±

CBD/SoBro/RutledgeHill/Rolling Mill Hill Projects

4,037 posts in this topic

Posted

This thread for all projects in the CBD, SoBro, Rolling Mill Hill, and Rutledge Hill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Posted

Here's an article in the Tennessean about the Downtown McDonalds attempting to receive approval for the their suburban style restaurant. 

 

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20121210/NEWS/312100072/Why-Broadway-McDonald-s-still-closed-?odyssey=tab{sodEmoji.|}topnews{sodEmoji.|}text{sodEmoji.|}

 

I hope the planning commission rejects the appeal. That being said, since McDonald's is considering rebuilding or renovating the burned out structure I am concerned that we may be in a no-win situation.  If they reject the current proposals and they rebuild then we lose, if they accept their current proposal with a building surrounded by a parking lot then we lose.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just don't understand McDonald's' stance on this redevelopment. Are they just so lazy that they can't put any more effort into the design of this site other than dropping one of their suburban boxes on top of it? All of their concerns about traffic patterns are complete BS. There are plenty of examples of other McDonald's that fit into an urban cityscape. What is the problem!? Why is the cost of an architect and some site re-grading so insurmountable to a multinational corporation?  /rant

 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Against my better judgement, I read the comments on that article and I must say that I am pleasantly surprised. I expected to hear a bunch of backlash against the downtown code, but it seems like most people support it.

We are not alone after all.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

From reading the Planning Commission recommendations, it looks as if they will be denied. Their option then is to go to the Metro Council to gain a waiver. If you look on the site there are a number of examples the McD's can follow and even some recomendations from the Planning Dept. I really think that Metro may stick to their guns on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Against my better judgement, I read the comments on that article and I must say that I am pleasantly surprised. I expected to hear a bunch of backlash against the downtown code, but it seems like most people support it.

We are not alone after all.

 

I was surprised too. I figured I would be the only one commenting in favor of keeping McD's in check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Well, I wrote a letter to the planning commission showing my support. Maybe it will be considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Congratulations and Thank You to council member Eric Gilmore for standing up for the current code and rejecting Mickey D's requests for a variance.  Although I doubt that she carries much clout with the council, her support for what should be the planning commission's decision is a plus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Bravo. Now I guess we wait and see what their next move is. I really don't understand (with what the land value must be) the short-sightedness of this property owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Bravo. Now I guess we wait and see what their next move is. I really don't understand (with what the land value must be) the short-sightedness of this property owner.

I know... You'd think they would be itching to sell this piece of land and either moving into the ground floor of a high rise, or working out an agreement where they maintain a presence there, either inside a building or with a smaller footprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Signature Tower is dead I guess? Does 505CST replace it? Any news on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

505CST is the replacement for Siggy - and the climate for corporate re-locations right now does not permit this to be anything more than fantasy and a pipe-dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I actually prefer the 505 Church Street plan to the Signature Tower.  I think 505 CST is a great design in a perfect location that would compliment the existing Nashville skyline.  The plan for Signature Tower was obviously impressive looking, but IMO a building that tall would have overwhelmed the rest of the skyline, especially at the original height.

 

I really hope that Tony G can get this project off the ground b/c I think it would be an incredible addition.  Right now it looks like he is a lot closer on his other two projects though.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The Broadway McDonalds issue is on the agenda for today's meeting. I misunderstood an earlier post, thinking it had already been denied.

Here is a link to the agenda and recommendations (begins on page 64 of the "staff recommendations" PDF).

http://www.nashville.gov/mpc/agendas/2012.asp

I must say, it seems that the staff has done their homework and suggested many fair alternatives. I really don't understand the property owners reluctance to this issue. I really hope they deny this. Could still be grandfathered into a remodel, but I think that's just the owner playing good ole boy hardball.

I think the alternative proposals are all great (or as "great" as a suburban, freestanding, fast food joint can fit into an urban landscape).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Also noted on today's schedule is the Buckingham Deveiopment (whatever it's new name is) as well as the Burton Hills/AmSurg building, which has a request to make it 3 stories instead of 4.

Edited by dmillsphoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I must say, it seems that the staff has done their homework and suggested many fair alternatives. I really don't understand the property owners reluctance to this issue. I really hope they deny this. Could still be grandfathered into a remodel, but I think that's just the owner playing good ole boy hardball.

I think the alternative proposals are all great (or as "great" as a suburban, freestanding, fast food joint can fit into an urban landscape).

My only question would be is the owner going for a remodel of the existing structure or a new structure altogether? If he's primarily keeping the existing structure, I can understand his reluctance, at least somewhat. If he's going for a rebuild, then he needs to get with the times. I wonder what the cost difference would be.

I like the proposal with the building fronting Broad with the extended outdoor area (Concept A)...it does a great job of hiding the drive-thru traffic.

Also, while I would love to see a multi-story building with NO drive thru here, I can understand that for a McDonald's, that might not work too well at present. It's not really *downtown*. It's not going to get much walk up traffic (aside from the homeless interstate sign holders -- I don't see the Gulch crowd as being McDonald's people). If a fast food burger joint is going to be there, it's probably going to need a drive thru to survive...so I agree that the planning commission did a good job of providing alternatives that do not appear to be restrict the owner's ability to profit from a fast food franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

My only question would be is the owner going for a remodel of the existing structure or a new structure altogether? If he's primarily keeping the existing structure, I can understand his reluctance, at least somewhat. If he's going for a rebuild, then he needs to get with the times. I wonder what the cost difference would be.

I like the proposal with the building fronting Broad with the extended outdoor area (Concept A)...it does a great job of hiding the drive-thru traffic.

 

The owner wants to build a new structure in essentially the same format as the old building. The existing (burnt) structure is grandfathered in so is not subject to the new downtown design codes. If they wanted to simple renovate/remodel the existing building they could do so without a variance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This maybe a few days or weeks old, not sure.  A shot of the roundabout by Bruce Cain, Elevated Lens from MCC's FB page.  Elevated Lens has a FB page too with some other nice shots.
 
10338_10151200180177746_1771908498_n.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Edited. Biting my tongue.

Edited by nashvillwill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The owner wants to build a new structure in essentially the same format as the old building. The existing (burnt) structure is grandfathered in so is not subject to the new downtown design codes. If they wanted to simple renovate/remodel the existing building they could do so without a variance.

I am inclined to say that McDonalds will end up working with the existing structure.  That's what they have just done to the McDonalds on Gallatin Rd at Burchwood in the South Inglewood area of East Nashville.  The Gallatin Road Specific Plan would have required new construction to be built up to the street.  What McDonalds ended up doing there was to demolish the play area out front and renovate the existing structure.  The absence of that play area means that the buidling now appears further back from the street than it did before!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I saw this on the news this morning. Holding my breath for something great, but I promise not to tur blue if ts not. Guess we have to wait till 3 and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Please be a giant guitar! Please be a giant guitar!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

±