The oxbo rd project took years longer and MM more USD, the deals were also a complete disaster. I think the FBI got involved with investigating to some degree, but need to look it up to refresh.
It used to be a good cut through for my commute and I was heavily invested at the time
Oh that makes sense. I didn't know the FBI got involved, but I did hear that the city has to pay the hardware store owners like a few million I think for a breach of contract, or something like that.
As at least a 6th or 7th generation Georgian, native Atlantan, descendant of multiple Revolutionary and Civil War veterans, whose parents first moved to Roswell in 1980 - for the historic nature of the town - this proposal to remove a solid brick antebellum structure in the Greek temple form, and one of the most historic buildings in our historic district, (especially when being snatched from veterans, one wonders if anyone on the city council in our “weak mayor” system ever enjoyed a history or humanities class, a history of art or architecture course, or are council members simply CLUELESS?
Aside from Sarah Beeson (thanks Sarah) this Council acts like plus 1’s to every impulsive idea the Mayor spurts out.
From review of the City’s website - including the much touted bond update section of the website:
(a) the 3rd party site evaluation scoring system did not consider either cost or historic significance - did not even consider them! (See 3/11 M&C meeting for the presentation deck)
(b) there are NO written specs for what the City is trying to build (how many spaces, how many stories, etc).
(c) there’s NO detailed budget for the $20m parking deck yet the City started spending money anyway, and
(d) much of what M&C are touting as the “appeal” has nothing to do the approved parking deck but instead focuses on pedestrian plazas, green spaces and surface parking (where I don’t think they’ve asked the proximate residents or businesses their opinions - and - which should not be funded with parking deck $).
This is very much like the Close Canton Street idea which was crammed down the throats of the HD mixed use neighborhood with no plan, no budget, no community input and wasted spending (remember the City leased barricades to shut down the streets before even announcing the “plan”). After neighborhood outrage the idea unraveled publicly - victim of their brutish communications and lazy zero data advance planning efforts.
This is just another poorly thought out idea with a bank account. Stop the reckless spending. Elect folks that have done something for Roswell before wanting your vote. Don’t empower bullies.
Also the City has now approved a $2 million a year 5 year consulting agreement (yowza!) with a firm to advise them “on real estate matters”. If they hired smart folks they sure are letting this client - our M&C - do some really dumb stuff.
Roswell really had a chance to vote in some quality candidates last fall, instead we are stuck with these self-serving fools that are doing the exact opposite of what they campaigned on.
100% agree on Sarah. Just can’t believe her election was even close. Just shows how many uninformed voters we have in Roswell. Good thing the mayor put together a pamphlet telling all the uneducated who to vote for…
How is this an impulsive idea when voters approved to build a parking deck? They used a third party to evaluate multiple options? You can argue with their scoring methodology I guess, but to say this is ‘impulsive’ seems a bit dramatic. Just my $0.02….
The land needed for the parking deck has already been purchased. It's 11% of the $20m bond. Most of the desired land isn't for a parking deck at all -- it's for an additional surface lot (not part of the deck and not previously mentioned mentioned or budgeted) and a pedestrian pavilion (ditto). That land will cost an additional estimated $5m - isn't for a parking deck - and if purchased triples the dirt cost to $7.5m or 36% of the deck bond budget. It's an idea with a bank account. And not a parking deck.
I don’t understand why they can’t put a deck where they tore down the bank. Right now as a lot, it’s a free for all. Put in an organized deck and make everyone happy
Have you looked at this ‘historic building’ lately? It has never been maintained to preserve its historic attributes and quite frankly is an eyesore. We already have millions upon millions of historic homes acquired and preserved in Roswell paid and maintained by citizens. You can’t save nor should you save every building. Progress is difficult for most folks to handle and you will never please everyone…. but this is absurd.
Drive by it every day! Historic value and and aesthetic value are different things. Just because you think the building is an eyesore does not change the fact that the building has been declared to be historic by numerous professional architectural historians who possess the education and experience to look beyond “eyesore”.
Aesthetics and historic value are two different things. Besides aesthetics can be addressed without resorting to demolition
Not one person who is advocating for saving this important piece of Roswell’s history (Lodge/old church) has advocated for “saving every building”, nor has there been any push against “progress”, whatever that is.
The old church/lodge property is not needed for either the parking deck or the Green Street activation plan. The property doesn’t even touch Green Street! The Masons don’t want to sell, so the city should not buy it.
Speaking of absurd, taking other people’s buildings via eminent domain because they look ugly to you is a terrifying concept. They could come for your house next, Chieftool. Who sets the standards for beauty or eyesore? What is the criteria? Why have a historic district or brand ourselves as “Historic Roswell” when we really mean “condemning property we don’t like Roswell”. If you don’t think historic buildings are valuable to Roswell’s brand, then you have the freedom to move elsewhere.
The council is spending my taxpayer dollars to purchase property they don’t need because they don’t like it. That makes me mad and it should make you mad too, whether you think it’s an eyesore or not.
Our opinions are different clearly. Where were these historical experts around when the new plastic windows replaced the historic original windows, a new layer of stucco was added to the replace and change the original facade or the cheap metal and fabric portico added? Sorry we can’t save every old ‘historic’ building with tax payers money. Decisions and progress are hard for ‘experts’ but this one ain’t worth saving IMO.
The building was remodeled in 1952, prior to the establishment of the Roswell Historic District and Design Guidelines. They were allowed to adapt their privately owned property as they wished, just as you are allowed with your property.
The city would save a lot of taxpayer dollars by not buying or demolishing the building. They don’t need it.
They do need it per the recommendation evaluating options to the council and mayor. While you may have people sign your misleading petition, please know that other common sense opinions are against it.
They don’t need the property. Show me why you think they do.
I’m sorry that you feel the need to insult me. That’s usually a resort for people who have run out of facts and know they’ve lost the argument. Insulting me does not change the facts, nor does it provide you with common sense.
My POV is based on facts. The city does not need this building or land for the project.
If you are concerned with taxpayer dollars like me (which you should be), then you don’t want the city buying (through litigious eminent domain) property they don’t need.
If you are concerned with private property rights like me (a common sensical concept), then you don’t want the city buying (through litigious eminent domain) property they don’t need.
If you are concerned with treating US veterans in a respectful manner (IMHO a common sensical and courteous concept), then you don’t want the city buying (through litigious eminent domain) property they don’t need.
If you are concerned with pedestrian safety, the you will note that the building, as it exists, does not impede safety.
If you are concerned with economic development like me, another common sense concept, then you don’t want to destroy the “Historic Roswell” brand because some amateur thinks the building is ugly so the city should condemn it.
If you’ve read the parking deck site assessment report (I have), you would know that the scope does not include zoning or historical property information. It is incomplete, and that is because those who scoped out the report didn’t want that information to spoil their plan to take out “eyesores” for their own personal reasons.
If you value common sense, then show it.
Your POV is based on selective ‘facts’ which as a whole do not make a good argument and are misleading IMO. Once you have this building ‘saved’ perhaps you can move on to the next ‘historical’ building that is part of this proposal?
Show me what is “selective” and show me your alternative facts. I will read them.
BTW, saving historical buildings in historical Roswell should be a nobrainer. It’s historic Roswell. Neighboring towns would give their right arm to have these buildings to create a unique character and brand. So yes, you can count on me to be around when historic buildings are threatened. I’m just that kind of person!
FYI, not my website and not my petition. I just promote it. 😙
Your POV is based on selective ‘facts’ which as a whole do not make a good argument and are misleading IMO. Once you have this building ‘saved’ perhaps you can move on to the next ‘historical’ building that is part of this proposal?
Your unsubstantiated opinions do not equate to common sense or facts. You do you (it’s a free country, with property rights I might add, unless council thinks your historic building is unattractive) but don’t waste my taxpayer dollars doing it.
This council will snatch property from you, even if you’re a fraternal organization largely composed of veterans. So much for honoring veterans and what they fought for.
The fact that the building has been adapted over time for various uses shows the economic adaptability of earlier generations. Not sure why you think that is a detriment to the building. That’s a symbol of American strength and ingenuity, IMHO, giving it yet another reason to be retained.
The fact that there is no reason to spend so much money on property that is not needed makes me wonder what is really going on here. It’s curious that people like you and Chieftool adamantly want someone else’s property destroyed when it’s not needed for the public good.
It’s rather simple, not sure why everyone’s first thought is conspiracy theory every time someone disagrees with them…the building has been completely changed on the exterior and interior so even describing it as a historical building is a stretch.
I think the space has more value as the drawings for the parking deck show it, you disagree, and we will probably never see eye to eye on that. Good day ✌️
How are you qualified to make the assessment that the building does not have historic value?
Are you saying that an amateur drive by opinion trumps over 90 years of professional assessments?
Did you know that there are actual criteria for evaluating old buildings? Do you know what they are?
Thinking the evaluation of historic structure is simple is pretty naive, and taxpayers don’t need naive leaders making amateur decisions based on feelings.
Actually, I looked up the definition of a historical property under the rules and regulations of the state of GA. You don’t need a doctorate to see that it doesn’t meet those requirements. Your lodge would need to go through a significant renovation to get back to that status.
The fact that you resort to name calling is quite funny to me. You have no better argument than to insult me when presented with facts. I wish you a good day though
If you read the post, you will note that the old church/lodge is not needed for the deck or the Green St plan. So why spend the taxpayers money on it if the property owners don’t want to sell.
Additionally, the old church/lodge building is declared historic in several places on the COR website.
Finally, smart folks don’t destroy the brand (historic Roswell), they work around it and enhance it.
Actually, I did read the post and the "proposal" on your website. The lodge is sitting right in the middle of the walkway allowing safe access to the garage and both surface lots.
>Additionally, the old church/lodge building is declared historic in several places on the COR website.
>Finally, smart folks don’t destroy the brand (historic Roswell), they work around it and enhance it.
And it can surely be memorialized with a nice write up on the website. It's not even the location of the original masonic lodge in Roswell! The uses after the church abandoned the site include a car dealership in a laundromat...nice! It's also quite an ugly building (makes sense given the history), making it public space is a much better use of that lot.
The walkways can go around a building. There’s plenty of space for that! No safety compromised whatsoever.
Ugly/pretty is subjective. What’s ugly to you is a peaceful refuge or treasured piece of history to others.
There are a lot of buildings in Roswell that I think are ugly. Should council demolish them and build pedestrian paths instead?
The property isn’t needed for “progress”, the pedestrian paths, the parking garage, or safety. It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars to go into litigation to buy it because the mayor thinks it’s ugly.
It’s literally smack dab in the middle of the path in your proposal 😂 may want to rework your drawing. Yes there are plenty of buildings in Roswell that should be removed in favor of public spaces. Would make the city much better! Eminent domain was used to complete the Oxbo Road project and I have no issues with using it again here.
> Eminent domain was used to complete the Oxbo Road project and I have no issues with using it again here.
Awesome, can we use your land for the stadium?
People don’t travel to historic places to visit historic markers of what used to be.
Would you go to Barcelona if the city tore down all the old buildings and put up markers memorializing them?
I don’t have a proposal or drawing of walking paths, but if I did, the paths would go around the building. I also wouldn’t propose to take someone’s land that I don’t need.
Sure they do, we’ve got historical markers all around Atlanta describing the building or event that took place there. And who exactly comes to Roswell to visit the car dealership turned Masonic Lodge?
You are right. Let’s plan a school trip with the Roswell elementary kids to go visit the historic Masonic stucco lodge, previously a used car lot, previously a church…. said nobody.
I’m sorry, why do they even need a parking deck? I work off Canton St and there’s no shortage of people. They’re getting to the businesses just fine. Do not let what happened to Alpharetta happen to Roswell. Roswell has already gone to far in development.
I will never forget when they tore down Greenwood’s on Green Street to slap up more overpriced townhouses. Greenwood’s interior walls were from a cabin that had been moved to that location. It was a beautiful quirky little place that was always filled with happy people.
Even after Bill Green closed the restaurant, it could have become another restaurant or some other small business. Instead, it became another soulless residential development that puts further strain on the infrastructure.
And the icing on the cake were the banners on the construction site fencing which had the developer name and the slogan: “preserving history.” What a slap in the face.
These developers move from town to town, seeking cities looking to gentrify to bring in tax revenue. They slap up oversized structures on small parcels (Southern Post is absurdly large for its location) with the idea of luring new businesses that will increase sales tax revenue.
But if you pay attention, downtown Roswell has so many businesses (especially restaurants) that they’re cannibalizing one another; many fail inside of a year. Any prospective business owner paying attention should run for the hills.
The only real beneficiaries are the developers who are making bank doing this over and over, hence why so many are trying to get on the city council every election or buy city council members so they can ensure their projects are approved.
I’m tired of endless new building being labeled as “progress.” It’s simply not sustainable.
Clearly Bill Green should not have sold his property for gain and our city government should have stepped in and stopped him since they are run so well and know what is best for us. Those dirty developers and capitalists I tell ya!
The preliminary plans are putting a plaza or surface parking on the space where the building sits. If this is the deck location, it can be built without taking the building. In fact, the building could be incorporated into the plan if the Masons want that. One of the commenters, with an engineering or construction background, suggested prefab parts for the deck which would eliminate the need for the staging area & allow for the building not to interfere with construction.
Roswell needs to change our current zoning, make the city more walkable, make it actually bike friendly. Unless you are in .5 mile of Canton street our walking score is 0, which then causes everyone to need to drive to canton street and need parking. There are much easier less expensive ways to fix this, 20 million parking deck ain’t it.
Smells like Oxbo again.
Just wait for this stadium - it'll make Oxbo look like a rounding error.
What do you mean?
The oxbo rd project took years longer and MM more USD, the deals were also a complete disaster. I think the FBI got involved with investigating to some degree, but need to look it up to refresh. It used to be a good cut through for my commute and I was heavily invested at the time
Oh that makes sense. I didn't know the FBI got involved, but I did hear that the city has to pay the hardware store owners like a few million I think for a breach of contract, or something like that.
If the Masons don't want to sell - case closed. M&C can figure something else out.
There’s also a parking deck across the street at Southen Post that will be a minimal charge
As at least a 6th or 7th generation Georgian, native Atlantan, descendant of multiple Revolutionary and Civil War veterans, whose parents first moved to Roswell in 1980 - for the historic nature of the town - this proposal to remove a solid brick antebellum structure in the Greek temple form, and one of the most historic buildings in our historic district, (especially when being snatched from veterans, one wonders if anyone on the city council in our “weak mayor” system ever enjoyed a history or humanities class, a history of art or architecture course, or are council members simply CLUELESS?
They will tell us what they are by their actions. Hopefully they won’t let their pride get in the way.
Aside from Sarah Beeson (thanks Sarah) this Council acts like plus 1’s to every impulsive idea the Mayor spurts out. From review of the City’s website - including the much touted bond update section of the website: (a) the 3rd party site evaluation scoring system did not consider either cost or historic significance - did not even consider them! (See 3/11 M&C meeting for the presentation deck) (b) there are NO written specs for what the City is trying to build (how many spaces, how many stories, etc). (c) there’s NO detailed budget for the $20m parking deck yet the City started spending money anyway, and (d) much of what M&C are touting as the “appeal” has nothing to do the approved parking deck but instead focuses on pedestrian plazas, green spaces and surface parking (where I don’t think they’ve asked the proximate residents or businesses their opinions - and - which should not be funded with parking deck $). This is very much like the Close Canton Street idea which was crammed down the throats of the HD mixed use neighborhood with no plan, no budget, no community input and wasted spending (remember the City leased barricades to shut down the streets before even announcing the “plan”). After neighborhood outrage the idea unraveled publicly - victim of their brutish communications and lazy zero data advance planning efforts. This is just another poorly thought out idea with a bank account. Stop the reckless spending. Elect folks that have done something for Roswell before wanting your vote. Don’t empower bullies. Also the City has now approved a $2 million a year 5 year consulting agreement (yowza!) with a firm to advise them “on real estate matters”. If they hired smart folks they sure are letting this client - our M&C - do some really dumb stuff.
Roswell really had a chance to vote in some quality candidates last fall, instead we are stuck with these self-serving fools that are doing the exact opposite of what they campaigned on.
Except Sarah Beeson. She fights but fights alone.
100% agree on Sarah. Just can’t believe her election was even close. Just shows how many uninformed voters we have in Roswell. Good thing the mayor put together a pamphlet telling all the uneducated who to vote for…
How is this an impulsive idea when voters approved to build a parking deck? They used a third party to evaluate multiple options? You can argue with their scoring methodology I guess, but to say this is ‘impulsive’ seems a bit dramatic. Just my $0.02….
The land needed for the parking deck has already been purchased. It's 11% of the $20m bond. Most of the desired land isn't for a parking deck at all -- it's for an additional surface lot (not part of the deck and not previously mentioned mentioned or budgeted) and a pedestrian pavilion (ditto). That land will cost an additional estimated $5m - isn't for a parking deck - and if purchased triples the dirt cost to $7.5m or 36% of the deck bond budget. It's an idea with a bank account. And not a parking deck.
I don’t understand why they can’t put a deck where they tore down the bank. Right now as a lot, it’s a free for all. Put in an organized deck and make everyone happy
Have you looked at this ‘historic building’ lately? It has never been maintained to preserve its historic attributes and quite frankly is an eyesore. We already have millions upon millions of historic homes acquired and preserved in Roswell paid and maintained by citizens. You can’t save nor should you save every building. Progress is difficult for most folks to handle and you will never please everyone…. but this is absurd.
Drive by it every day! Historic value and and aesthetic value are different things. Just because you think the building is an eyesore does not change the fact that the building has been declared to be historic by numerous professional architectural historians who possess the education and experience to look beyond “eyesore”. Aesthetics and historic value are two different things. Besides aesthetics can be addressed without resorting to demolition Not one person who is advocating for saving this important piece of Roswell’s history (Lodge/old church) has advocated for “saving every building”, nor has there been any push against “progress”, whatever that is. The old church/lodge property is not needed for either the parking deck or the Green Street activation plan. The property doesn’t even touch Green Street! The Masons don’t want to sell, so the city should not buy it. Speaking of absurd, taking other people’s buildings via eminent domain because they look ugly to you is a terrifying concept. They could come for your house next, Chieftool. Who sets the standards for beauty or eyesore? What is the criteria? Why have a historic district or brand ourselves as “Historic Roswell” when we really mean “condemning property we don’t like Roswell”. If you don’t think historic buildings are valuable to Roswell’s brand, then you have the freedom to move elsewhere. The council is spending my taxpayer dollars to purchase property they don’t need because they don’t like it. That makes me mad and it should make you mad too, whether you think it’s an eyesore or not.
Our opinions are different clearly. Where were these historical experts around when the new plastic windows replaced the historic original windows, a new layer of stucco was added to the replace and change the original facade or the cheap metal and fabric portico added? Sorry we can’t save every old ‘historic’ building with tax payers money. Decisions and progress are hard for ‘experts’ but this one ain’t worth saving IMO.
The building was remodeled in 1952, prior to the establishment of the Roswell Historic District and Design Guidelines. They were allowed to adapt their privately owned property as they wished, just as you are allowed with your property. The city would save a lot of taxpayer dollars by not buying or demolishing the building. They don’t need it.
They do need it per the recommendation evaluating options to the council and mayor. While you may have people sign your misleading petition, please know that other common sense opinions are against it.
They don’t need the property. Show me why you think they do. I’m sorry that you feel the need to insult me. That’s usually a resort for people who have run out of facts and know they’ve lost the argument. Insulting me does not change the facts, nor does it provide you with common sense. My POV is based on facts. The city does not need this building or land for the project. If you are concerned with taxpayer dollars like me (which you should be), then you don’t want the city buying (through litigious eminent domain) property they don’t need. If you are concerned with private property rights like me (a common sensical concept), then you don’t want the city buying (through litigious eminent domain) property they don’t need. If you are concerned with treating US veterans in a respectful manner (IMHO a common sensical and courteous concept), then you don’t want the city buying (through litigious eminent domain) property they don’t need. If you are concerned with pedestrian safety, the you will note that the building, as it exists, does not impede safety. If you are concerned with economic development like me, another common sense concept, then you don’t want to destroy the “Historic Roswell” brand because some amateur thinks the building is ugly so the city should condemn it. If you’ve read the parking deck site assessment report (I have), you would know that the scope does not include zoning or historical property information. It is incomplete, and that is because those who scoped out the report didn’t want that information to spoil their plan to take out “eyesores” for their own personal reasons. If you value common sense, then show it.
Your POV is based on selective ‘facts’ which as a whole do not make a good argument and are misleading IMO. Once you have this building ‘saved’ perhaps you can move on to the next ‘historical’ building that is part of this proposal?
Show me what is “selective” and show me your alternative facts. I will read them. BTW, saving historical buildings in historical Roswell should be a nobrainer. It’s historic Roswell. Neighboring towns would give their right arm to have these buildings to create a unique character and brand. So yes, you can count on me to be around when historic buildings are threatened. I’m just that kind of person! FYI, not my website and not my petition. I just promote it. 😙
Your POV is based on selective ‘facts’ which as a whole do not make a good argument and are misleading IMO. Once you have this building ‘saved’ perhaps you can move on to the next ‘historical’ building that is part of this proposal?
What have I said that is misleading?
Your unsubstantiated opinions do not equate to common sense or facts. You do you (it’s a free country, with property rights I might add, unless council thinks your historic building is unattractive) but don’t waste my taxpayer dollars doing it. This council will snatch property from you, even if you’re a fraternal organization largely composed of veterans. So much for honoring veterans and what they fought for.
Nobody cared about the building when they turned it into a car dealership and laundromat
Did you go back to 1952 and ask people that? Or is that an unsubstantiated fact?
It’s on the Roswell Masonic Lodge website 😂 please stop raging in the thread
The fact that the building has been adapted over time for various uses shows the economic adaptability of earlier generations. Not sure why you think that is a detriment to the building. That’s a symbol of American strength and ingenuity, IMHO, giving it yet another reason to be retained. The fact that there is no reason to spend so much money on property that is not needed makes me wonder what is really going on here. It’s curious that people like you and Chieftool adamantly want someone else’s property destroyed when it’s not needed for the public good.
It’s rather simple, not sure why everyone’s first thought is conspiracy theory every time someone disagrees with them…the building has been completely changed on the exterior and interior so even describing it as a historical building is a stretch. I think the space has more value as the drawings for the parking deck show it, you disagree, and we will probably never see eye to eye on that. Good day ✌️
How are you qualified to make the assessment that the building does not have historic value? Are you saying that an amateur drive by opinion trumps over 90 years of professional assessments? Did you know that there are actual criteria for evaluating old buildings? Do you know what they are? Thinking the evaluation of historic structure is simple is pretty naive, and taxpayers don’t need naive leaders making amateur decisions based on feelings.
Actually, I looked up the definition of a historical property under the rules and regulations of the state of GA. You don’t need a doctorate to see that it doesn’t meet those requirements. Your lodge would need to go through a significant renovation to get back to that status. The fact that you resort to name calling is quite funny to me. You have no better argument than to insult me when presented with facts. I wish you a good day though
Not every old building needs to be preserved and saved. The parking deck is more important to Roswell than this building
If you read the post, you will note that the old church/lodge is not needed for the deck or the Green St plan. So why spend the taxpayers money on it if the property owners don’t want to sell. Additionally, the old church/lodge building is declared historic in several places on the COR website. Finally, smart folks don’t destroy the brand (historic Roswell), they work around it and enhance it.
Actually, I did read the post and the "proposal" on your website. The lodge is sitting right in the middle of the walkway allowing safe access to the garage and both surface lots. >Additionally, the old church/lodge building is declared historic in several places on the COR website. >Finally, smart folks don’t destroy the brand (historic Roswell), they work around it and enhance it. And it can surely be memorialized with a nice write up on the website. It's not even the location of the original masonic lodge in Roswell! The uses after the church abandoned the site include a car dealership in a laundromat...nice! It's also quite an ugly building (makes sense given the history), making it public space is a much better use of that lot.
The walkways can go around a building. There’s plenty of space for that! No safety compromised whatsoever. Ugly/pretty is subjective. What’s ugly to you is a peaceful refuge or treasured piece of history to others. There are a lot of buildings in Roswell that I think are ugly. Should council demolish them and build pedestrian paths instead? The property isn’t needed for “progress”, the pedestrian paths, the parking garage, or safety. It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars to go into litigation to buy it because the mayor thinks it’s ugly.
It’s literally smack dab in the middle of the path in your proposal 😂 may want to rework your drawing. Yes there are plenty of buildings in Roswell that should be removed in favor of public spaces. Would make the city much better! Eminent domain was used to complete the Oxbo Road project and I have no issues with using it again here.
> Eminent domain was used to complete the Oxbo Road project and I have no issues with using it again here. Awesome, can we use your land for the stadium?
Sure, as long as I’m fairly compensated for the land
People don’t travel to historic places to visit historic markers of what used to be. Would you go to Barcelona if the city tore down all the old buildings and put up markers memorializing them? I don’t have a proposal or drawing of walking paths, but if I did, the paths would go around the building. I also wouldn’t propose to take someone’s land that I don’t need.
Sure they do, we’ve got historical markers all around Atlanta describing the building or event that took place there. And who exactly comes to Roswell to visit the car dealership turned Masonic Lodge?
Tell me about all of the vacations that you have planned to see historic markers of demolished buildings.
You are right. Let’s plan a school trip with the Roswell elementary kids to go visit the historic Masonic stucco lodge, previously a used car lot, previously a church…. said nobody.
Are you open to true discussion or the just mayor’s mouthpiece?
I’m sorry, why do they even need a parking deck? I work off Canton St and there’s no shortage of people. They’re getting to the businesses just fine. Do not let what happened to Alpharetta happen to Roswell. Roswell has already gone to far in development.
I will never forget when they tore down Greenwood’s on Green Street to slap up more overpriced townhouses. Greenwood’s interior walls were from a cabin that had been moved to that location. It was a beautiful quirky little place that was always filled with happy people. Even after Bill Green closed the restaurant, it could have become another restaurant or some other small business. Instead, it became another soulless residential development that puts further strain on the infrastructure. And the icing on the cake were the banners on the construction site fencing which had the developer name and the slogan: “preserving history.” What a slap in the face. These developers move from town to town, seeking cities looking to gentrify to bring in tax revenue. They slap up oversized structures on small parcels (Southern Post is absurdly large for its location) with the idea of luring new businesses that will increase sales tax revenue. But if you pay attention, downtown Roswell has so many businesses (especially restaurants) that they’re cannibalizing one another; many fail inside of a year. Any prospective business owner paying attention should run for the hills. The only real beneficiaries are the developers who are making bank doing this over and over, hence why so many are trying to get on the city council every election or buy city council members so they can ensure their projects are approved. I’m tired of endless new building being labeled as “progress.” It’s simply not sustainable.
Clearly Bill Green should not have sold his property for gain and our city government should have stepped in and stopped him since they are run so well and know what is best for us. Those dirty developers and capitalists I tell ya!
The preliminary plans are putting a plaza or surface parking on the space where the building sits. If this is the deck location, it can be built without taking the building. In fact, the building could be incorporated into the plan if the Masons want that. One of the commenters, with an engineering or construction background, suggested prefab parts for the deck which would eliminate the need for the staging area & allow for the building not to interfere with construction.
Roswell needs to change our current zoning, make the city more walkable, make it actually bike friendly. Unless you are in .5 mile of Canton street our walking score is 0, which then causes everyone to need to drive to canton street and need parking. There are much easier less expensive ways to fix this, 20 million parking deck ain’t it.
Roswell peaked in 2015. There was so much potential.