Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinman
Care to elaborate?
|
Sure thing. From a strictly design perspective, you should not be building an 18 story hotel directly adjacent a 10 story building (PCM) as well as a handful of 2-4 story low-mid rises (both proposed and existing). Additionally, the watertower is an incredible feature that should be accentuated, not hidden from its surroundings.
This rendering from GT's northside drive studio does a great example displaying the setback that helps create a pleasant urban experience for pedestrians when out and about. Notice there's an appropriate setback that tapers off as the height continues to increase, as this helps not to feel the development is looming over an individual or neighborhood in an out of place fashion. This glen iris parcel would be much better if it were to step incrementally in height. Instead, we have a poorly designed proposal that resembles Houston's lack of zoning and caters to a theme park like destination catering to its own whims (18 story hotel and 2-3 story low-rise proposal next to PCM and 2-4 story condos nearby is incredibly disrespectful to the surrounding neighbors and hardly creates a sense of place for the neighborhood). Rather, this neighborhood *should* be a welcoming design for a neighborhood that people should live in. I cannot say it enough, but the hotel hotel and 2-3 story low-rise adds little to the surrounding area.
Additionally, the 18 story hotel's height alone would block PCM's own view of downtown's skyline from both the offices as well as the rooftop. It's a poor and merely selfish decision to place that tall of a hotel located there. PCM's water tower is the emblem of this side of the neighborhood and has grown/is growing into a recognizable landmark, an item that Atlanta is much in need of preserving. By continuing to dwarf the water tower from the skyline, we would be creating a fortress around an insular project rather than building out a welcoming neighborhood and design standard that should be expanded upon. PCM, as much good as it has brought the neighborhood, does not have the right to inadvertently negatively impact the neighborhood as they please. As such, it is our right to encourage appropriate development. I want to be clear blocking views is not what convinces me this is a poor proposal. Rather, the general disregard of basic design standards neglect of existing features and neighborhood has led me to raising issue with the project.
Instead of what is proposed, I'd encourage 3-7 story brick developments modeled similarly to recent redevelopment in Chicago's West Loop, with ground floor retail and residential above. Each building would run horizontal from east to west and there would be a pedestrian plaza not accessible to cars between the two buildings. The point of the development would be to encourage a place to live, rather than encouraging the insular theme park like vibe people currently visit by car. Ideally, we'd redevelop the whole PCM except for the old standing sear's warehouse. Dancing goats/city winery would also be developed in a similar fashion to the glen iris parcel. Shorter row-home like developments would line the west side of the public park in front of the "PONCE CITY MARKET" sign viewable from North Ave, as well as the east side of the property along North Ave. Streets (tan with orange outline) would be treelined, with light colored pavement to reflect the sun rather than trap heat, as well as have tasteful designs on the streets to deter drivers from speeding and help create the sense of place. Extend Ponce City Market NE southbound so it can connect with a theoretical new road connecting to Morgan street once the parcel southeast corner of North and Glen Iris is redeveloped. Pedestrian plazas (green with orange outline) would be automobile free zones. As a transit oriented development, newly created parking would be limited. Rather, shared parking would occur with the east wing of PCM, the new parking podium, some underground parking below the northwest and northwest developments on glen iris, and limited if any street parking, which would be limited to diaganol or parallel spaces. No Parking on North Ave to account for new dedicated lane transit and new streetscaping.