Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by NewTowner

  1. We may or may not have the opportunity to meet with the selected design firms. It would certainly be an honor to do so. Thank you very much for the kind words on our efforts!
  2. Many have argued that the submerged hall (and by submerged, I really mean "tucked," as the slope of the site means that our underground hall would have street-level frontage on 5th Avenue) would be best capped by bridge-like structural systems. This includes not only 6th and 7th Avenues, as you have very insightfully pointed out, but also the main plaza itself and all other "rooftop" (and street-level!) public spaces could be supported by steel truss systems. In effect, the entire Main Plaza above the Great Hall would be a modest bridge. It could be done, and in my opinion, it should be don
  3. Thank you very much! We are all proud citizens of a wonderful town with a great future. Encouragement like yours keeps us going!
  4. There are plenty of good reasons to do exactly what you have said. While I think Nashville would be pleasantly surprised by the grandeur and liveliness of a solid pedestrian street or two, keeping the grid completely intact has the undeniable benefits of efficiency, functionality, and ease of navigation. The biggest hurdle one must leap over to accomplish such a thing is structural. It would be very difficult to make those streets support vehicular traffic without absolutely stuffing the Great Hall beneath them with columns. But, like I said--your criticism is totally valid.
  5. Hello, everyone! Big thanks to all the kind words and encouragement that has been poured out for this little conceptual design project. It makes the sweat and tears all worthwhile, regardless of what ultimately happens with this consensus-building exercise! Cliff and Smeagolsfree are right about the hotel. It will probably be across 5th behind the Country Music Hall of Fame...a different site altogether. The Main Hall alone is 380,000 SF. There is also loads and loads of additional square footage, in the above-ground MCC building along 5th, all dialed-in to the specific needs a
  6. You have a legitimate point, and no one should poo-poo it. High-rise buildings make mockeries out of fire safety codes, and every fireman knows it. How it is that we can require standard emergency exit signs and multiple exits in every public building, but yet permit people to be marooned 600 feet in the air where no ladder could ever reach them, is a testiment to the public's inability to apply critical thought to their surroundings. Very few people would be willing to work 600 feet undergorund, beneath tons and tons of rock and soil--yet this would actually be considerably safer.
  7. Actually, the main administrator over at the Nashville Charrette has taken great pains to point out some nice things about the so-called Vancouver Model, which is a disciplined approach to urban design that holds the humane and intelligent deployment of skyscrapers as its defining feature. Also, I don't know a single person with a Theory degree from Harvard. Most of the people I know with theory degrees pulled them out of Berkley or Princeton. None of them post on the Nashville Charrette. What-evuh!
  8. The new dependency sucks.
  9. I called it first! I get the cookie! Only, my post mysteriously disappeared!
  10. Does anyone have a picture of the Washington Building on Capitol Square? I have just read about it, and am dying to see a photograph...I would give a special wish and a super nice thought to anyone who could take and post a really good photograph of this awesome building.
  11. This isn't the choice. Consider Tuscany.
  12. You misread my statement. I have no problem with achievement, and certainly no problem with great achievement--where we actually disagree is whether technological exhibitionism for its own sake can count as achievement. I would not harken the building of a giant skyscraper with going to the Moon, because architecture is art and space exploration is not...the fact that you compared them suggests to me that when you see a skyscraper, you do not see art--you see a technological feat...like going to the Moon. Architecture which is nothing more than techno-showmanship is failed architecture, bec
  13. Wow! So much juicy action goes down in the Signature Tower thread, it is hard to stay relevant and engaged. The subjects change almost as quickly as the gauntlets get thrown down! Please indulge me a wee mite as I try to scoop up and present a few scattered and fading thoughts... I posted a li'l thing a few days ago in which I announced my opinion that skyscrapers were cheezy, and in fact, "butt-redneck." Barakat responds: I definitely think that skyscrapers are ostentatious...but this does not preclude their being cheezy. Goodness Knows that there is a lot of cheezy and ostent
  14. Sprawl was not created solely by the marketplace...it was heavily subsidized by local, state, and federal governments at every level, and was administered from above by regulatory agencies who came to believe that the The Athens Charter and other assorted Modernist dogma was the key to the creation of cities of futuristic mechanical glory. I know that's a side note, Metro.M, but I had to throw it in there. So many sprawl apologists argue that capitalism and freedom bore the automobile suburbs into this world...when in actuality, pure capitalism and freedom would have kept the government ou
  15. This analysis of high-rise urban design tendencies is well-informed and dead-on.
  16. I think that the new approach to Signature's dependency is both fascinating and commendable. I would love to get a good, solid, hard look at some elevations...but so far, I am thoroughly impressed by what appears to be a genuinely well-informed classical design, scheduled on a remarkably in-tune human scale, and both proportioned and detailed in dignity and class. Way to go, Giarratana! It is interesting to me, to watch the "tower" portion of the Signature reinforce its commitment to Art Deco (the skyscraper's second-best era, in my opinion), even while striving for horizontality on the l
  17. I don't think it will...and New York had many superior and better-loved "symbols" than the almost universally hated World Trade Center--take the Empire State Building, Times Square, Rockefeller Center, the Chrysler Building, and the Statue of Liberty as examples. While there are a few things I do indeed like about the Signature Tower, I don't think it will be beautiful enough--or representational enough--to become Nashville's premier iconic symbol. We have a couple of contenders already (Ryman, Parthenon, etc.), but we will likely have to wait many years more before a true masterpiece
  18. Leave the fellow alone. I suspect, due to previous experience, that he has only deleted posts that were unreasonable or ridiculous. If you look back over the past few pages of Signature Tower thread, you will find plenty of dissenting "opinions", undeleted in all of their glory, and probably some pretty nasty ones, too. I don't know why everybody has to get so angry at Metro.M's thoughts and feelings on the subject of the Signature Tower. No amount of online cheerleading will erect the thing, and no amount of online skepticism will kill it if the buying is good. So lighten up, keep the
  19. I don't think a Signature collapse will amount to egg on anybody's face but Mr. Giarratana's.
  20. What I have been told is that the addition of a boutique hotel has necessitated a few shifts in the building's lower portion, likely mostly in the interior. Other than that, I am sure there are some continual little tweaks, a lot of little pushes and pulls all over the thing, probably some work on the pool, but mostly just a lot of work on the main interior spaces of the ground floor. But that's just what I'm told. I'm not working on it myself. Gaushell probably has more intimate information, but he might be able to talk too much about it.
  21. Interesting stuff...it will probably keep me awake tonight. Disneyland is a tough one, on many levels. One of the most puzzling and challenging moments in my Architectural Theory course at the Savannah College of Art and Design struck when the Professor (a genius, by the way) showed us all a slide of Main Street USA at Disneyland and asked us, "Is this a street"? Of course, everyone was standing on their chairs and hollering "No! No it's not! It's fake!!"...especially the European "contemporary architecture" students. He asked us why it was not a street, and he made us really fall all ov
  22. There is wisdom up there. Patience is a hard virtue--particularly when amazing new projects get announced and the possibility of Nashville becoming a vibrant, thriving, beautiful city seems nearly imminent. We should go for broke, and acquire the skills and wisdom that are needed to help accelerate and facilitate all of this new urban energy in a meaningful way--but we shouldn't throw ourselves at every project, just because it seems like another "step forward". Remember--walking can be a lot better than lying down, but it isn't good or wise to move just for movement's sake--walking in the
  23. I agree with you 100% on that color!! Nashville definitely needs more color...and the awnings, trees, and wide sidewalks are all prerequisites for great streets...which Nashville needs more of, too! Gosh, Smeagol! That's rough. But anyway, I think one-story buildings qualify as low-rise, rather than mid-rise--and one-story buildings have to be moderately scaled and really close together on super-narrow streets (lanes, really) in order to make you feel all snug and enclosed. When that happens, they rock! As far as Disney World goes...well...it is sadly ironic, but Americans pa
  • 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.