Jump to content

Project Thread/New Construction/Photo du jour/Const. CAMs


smeagolsfree

Recommended Posts


BTW Andrew, You have now committed yourself for keeping us updated on the Nations with photos from now on, JK. I am glad you are taking pix over there. Everyone is making my job much easier now. I dont have to take near as many pictures with you, Chris Holman and many others taking shots.

 

Keep em coming guys. It would be great if someone could take pix for each of the threads

Ha - I don't mind snapping some picks while I go on runs in the neighborhood. Glad people are enjoying them. I'll be sure to update yall with projects going on in the Nations neighborhood.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know...there's a reason that neighborhoods around the country and the world with two...four...eight...twenty times the density of The Gulch don't have similar traffic issues.  I hope I'm not coming across as condescending here, and I apologize if I am, but it's just so funny to me to listen to Nashvillians worry about the possibility of density creating more traffic problems.  I hate to break it to you, but The Gulch is still pretty sparsely populated as urban neighborhoods go.  It's still mostly empty lots and old warehouses.  Trust me, density is NOT what is creating the traffic issues in this city.

Edited by BnaBreaker
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point I see that BnaBreaker attempting to make, in response to bruceman73, is the issue of mobility and accessibility.  I have to exercise constraint not to hijack this thread from its namesake sub-topic, by simply saying that the steady increase of more occupants per square miles indeed does have a direct effect on the level of concurrent activities ─ pedestrians (far more) vs. cars ─ all in turn vying for mobility with the preemptive presence of ongoing and seemingly randomly located construction sites, moving utility- and general service activities.  Interject what little public transportation provisions exist, in conjunction with little if any enforcement of what few traffic movement policies appear to be in place to govern surface movements along paths with few if any parallel alternatives, and you have a "vermicelli-like" recipe for disaster that not only remains bad, but which always will continue to grow worse.

Not even old and much larger urban districts like SF and DC have “solved” their traffic problems, as to do so would be analogous to trying to wash an unbound mass of dirt.  You end up with a muddy mess worse than at the start, while more meaningful solutions might be to bridge over or tunnel under it, and allow it to run its course (thereby becoming "dirtier" with more growth), without channeling all resources in trying to fix something that cannot be “arrested”.  This is the reason that SF and DC rely on sound, reliable alternatives of public conveyance, to require in many cases no more than a several blocks to access feeder lines within the quagmire, and in turn access the more advanced modes for movement.  That’s how density is handled, whether in Vancouver BC or Miami.  Nashville hasn’t even begun to turn such attention into action.  That’s why transportation is among if not “the” foremost topic of the mayoral election, in a whole lot of people’s minds (other than education and affordable housing).
-==-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a ton for the updates Mark!  Man, I'm still not quite sure how I feel about that Hume Fogg addition.  Much better than the empty lot, to be sure, but the incorporation of stone work aside, I feel like they could've done a better job making the physical/aesthetic connection between the two buildings.  Minor critique though, really.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a ton for the updates Mark!  Man, I'm still not quite sure how I feel about that Hume Fogg addition.  Much better than the empty lot, to be sure, but the incorporation of stone work aside, I feel like they could've done a better job making the physical/aesthetic connection between the two buildings.  Minor critique though, really.

I agree--wish it could've been more of a seamless look to match the stonework of the original structure.  Probably was a cost issue.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a ton for the updates Mark!  Man, I'm still not quite sure how I feel about that Hume Fogg addition.  Much better than the empty lot, to be sure, but the incorporation of stone work aside, I feel like they could've done a better job making the physical/aesthetic connection between the two buildings.  Minor critique though, really.

I agree--wish it could've been more of a seamless look to match the stonework of the original structure.  Probably was a cost issue.  

Fully agree, and no doubt cost was an issue.  But I will give kudos to that tower shown in the middle of the view (facing 8th Ave), but you have to actually be present to see why.  The masonry detail (barely discernible in this view) actually emulates some of the old-world Quoin-block ashlar, but with a contemporary flair.  In my opinion, the remainder of the addition would have been best designed and constructed as such.  I hold reservations about the general design, as it looks somewhat "tacked on" (if not partially tacky), and it probably will not weather gracefully as would a fully masonry design.  The roof-line, however is indeed tacky (along the front especially) and would have best built as a castellated, battlement-style parapet, to better match that of the original school-house.  Also, no pilings or railing protection bollards are provided on the parking-lot side (left), the absence of which is certain to lead to damage.
-==-

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.