I tend to agree. I live neaby and pass by this at least weekly. It isn't an eyesore. There are bigger issues to address.

Really, it's across the street, in the shopping center with all of the restaurants, that needs fixing. What the heck is that ...fountain ... thing that they have there? And the wagon with the hay? That whole intersection is an eyesore.

Corner pizza - advertising ?!?! Really ?

No faded flags , on sticks sold on , grass clean .

The wagon mentioned ... Cleaned up - and the shopping center is "crossings" also look at the historical location sign ( graffitied ) - which fits the wagon ...

Corner pizza and planters--- cleaned up, and the planters have been part of the location since built ...
Must have been a code violation then too....
Plenty of room on sidewalk , unless its meant for a car to drive on

Sidewalk - plenty of room - and these type of flags must be a violation and the stores should immediately stop selling them .

How about people read the historical site sign --- the wagon relates . Yes fountain needs to go and the flags in the planters before the restaurants need to go. Those are faded. Did not realize a wagon on a historical "crossing" site is a violation of some type ... Again Brookhaven if this is a priority in first few months of government ...

Better yet --- fix the intersection, signal timing - as reported . I would prefer to see less people gunning it through a light with many senior citizens around. Add in 600 new residents in the apartments and new homes and this area is going to be a nightmare. Though Brookhaven did elect to stop the round about proposed solution that many other cities use to expedite traffic throughout , with signals of course guiding traffic .

I think the entire shopping center is a dilapidated eyesore and our community deserves better from this property owner. I support a close examination of all potential code violations for the benefit of the community and the tenants.

If the planters and the ridiculous fountain are in the right of way they should be removed. If code requires a permit for planters, flags, fountains, benches and all other assortment of stuff the land owner should be required to get a permit. It is really that simple. Any other code violations are just that "violations" and they should be treated as such. The city has a department to address code violations, it is not about having more important things to address.

All good - go welcome to Brookhaven - this is a code guy and he is here to review your premises and advise of all your violations . Again , welcome and a great benefit of the city. Now that we have a city, lets complain about a place around for half a decade - boo hoo. This has probably been around longer then most people complaining being residences . Started about complaints about flags . Maybe we can submit all of our neighborhoods for code compliance review too, no doubt would find something. Maybe people thought this is Phipps mall - or maybe the next and how about we just demand things to a place where restaurants go under as is. These little restaurants will all be there is with the new construction now having no restaurants as part of the plan .

Regarding code staffing - seriously ? It is a matter of staffing - there no doubt is tons of other places that are violations of a bigger nature . One less code person and study and fix the traffic here - but by the replies I can see how this item is high importance . I suggest we create the flag police , plenty of my neighbors do have them up, our HOA covenants so no but look at the cases , never going to fly legally.

A flag being used for advertising ... This thread has turned into people demanding a shopping center to be revamped cause we dont like it ... off the mark now a so has the entire point of this site . Goes into how people report the same thing 3 times cause they can't figure it out --- not create a login. Not worth the time for people who have irrational expectations in 6 months of a city.

OK, Douglas, we'll just let you tell us what we should be concerned about.

Yep, the Mesh Corners site is wacky and could use a face lift, yep, some of the things being demanded are completely unreasonable, yep, this forum provides a wonderful opportunity to notify the new "City" of potential hazards and repair issues.

Unfortunately, even greater is the opportunity to create a clearinghouse for ill will and animosity between neighbors as is evidenced by this one issue. The owner has receive harassing phone calls and death threats for her stance on the new city and viewpoints. Really? For being part of the process? My comments will remain anonymous for similar reasons. I also believe aesthetic improvements are necessary, there's no love lost on the property, but are we going to be neighbors that continually use public forums to report each other for minor violations? No, this will be my first and last posting. I also think this this should be a yes-no vote for prioritization, not a forum, which I'm guilty of.

Take a look across the street on the boundary of Cambridge Park at the dilapidated fencing, dumping of yard debris on right of way and unsightly brush and trees growing on the right of way and power lines before casting too many stones. (This could apply to the corner of Murphy Candler and Ashford Dunwoody, not my taste in landscaping but better than when it sat barren, vacant and depreciating, permitting aside) You are my neighbors and friends and I would like to think if ever there were an issue, you would offer a neighbor a carrot before beating him overheard with a stick, and maybe even overlook flaws in favor of more pressing business. "But the place is terrible" yea I hear you, next.

I could fill a landfill with residential landscaping and trees which overhang and obstruct sidewalks on your streets. I would rather duck my head and bow to a friendly community.

Thank you for reporting this to the City of Brookhaven. We will evaluate the situation and have one of Code Compliance staff get back to you with an answer shortly.

This almost has the appearance of an individual using government to solve their personal vendetta with a commercial property owner. Violations should certainly be addressed, but future misuse of this system for harassment of the property owner as we have seen in forums over the past year with no basis should be ignored and claimants in violation of civic spirit should be called out by the City of Brookhaven. This is not what Brookhaven is supposed to be. Go back to your HOA.

It too hope that some of the crap this owner has placed in the parking lot and along the sidewalk of this shopping center constitute code violations so it can be removed.

City of Brookhaven City Manager's Office đã giao vấn đề này cho City of Brookhaven Code Compliance

SeeClickFix service request audit initiated. Issue ID 462174 still in ACKNOWLEDGED status. Submitted request to Brookhaven Code Compliance to provide status update.

Douglas, I'm with you man! This site can be used as a valuable civic tool or a site for every old bag to be vindictive against businesses or citizens that do not meet their self righteous standards. The city should be promoting businesses, not throwing impediments in their path. That corner is "quirky" just like R. Thomas in Brookwood is quirky. That's part of its charm and that's what makes us better than SS or Dunwoody.

Good lord Rick, you hit the nail on the head! I couldn't have said it better myself! "Go back to your HOA", Hahahaha - priceless!

@Brookhaven Betty - Many Thanks, glad you agree! This website should be a means to engage in a polite but active way with the city. I too almost wish it would not allow anonymous or guest users as it allows for bashing in issues without accountability of being a registered user.

SECOND REQUEST: SeeClickFix service request audit initiated. Issue ID 462174 still in ACKNOWLEDGED status. Submitted request to Code Compliance to provide status update.

This shopping strip IS an eyesore...has been for years.

Yes, R Thomas is quirky. This mess isn't quirky at all.

THIRD REQUEST: SeeClickFix service request audit initiated. Issue ID 462174 still in ACKNOWLEDGED status. Submitted request to Code Compliance to provide status update.