A mere four-and-a-half years after it first announced the project, Atlanta REIT Post Properties says it’s just about ready to begin construction on a somewhat revised 5-story, 242-unit apartment building on Richmond Ave, just west of the Downtown Spur. The latest First Montrose Commons Newsletter features these black-and-white images of the project, along with a few more details that were announced to the neighborhood organization last month. Unlike the Post Midtown, this building on the 5-sided block surrounded by Richmond, Jack, Colquitt, Garrott, and Milam won’t include any retail space. A parking garage tucked into the structure will have 1 1/2 spaces per bedroom and point driveways toward Richmond and Colquitt. The Wheeler light-rail station sits 3 blocks east of the construction site, on the other side of Spur 527.
***
Construction is scheduled to start in March and take 22 months.
- Post Properties To Break Ground in Next Few Weeks (PDF) [On Common Ground]
- Previously on Swamplot: Still Coming Soon: The Courtyard on Richmond
Images: Post Properties, via First Montrose Commons
Once the sun goes down, there’s plenty of ‘retail’ that occurs under the overpass across the street from that lot.
Oops. That drawing says Colquitt Avenue. It’s a street, not an avenue.
Let’s hope the city finally does something about the sorry state of the westbound lanes on Richmond right at this site.
Great cant wait to see this go up ! ! !
I mentioned this before – it will be Mission / Craftsman in style. A nice change from RomaTuscaDoodledoo.
what is the average apartment occupancy per bedroom?
Bleh, and I *JUST* sold my little triplex on the corner of Jack and Colquitt :-)
.
But I knew this was coming at some point and was the reason I bought that triplex to begin with. Damn lack of financing makes selling properties to fund new ones a necessity. I would have loved to just refinance and accomplished (almost) the same thing as selling but such is the market right now.
Too bad that lot is haunted by the ghost of a murdered transgender prostitute. Oh well.
What do you do with 1/2 a parking space?
Dargor: if that was the case, what area of Montrose wouldn’t be haunted?
Dargor: If I remember correctly, the murder was mistakenly reported early on as being on that lot, but it actually occurred on the other side of the spur near the down ramp. Whatever the case, it’ll be interesting to see how this project shifts the criminal activity in that corner of the neighborhood.
And our pro-development,but NIMBY ( Not In My Backyard )mayor Annise, loves it.Since it is 8-9 blocks south/southwest of her home.
I drove by the this on my way to work this morning, and the crews are there, starting work.
Photos next time I drive by.
And I suppose I could text those photos to Gus as I enter the Spur…
@Cody: Have a look at page 3 of the “on common grounds” FMC neighborhood newsletter linked above: Either your buyer refused to sell or wasn’t even asked, but it seems like they build “around” your old property, cornering it on both sides and dooming it with everlasting shadow and boxed walls 3 feet from the property. Not a bad sale afterall in my opinion!
@ Marcel: It’s never a bad thing to be a tiny apartment complex with curb appeal next to a gigantic complex that spends money on advertising to drive traffic past your doorstep and into their leasing office.
A shadow isn’t necessarily a bad thing, either. In this instance, it happens to block noise and light pollution from Spur 527 and may result in lower electricity consumption from air conditioning.
And of course…there was always the possibility that a sale could be negotiated with the developer so that they could expand their site and make the complex more efficiently laid-out. But that’s just wishful thinking.
Anybody know how the developer got past the historic preservation guidelines on this? I am assuming the building will not be wood sided, have single pane wood divided light windows, and the other features we FMC residents are prevented from updating by the same verbage as new development must follow. i.e. “exterior features of new construction must be compatible with the exterior features of existing contributing structures in the historic district.” vs. “the proposed design for any exterior alteration…must be compatible with the size, scale, material, and character of the property and area in which it is located.”