Atlanta is a young, big city. First and foremost, it is a place that aspires to be known as both progressive and hip. It is a beacon of diversity and sophistication in what was once viewed, and still is by some, as the backwater South.

In the relentless pursuit of reputation, wealth and growth, some important things have been overlooked. The city's increasingly large but still struggling arts community fights against the perception (and too often the reality) that Atlanta is not an arts-friendly town. It is because of that, I believe, that the reported destruction of the Buckhead Library seemed to strike such a deep chord with so many artists and architects in the city.

(ENLARGE)

David M. Hamilton is the 2008 co-chair of the Metropolitan Public Arts Coalition and a principal at an Atlanta architectural firm.

The very notion that a developer seemingly committed to public art would advocate for the demolition of what is arguably one of the most significant pieces of art and architecture in Atlanta seemed to confirm their worst fears about the direction of the city.

Replacement of a truly world-class and public piece of architecture with more shopping, parking and luxury living seemed to indicate that the city no longer held a place for the quirky, the experimental or frankly even the interesting things that make a culturally vibrant community.

For all the opinions about the Buckhead Library, it is a nationally and internationally recognized work of art and architecture that has appeared in a multitude of journals and other publications on architecture.

The library, designed by the acclaimed Atlanta firm of Mack Scogin and Merrill Elam Architects, has won a number of significant design awards including the 1993 National American Institute of Architects Award for Excellence. This yearly National AIA Honor Award is indeed a very difficult award to win and is only given to what is considered the very best work in the country. The honor award is the highest form of that award.

The building is certainly a contemporary landmark for the city of Atlanta as well as the entire Southeastern region as students and practicing architects alike from around the country make regular pilgrimages to view and study this groundbreaking work of art and architecture.

As one of the principals of an architecture firm based in Atlanta, I can truly say that the destruction of this landmark work of architecture would make it harder for us to attract the kind of national talent that we need to remain competitive. Young architects are very selective about where they choose to live and make a living. The reputation of a city for respecting and allowing innovative and sophisticated architecture rank high on the list of a city's attributes for them. I suspect other creative fields have similar perspectives and problems.

All too often in Atlanta we have exchanged great art and great potential for immediate and simple gain. When we as a city and our leadership stand for the long-term good of the city, for developing the deep culture and the real future potential of the place where we live and work, then we will truly have entered that upper echelon of towns and cities around the world that Atlanta so clearly aspires to.