spring Street, NW, Suite 400
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
john.carter@gtf.gatech.edu

[smartymidtown]

Originally Posted by joey

A.) How does this diminish the fact that there is great availability in other public garages? There are rarely parking shortages, even during the day in Midtown, because the supply is so great. For instance, doesn't the BellSouth deck have visitor spaces that are available during the day for a basic parking fee?
B.) Why does it have to be adjacent, and not a 5-minute walk away?
C.) Why do funerals "require dedicated parking" (especially moreso than any other service?) What makes them different than weddings, baptisms, confirmations, or really, any ordinary service?

From you post earlier, I have to correct you. Church members usually do not pay yearly dues; they give offerings with a loving heart or a have a minister that knows how to shake money out of people. LOL

To answer some of your questions:
A. I wish it were as simple as telling the membership to park a few blocks away at a pay lot or trying to renegotiate parking with other facilities. Looking at some of the downtown churches, were it not for their endowments they would not be in existence because of a drop in membership. I have a feeling this is due to parking issues. I know St. Mark has been successful negotiating parking at the lot on Peachtree and 6th. But unfortunately that lot many not be available in the near future (this is what we have been told). The fear is that if we do not do something now, we will always be dependent on others to meet our parking needs.

B. We would like the property to be adjacent to the church because it is not our intent to leave it as a parking lot (this is a temporary solution). The new parking will in no way fulfill our parking needs. We are raising money to build a structure that can better meet our needs in parking and provide more learning space.

C. There is no requirement for dedicated parking at a funeral or any other event. However, most churches are a 7 day a week organization and have many events going on. I know at St. Mark there are support group meetings, volunteer events, etc. And most people coming to these events have to travel by car to reach our location. This is Atlanta not the Northeast. Atlanta will never look like those cities because we are too spread out and people need cars. If we have the resources to invest in our future and expand our parking, I do not see the problem with demolishing 3 building on the verge of being condemned.

[Chris Creech]

Originally Posted by trainiac

Wow, I'd only seen old black and white photos of that theater. I had no idea it survived into the 80s. What a loss. Wasn't that the first Panovision theater in town or something? And to top it all off, I hate walking by that surface lot.... it's so dead

I've actually been to movies there, yeah it wasn't torn down all that long ago. It had been "renovated" in the 60s I guess when they did the panavision conversion, so you really only saw a big wall of curtains when you went in the main auditorium.

However I went with a friend in the place when they were getting it ready for demolition and they'd taken down all the big curtains and taken out the drop ceiling. The place was amazing, I'm sure no one really realized what a jewel there was that could have been so easily renovated. Everyone kept saying that during the Cinerama renovation they place had been gutted and rebuilt (even see article below) However, the original decor was pretty much intact, they had just built temporary walls, hung curtains and the drop ceiling. I think they were just trying to keep the demolition under the preservation radar. The place was HUGE, where you thought the projector was probably stuck in a back wall, behind the curtains, it was actually mounted on a massive balcony that had been hidden for decades. There was just some beautiful details in there. I've never really been able to find any pictures of what it looked like originally, but if I'm not mistaken it was actually built as an opera house originally.

Here's info on from the Cinema Treasures website that logs old theaters. It was originally called the "Atlanta", then "Martin's Cinerama", then the "Columbia". I didn't realize it was only demolished in 1995. It was a real crime that we lost this one, and only so recently.




+++++

This venue, located at 583 Peachtree Street, started life as a live 1790 seat playhouse with stage and four floors of backstage dressing rooms. There were 672 seats on the main level, 190 in the first balcony, and 928 in the second balcony.

Sometime around the late 50's, the Martin chain took over and completly rebuilt the inside. They cut back just enough of the stage to install a 64x34' curved Cinerama ribbon screen. Outside they added a projection booth to each side to house the three projector Cinerama system, and speakers for the 7 track Cinerama sound system. The lobby was paneled and the entire place including the seating area was covered in gold carpet. The biggest change was a false celing that was hung between the first and second balconies which reduced the capacity to 862.

It was renamed the Martin Cinerama and to my knowledge was the only theatre in Atlanta to get the full three projector Cinerama treatment. After the demise of Cinerama two dedicated 70MM projectors were installed with carbon arc lamps and perscription ground lenses. This produced a bright, beautiful picture and the Martin became the #1 place for big roadshow movies. "Mary Poppins", "The Sound of Music", and "Camelot" were among the attractions. "The Sound of Music" played for 18 months.

In 1968, the Walter Reade Organization was looking for a venue to show their two-part six hour "War and Peace" epic, and took over the lease. After "War and Peace" flopped out of town Reade never seemed to know what to do with the place. "2001: A Space Odyssey" enjoyed a spectacular 70MM run there, but the next big hit was "Carnal Knowledge", three years later.

I worked at the Atlanta from February 1972 until October of 1973. When I started, I was wearing a tux and escorting patrons to their reserved seats to see "Fiddler on the Roof". That was really the last gasp of class for the Atlanta. Prior to opening "Fiddler", they had removed that beautiful Cinerama ribbon screen from Martin's time and installed a much smaller 45'x19' solid screen to meet the technical requirements of the 'experts' from United Artists pictures.

"Fiddler" was a big disappointment both business-wise and technically. Presentation wise, when that huge curtain opened up to reveal that tiny screen, it set the tone for the whole movie. At the box office, there was still an audience for that type of picture, but the days when they had been willing to drive downtown to see it were long gone.

Walter Reade was ready to give up by now, so they closed the place up while they tried to decide what to do. They decided to go back to where the trouble started in the first place and booked in "Man of LaMancha" starting in February 1973. Because everyone realized the existing screen was a big mistake, they took it out and put in a larger one, 23x46', though still not the size of the Cinerama one. "LaMancha" flopped, but since it flopped everywhere the theater did not get the blame. Reade decided to give quality one last chance and booked in "This Is Cinerama" in 70MM since the old three projector Cinerama system was long gone. Out came the "LaMancha" screen after only six weeks, and in went a huge 35' by 95' Cinerama screen. It was the largest anyone involved had ever seen. The curve was so deep that when you stood in the middle, even with the edges of the screen, it was 15' to the center. "This Is Cinerama" looked great but did almost no business....

By it's Columbia days, the building was owned by the North Avenue Presbyterian Church located next door. Halfhearted efforts to find another use and/or tennant failed, and in April 1995 the church demolished the building and constructed a state of the art parking lot on the site. The 70MM projectors, lenses, and other equipment was purchased by the Fox Theatre and are used during the summer film series whenever there is a 70MM movie booked.

[Andrea]

Originally Posted by trainiac

Wow, I'd only seen old black and white photos of that theater. I had no idea it survived into the 80s. What a loss. Wasn't that the first Panovision theater in town or something? And to top it all off, I hate walking by that surface lot.... it's so dead

It was true three-camera Cinerama rather than Panavision. It was so wide it almost gave you a headache trying to take in the whole screen. The theatre was cool because you'd go in the lobby and then walk downstairs to the ticket counter and refreshment stand.

My friend Elaine's mom took us to to see "How The West Was Won," which featured just about every star in Hollywood. It was a very big deal.