222 2nd Ave. South, 25 Stories|305 Feet, 391,000 sq. ft., $100 million

[NashRugger]

I appreciate that you're trying to be fair and withhold judgement until you gather all the facts.  I do respect that.  But c'mon man, you can't tell me that you look at these renderings and see something other than a box.  All the design elements might not be totally clear, but it's enough that you can make out the general shape of the building.

 

I don't know if I've ever been more disappointed with a proposal.  I don't mean to be disrespectful, because I appreciate what Mr. Hayes has done for the community, but seriously, can this city recruit some architects for once that know what they're doing and have experience beyond suburban office parks?  This lazy box thing is getting old really fast.

How is there going to be a parking podium when the press release stated parking would be underground? I mean hopefully that's the case and this isn't the final product and just a relative placeholder until final renderings and design are finalized, which can be redone several times, i.e. 505CST, Eakin's Demonbreun, Aerston, etc. 

 

Also, the city recruiting architects for a private development? Yeah, that's not how it works exactly. 

 

This is one thing I do get a kick out of, everyone for many years were constantly complaining of surface lots and the like, but even when a new development just happens to be a box, we're pissed off. Beggars can't be choosers in most situations, we don't have companies lined up directly for massive relocations or upping their need for space, so you get something potentially like this to get a good return while developing a property. Honestly, if it weren't for the crash a few years back and banks not be so stingy on loaning, even when it's clear our market NEEDS the space, this is what can happen. I'd rather take a modern glass box over a blank piece of pavement any day since the original buildings from decades ago are long gone. 

 

The stripes, I hope, will be LED light strips, like Hunt Oil's HQ in Dallas and the new KPMG Center at Hall Arts in Dallas that just topped off. 

 

Hunt Oil HQ

 

KMPG Center at Hall Arts

Edited March 3, 2015 by NashRugger

[dmillsphoto]

Not at all, just making sure everyone is aware. Maybe he'll respond.

[MLBrumby]

If anything... he should know better. This really is a bland design that completely ignores the striking designs in other cities even for parking garages. Now, it may be that Mr. Hayes' involvement here is really nothing more than partial ownership by virtue of owning the site.  If so, then shame on Hines for putting something in such a prominent place that doesn't even measure "up" to the architectural "ornamentation" of their 2525 (even with its horrid parking lot in front). Disappointed. Now... no more comments about this one from me. 

[barakat]

I like this design for these reasons: The Liggett building is preserved. The entire block is used, no surface lots. Lots of retail. The height is more than would be normally allowed under DTC zoning [was a variance needed?]. It's subtle in these images, but pattern in the glass will be very attractive when built.  Regarding the garage complaints - so if all the parking were underground, this would be 14 stories, and probably twice as expensive. I don't understand why people complain about above-ground garages when the facade doesn't reveal the purpose. Hayes is right - this building will activate the park in significant ways.  It's a good design, considering all the constraints.  It has to be appealing to top-notch office tenants, and I believe this will be the case.

[titanhog]

If the "glass box" was from the ground up...ok...but having that huge concrete parking garage about 100' high across from the park and the only thing you'll see from ground level...like a huge granite boulder...is about the worse thing we could get.  At least with the parking lot there, you could still get a good view of Sobro and nicer structures.  This is like putting up a large tarp to block the view.

[nashwatcher]

There's still plenty of time to make the final product look much better. Hopefully those in charge have the desire to.

[Vrtigo]

At least it is on the KVB side of the pedestrian bridge. We won't have to worry about it standing front and center, blocking the view in the most photographed spot in the city.

[BnaBreaker]

How is there going to be a parking podium when the press release stated parking would be underground? I mean hopefully that's the case and this isn't the final product and just a relative placeholder until final renderings and design are finalized, which can be redone several times, i.e. 505CST, Eakin's Demonbreun, Aerston, etc. 

 

Also, the city recruiting architects for a private development? Yeah, that's not how it works exactly. 

 

This is one thing I do get a kick out of, everyone for many years were constantly complaining of surface lots and the like, but even when a new development just happens to be a box, we're pissed off. Beggars can't be choosers in most situations, we don't have companies lined up directly for massive relocations or upping their need for space, so you get something potentially like this to get a good return while developing a property. Honestly, if it weren't for the crash a few years back and banks not be so stingy on loaning, even when it's clear our market NEEDS the space, this is what can happen. I'd rather take a modern glass box over a blank piece of pavement any day since the original buildings from decades ago are long gone. 

 

The stripes, I hope, will be LED light strips, like Hunt Oil's HQ in Dallas and the new KPMG Center at Hall Arts in Dallas that just topped off. 

 

I didn't mean that in the sense the city government recruits architects, I just meant that I wish Nashville in general could attract more accomplished architects.  In any case, I hope you're correct that this is just a preliminary design.  I would be more than happy if it looked like either of the two buildings you posted, and neither of those are exactly heart stoppers. 

 

I also disagree with you when you say beggars can't be choosers.  Smeagolsfree just stated in another thread that we have at least 40 buildings of over 100 feet either U/C or proposed in Davidson County.  We are definitely not beggars in this situation.  Personally, if it meant we'd get a building who's design would be well received and would stand the test of time, then yeah, I'd rather have a parking lot for a few more years.

Edited March 3, 2015 by BnaBreaker

[SoundScan]

How is there going to be a parking podium when the press release stated parking would be underground? I mean hopefully that's the case and this isn't the final product and just a relative placeholder until final renderings and design are finalized, which can be redone several times, i.e. 505CST, Eakin's Demonbreun, Aerston, etc. 

 

Also, the city recruiting architects for a private development? Yeah, that's not how it works exactly. 

 

This is one thing I do get a kick out of, everyone for many years were constantly complaining of surface lots and the like, but even when a new development just happens to be a box, we're pissed off. Beggars can't be choosers in most situations, we don't have companies lined up directly for massive relocations or upping their need for space, so you get something potentially like this to get a good return while developing a property. Honestly, if it weren't for the crash a few years back and banks not be so stingy on loaning, even when it's clear our market NEEDS the space, this is what can happen. I'd rather take a modern glass box over a blank piece of pavement any day since the original buildings from decades ago are long gone. 

 

 

 

The site plan is in the Nashville Post article: https://www.nashvillepost.com/news/2015/3/3/mdha_approves_design_for_proposed_sobro_tower

 

We are replacing a parking lot with 10 parking lots stacked on top of one another.

 

I understand the economics involved. Underground parking is expensive to build. You need large floorplates for Class A office. Nashville is a car town so you need parking for every employee. However, there are many cities that deal with these same realities and get better buildings. And again I reiterate, if this was a single block back from 1st avenue I wouldn't care one iota. But in this location? Facing the centerpiece of our new riverfront parks?

 

Heck, Eakin's 1201 Demonbreun isn't much smaller than this (285,000 sqft) and yet still maintains a human scale and closely integrates its parking garage (much of which is subterranean)--and it faces a strip club!!

[NashRugger]

I hadn't scene the stacking plan yet, that's just crapty. The release yesterday made it sound like all the parking would be below ground, not just one level. Sigh, I just hope for lighting elements like I gave two examples of a few posts up. Just wait and see now.

[bigeasy]

[dmillsphoto]

Underground without MASSIVE water table concerns (read, cost) wouldn't be possible.

[barakat]

The NBJ piece mentions flooding as one reason for all above-ground parking, which completely makes sense. 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/real-estate/2015/03/nashvilles-newest-and-most-expensive-office-tower.html

[Vrtigo]

And most expensive...? Really? I'm curious of the economics that ensure they can charge such a price with premium real estate nearby in Pinnacle, etc. that would somehow cost less than their going rate.

 

Maybe there's something we don't know yet. They seem really proud of this one, in spite of this lackluster exterior. I'm hesitant, but feel very slightly optimistic?

Edited March 3, 2015 by Vrtigo

[fieldmarshaldj]

I'll say it straight out: that design is utter garbage. It's a step above Parkway Towers mediocrity. This city deserves better.

[PruneTracy]

While I'm firmly in the "beggars can't be choosers" camp, fronting what is practically permanent open space with ten stories of a garage is a huge missed opportunity.

 

Why not construct the office and retail space on the eastern half of the block and reserve the west half for a garage? There appears to be plenty of room for a 25,000 SF floor plate that fronts the entire width of the block along First.

[Vrtigo]

While I'm firmly in the "beggars can't be choosers" camp, fronting what is practically permanent open space with ten stories of a garage is a huge missed opportunity.

 

Why not construct the office and retail space on the eastern half of the block and reserve the west half for a garage? There appears to be plenty of room for a 25,000 SF floor plate that fronts the entire width of the block along First.

 

If I understand correctly, the garage portion will be the same all around the building, so there's not really anything that would be accomplished by turning the building around 180 degrees. The "observation deck" or whatever they call it seems to be a big feature they are pushing and, yes, the office portion that faces the river will indeed be set back as a result, but that's how they get the observation deck.

[titanhog]

There are ways to disguise parking...so I'm hoping they do something more than just a concrete wall with slits.  Even Pinnacle added glass to give the illusion it's part of the main building.

 

[BnaBreaker]

I'll say it straight out: that design is utter garbage. It's a step above Parkway Towers mediocrity. This city deserves better.

 

I hate to say it, but that's actually a perfect comparison, in my opinion.  I'd even argue that the Parkway Towers design is more acceptable, because at least you can say that when it was built in 1968, this design was actually in vogue.  This proposal is coming along FORTY-SEVEN YEARS later, and the only real 'improvement' over Parkway is that there is retail in the base of the garage portion. 

 

The parking garage base, for me, isn't really even the main concern because as titanhog rightly pointed out, it is possible to disguise a parking garage and make it look decent, or even make use of it, as they've done in downtown Chattanooga by converting the outside of one of their parking garages near the aquarium into a climbing wall.  The problem to me, is that the tower itself looks horrible.

 

Superimpose the image over one of the renderings of the proposal in question, and how much would it really change?

 

Edited March 3, 2015 by BnaBreaker

[RonCamp]

Considering Nashville's floods in 2010 and the effect they had on SoBro, I can’t imagine any developer that understands the price of risk (read: insurance premiums) would decide to build a nine story underground parking garage on this site.  That means we get primarily above ground parking.  

 

Some takeaways:

• Replacement of a surface parking lot with a mixed use, class A, office development that will bring an additional 1,000+ office workers to downtown.  This means increased demand for retail, increased demand for downtown living, what will hopefully be more walking and biking commutes that reduce automobile reliance, and ultimately increased demand for regional transit solutions – all positives. 
• Excellent street-facing design, including retail facing the entirety of the lot’s frontage along the new riverfront amphitheater park and retail facing the new apartment tower currently under construction.  Very little service/vehicular/dead frontage along the street (unlike the Omni’s entire face along 4^th Ave S. which is just awful).  All positives.   
• Return of Hines, a well-respected international developer, to Nashville’s real estate scene.  Will compress cap rates for sure, which is tough luck for those searching for yield in secondary markets, but overall great for our city.  Positive. 

The fact is that Hines wouldn't build a downtown building without supplying what any building in Nashville that charges $40 psf simply has to have, which is at least a 3/1,000 parking ratio.  This design incorporates 25,000 sf floorplates, which are standard and found in every Cool Springs office building because they lay out very efficiently, and delivers the required parking to match all while staying underneath what I understand to be a Rutledge Hill 300’ maximum height requirement.  I’d say the architects did pretty well.    

 

Is it the sexiest design in the world?  No.  But the positives here far outweigh the negatives.  We can hold out hope that the parking garage façade is handled in an attractive way… not to mention that the offices on the river-facing side of the 11^th floor will be some of the coolest in the city once that roofdeck opens for business.  

 

Edited to add "in Nashville"

Edited March 3, 2015 by RonCamp

[PruneTracy]

If I understand correctly, the garage portion will be the same all around the building, so there's not really anything that would be accomplished by turning the building around 180 degrees. The "observation deck" or whatever they call it seems to be a big feature they are pushing and, yes, the office portion that faces the river will indeed be set back as a result, but that's how they get the observation deck.

 

Was thinking more along the lines of a different design that included office space from the first floor up on the east side with the garage space completely within the west half. You'd lose some Class A space but the premiums on the park-facing space might make up for that. Would also give your observation deck (and corresponding greenery) more sunlight.

 

I dunno. I'm not an architect, I just get paid to make their designs stand up.

[Hey_Hey]

If Nashville can ever develop a truly useful mass transit system in the future we'll look at these developments and wonder why we required so much parking. The fundamental problem is that we (as a populace and workforce in nashville) demand that we must park in the same building in which we work.  This building has 10 floors of parking for 14 floors of office.  If we ever get a 750,000 sq ft office tower then we're going to be looking at 20-25 floors of parking, which is crazy.  You can't have great design of a building when over half the sq footage that you build is for parking.  It also has to eat up funds that could be used to make architectural statements.  Right now, it seems like money is spent on building enough parking that everyone has ready access to parking. In the future, hopefully buildings will be built that compete on design and amenities for office workers instead of competing on how close they can park for work.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Hey_Hey

[Guest]

1 acre site is tight for that much program. It isn't like they had a ton of space to do the office tower to the side. Ya'll want the parking block to be taller??? Parking demands a large area. The renderings are stylized and I have trouble telling what is really going on. It isn't horrible from what I see.

[BnaBreaker]

If Nashville can ever develop a truly useful mass transit system in the future we'll look at these developments and wonder why we required so much parking. The fundamental problem is that we (as a populace and workforce in nashville) demand that we must park in the same building in which we work.  This building has 10 floors of parking for 14 floors of office.  If we ever get a 750,000 sq ft office tower then we're going to be looking at 20-25 floors of parking, which is crazy.  You can't have great design of a building when over half the sq footage that you build is for parking.  It also has to eat up funds that could be used to make architectural statements.  Right now, it seems like money is spent on building enough parking that everyone has ready access to parking. In the future, hopefully buildings will be built that compete on design and amenities for office workers instead of competing on how close they can park for work.

 

Yes.  A thousand times this. 

[Paramount747]

Gresham Smith is the architect on this one. Man, this is worse than I thought. So much for creativity. A first year architectural student could do better. Again, let's scrap this and build some  20th century masonry brick buildings that face the park and fill it with retail and restaurants. Not this sugar cube shaped building. Some low rise density is what is needed here.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Paramount747