Save The Cordell Hull and The Ben West

[UTgrad09]

As I have said before, I don't have any inside information, but I hear, third-hand, that the wheels may be coming off the "close the Hull and save the State money" idea. Seems that those with clout within State government, but with no investment in the Hull closing scheme have finally begun to ask some hard questions, and they haven't been happy with the answers given. It is way too early to be hopeful, but this is the first glimmer of good news that I've heard on what appeared to be a foregone conclusion.

Does your third hand info have any idea which departments/individuals are on what side of the issue? Is this a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing?

[Guest 5th & Main Urbanite]

At least we are saving the Ben West for now.

[dmillsphoto]

Further evidence the Ben West may be saved...

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/morning_call/2013/05/metro-rethinks-downtown-land-swap-with.html?ana=e_nsh_rdup&s=newsletter&ed=2013-05-24&u=drcYdJ+LUlLsUffarQA/eQ065a0e08&t=1369402745

[nashvylle]

great. Any updated on the hull building? Both easily could be renovated into something useful.

[captainwjm]

The news in today's Tennessean that facilities managment of state buildings is being outsourced to the company that declared the Cordell Hull building funtionally obselete is not a good sign.

[chelovek]

Hey all,

 

I'm not sure if anybody was at the public hearing at city council last night, but if you weren't there one of the reasons people got up to speak in opposition to the Mayor's budget is that it moves the Davidson County Elections Commission out to Murfreesboro Road and McGavock Pike. The gripe is that the new location is a lot less central and a lot less accessible than the current location- Howard School. That means a convenient early voting location potentially becomes a lot less convenient for transit riders from across the county and downtown residents/employees. Registering to vote could become more difficult too.

 

I'll go ahead and put it out there that I'm for the budget because of its inclusion of funds for bikeways, greenways, and of course- the amp. I'll also admit that I think the plan to create a 1-stop permit shop to make it easier for developers to get moving on projects is a great idea. Still, I think that the concerns regarding the Elections Commission are very valid. If a 1-stop permit shop pushes the elections commission out of the Howard School complex, then at the very least the new location should be equally central and accessible by transit.

 

Then during the hearing it hit me- Ben West! The old library is arguably more accessible by transit than Howard School, since it is closer to Music City Central than Howard School is. I wanted to put the idea out there to get your thoughts before making a more formal suggestion to our government. Would it work?

 

One potential drawback may be that DCEC may not be large enough to utilize the entire ben west library. I don't know, really. But in that case, you could put the 1-stop permit shop in the ben west building and leave the elections commission where it is.

 

Anyway, what do you all think? I just feel like saving these buildings will depend on finding a good use for them, and this might be a chance to be opportunistic (in a good way) while there is pressure on the Mayor to consider alternative locations for the Elections Commission.

[captainwjm]

To further update my comments on the fate of Cordell Hull, my third-hand source is now resigned to the abandonment and destruction of Cordell Hull as a fiat accompli.  It seemed that the declaration that the building was functionally obsolete and that money would be saved by abandoning it was becomming harder to justify, and would soon be subjected to public scrutiny similiar to that being experienced by the state's out-sourcing of its motor pool and vehicle maintenance.  However, it dosen't appear that either the vehicle contract or the property decisions have gained any traction by those who matter; namely the Comptroller or the Legislature's Fiscal Review Committee.  The out-sourcing of state building maintenance to the firm that made the obselete declartion in the first place is probably the final nail in the coffin. Thus, my source says that absent a major scandal - think Tennessee Waltz style, and nothing indicates that is even a possibility - its pretty much a done deal.

[Guest 5th & Main Urbanite]

To me its a bunch of Tea Party type politicians who don't want to spend money on a building that won't generate revenue so they can have a surface parking lot that will. It's that "backward" thinking that keeps Nashville behind other cities, and it's this thinking that makes America a joke to the rest of the world. Amazing, I was in buildings built in the year 900 while I was in London, but Nashville cannot keep and maintain a building built in 1951. It's a shame.

 

Stuff like this make me embarrassed to be a Tennessean and a Nashvillian. I guess the Snodgrass Tower, and L&C Tower will be next on the hillbilly list of demolition.

[UTgrad09]

To me its a bunch of Tea Party type politicians who don't want to spend money on a building that won't generate revenue so they can have a surface parking lot that will. It's that "backward" thinking that keeps Nashville behind other cities, and it's this thinking that makes America a joke to the rest of the world. Amazing, I was in buildings built in the year 900 while I was in London, but Nashville cannot keep and maintain a building built in 1951. It's a shame.

 

Stuff like this make me embarrassed to be a Tennessean and a Nashvillian. I guess the Snodgrass Tower, and L&C Tower will be next on the hillbilly list of demolition.

DUDE.

[fieldmarshaldj]

^That comment is offensive, John. I'm a proud Tea Partier, and I don't support the demolition of the Hull. Saying that, I also don't think government should be in the business of subsidizing taxpayer black holes (then again, government shouldn't be in the business of subsidizing anything -- unless specified in the Constitution). I might also remind you how much Nashville has lost under 125 years of uninterrupted municipal Democrat control... talk about needing a change.

[UTgrad09]

Hey all,

 

I'm not sure if anybody was at the public hearing at city council last night, but if you weren't there one of the reasons people got up to speak in opposition to the Mayor's budget is that it moves the Davidson County Elections Commission out to Murfreesboro Road and McGavock Pike. The gripe is that the new location is a lot less central and a lot less accessible than the current location- Howard School. That means a convenient early voting location potentially becomes a lot less convenient for transit riders from across the county and downtown residents/employees. Registering to vote could become more difficult too.

 

I'll go ahead and put it out there that I'm for the budget because of its inclusion of funds for bikeways, greenways, and of course- the amp. I'll also admit that I think the plan to create a 1-stop permit shop to make it easier for developers to get moving on projects is a great idea. Still, I think that the concerns regarding the Elections Commission are very valid. If a 1-stop permit shop pushes the elections commission out of the Howard School complex, then at the very least the new location should be equally central and accessible by transit.

 

Then during the hearing it hit me- Ben West! The old library is arguably more accessible by transit than Howard School, since it is closer to Music City Central than Howard School is. I wanted to put the idea out there to get your thoughts before making a more formal suggestion to our government. Would it work?

 

One potential drawback may be that DCEC may not be large enough to utilize the entire ben west library. I don't know, really. But in that case, you could put the 1-stop permit shop in the ben west building and leave the elections commission where it is.

 

Anyway, what do you all think? I just feel like saving these buildings will depend on finding a good use for them, and this might be a chance to be opportunistic (in a good way) while there is pressure on the Mayor to consider alternative locations for the Elections Commission.

I like the idea. It is at least worthy of suggestion. I think either the permit stop or the election commission would be a good fit. But you better make your suggestion quickly. Dean seems to have this thing for once he gets started on something, he goes through with it.

I don't know who would be the best person to contact, though. Perhaps your councilman? The head of the election commission might work, too.

[Guest 5th & Main Urbanite]

DUDE.

I agreed it's over the top, but I am making a point. I am sick of politicians making decisions they don't have to live with when they leave office. Yes, Democrats are too blame too, but they are not currently in power, and I expect...demand those in power learn from the mistakes of the past and no-one ever seems to learn. Damn right the left is to blame as well. They are all a bunch of hillbillies at some point. 

 

The Tea Party folks as much as anyone else only cares about money. Hell, with this State Legislature they would have torn down the Tower Of London by now.

^That comment is offensive, John. I'm a proud Tea Partier, and I don't support the demolition of the Hull. Saying that, I also don't think government should be in the business of subsidizing taxpayer black holes (then again, government shouldn't be in the business of subsidizing anything -- unless specified in the Constitution). I might also remind you how much Nashville has lost under 125 years of uninterrupted municipal Democrat control... talk about needing a change.

Davy I actually agree. THE STATE SHOULD NOT OWN ANY PROPERTY IF THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO KEEP IN IN GOOD REPAIR! Yes, Communist/Socialist me is against The State Owning property if they cannot maintain it. Take a guess how many "State" owned buildings they tore down in London or Edinburgh this year...NONE! And, they (Tennessee) still have to use tax payer money to tear them down. Ridiculous!!!!

[UTgrad09]

I agreed it's over the top, but I am making a point. I am sick of politicians making decisions they don't have to live with when they leave office. Yes, Democrats are too blame too, but they are not currently in power, and I expect...demand those in power learn from the mistakes of the past and no-one ever seems to learn. Damn right the left is to blame as well. They are all a bunch of hillbillies at some point. 

 

The Tea Party folks as much as anyone else only cares about money. Hell, with this State Legislature they would have torn down the Tower Of London by now.

I don't like this taking a political turn...but as you point out, both sides are to blame for this. Let's not forget that urban renewal was a pretty liberal vision of how cities should be transformed, and many architectural gems across the country were lost because of that. Liberals have been pretty blind in their progress and vision, and conservatives have been pretty heartless on the subject as well. I don't think pointing the finger at a political ideology gets us anywhere.

I also don't think that the Tea Party itself has much to do with any of this. This started before them, and will likely continue on regardless of how much power and influence they have. This isn't a political philosophy; it's an urban philosophy. You don't have to be a Democrat or a Republican to see the value in saving character buildings that make Nashville what it is. And if the Ben West Library is razed, Democrats and Republicans will be parking side-by-side where it once stood, probably with little thought or regret.

The Ben West Library, though, is not the Tower of London, nor would it be if it stood for another 900 years.

Just remember us hillbillies have managed not to pave over the State Capitol, the Downtown Presbyterian Church, The Ryman, Jubilee Hall, or The Hermitage as of yet. And none of those structures is in the same league as The Tower of London. Ease down on the hyperbole.

Pointing fingers isn't what should be done. Questioning the wisdom behind tearing down a perfectly good structure to build a rather small surface parking lot, however, is a good idea.

Sadly, a lot of the decision-makers on Capitol Hill, regardless of their politics, aren't on the same page as we are when it comes to the built environment, John.

[Guest 5th & Main Urbanite]

I don't like this taking a political turn...but as you point out, both sides are to blame for this. Let's not forget that urban renewal was a pretty liberal vision of how cities should be transformed, and many architectural gems across the country were lost because of that. Liberals have been pretty blind in their progress and vision, and conservatives have been pretty heartless on the subject as well. I don't think pointing the finger at a political ideology gets us anywhere.

I also don't think that the Tea Party itself has much to do with any of this. This started before them, and will likely continue on regardless of how much power and influence they have. This isn't a political philosophy; it's an urban philosophy. You don't have to be a Democrat or a Republican to see the value in saving character buildings that make Nashville what it is. And if the Ben West Library is razed, Democrats and Republicans will be parking side-by-side where it once stood, probably with little thought or regret.

The Ben West Library, though, is not the Tower of London, nor would it be if it stood for another 900 years.

Just remember us hillbillies have managed not to pave over the State Capitol, the Downtown Presbyterian Church, The Ryman, Jubilee Hall, or The Hermitage as of yet. And none of those structures is in the same league as The Tower of London. Ease down on the hyperbole.

Pointing fingers isn't what should be done. Questioning the wisdom behind tearing down a perfectly good structure to build a rather small surface parking lot, however, is a good idea.

Sadly, a lot of the decision-makers on Capitol Hill, regardless of their politics, aren't on the same page as we are when it comes to the built environment, John.

Well said, but it's the damn politicians that make decisions that create or destroy great cities like Nashville. I do think Europe (who lost a lot during WW2) takes more pride in their cities and their built environment. In Europe it's called "Adaptive Reuse." In America it's called "Seek and Destroy", "Shock and Awe."....okay seriously, it's called "Tear Down and Rebuild."

[bwithers1]

I have sometimes said jokingly that an air-based bomb campaign would do a lot to improve the built environment in Nashville.  Like, let's have an air raid siren and have everyone leave the city for a while, as was the original intent with the Interstate system, which was a national defense spending program, then bomb the hell out of a lot of our pikes, and then have everyone come back and rebuild the pikes to be proper boulevards.  It would clear out a lot of crap like the former gas stations that will never go away and the discount beer and tobacco huts.  Although in restrospect, a massive bulldozer campaign would be more selective and therefore appropriate.

 

OK everyone, I really am joking.

[UTgrad09]

Well said, but it's the damn politicians that make decisions that create or destroy great cities like Nashville. I do think Europe (who lost a lot during WW2) takes more pride in their cities and their built environment. In Europe it's called "Adaptive Reuse." In America it's called "Seek and Destroy", "Shock and Awe."....okay seriously, it's called "Tear Down and Rebuild."

Much of Europe was developing a millennia ago or more. Through that time, they built some truly fantastic works of art. Through that time, wars, fire, natural disaster, and simply age destroyed much of that. They still have tons of it left...but it would be interesting to compile a list of amazing structures that have been destroyed or torn down since then. It would easily dwarf anything that we have lost.

That's not to say they don't do a better job of preserving now, or that we shouldn't be upset when our prized buildings are razed.

It is a difference in philosophy, for sure. But I wonder, had America been building cities all the way back then, would we have the same attitudes we have now?

Some of it is an attitude of "teardown and rebuild," sadly. Some would call it progress. I disagree. You also have to consider that a lot of the structures we consider historic and worthy of saving would probably not meet that standard in Europe. We fret over 100+ year old churches that are kind of neat, but not necessarily unique. In Europe, a lot of cities have magnificent cathedrals built in the middle ages.

We're worried about (in this thread) a couple of mid century government structures. I wonder if Europe would bat an eye to tear them down? Would they even be considered a loss over there? Of course...the big difference would be the proposed land use. I can't imagine a European city considering turning a functional structure into a surface parking lot or green space. That is the big problem I see here.

As I stated previously, this wouldn't sting so bad if there were worthy structures being proposed for these sites. But no, rather it is merely destruction of the urban fabric of downtown.

I really see this as a more egregious crime than developers that raze old buildings, build surface lots, but have the intention of developing them later. From what I can tell, the state has no plans to build new structures of any kind downtown.

[Guest 5th & Main Urbanite]

My fear is they don't stop there and they go after the Snodgrass Tower, The L&C Tower and structures such as those in their attempt to tear everything down. Our State Legislature is quite stupid.

[volsfanwill]

here is an example of this in European cities.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_of_the_Republic_%28Berlin%29

 

but in this case a communist building from the 1970s was demolished to make room for rebuilding a much older palace that was destroyed during world war 2.

[UTgrad09]

My fear is they don't stop there and they go after the Snodgrass Tower, The L&C Tower and structures such as those in their attempt to tear everything down. Our State Legislature is quite stupid.

I'm not saying it's out of the question, but they'll face some serious opposition if they try that. Those are much more prominent, iconic buildings.

[bwithers1]

That's right.  Plus, if I'm not mistaken, the L&C is privately owned and managed, so I'm not sure how the State of TN would come after that wanting to tear it down.  The Snodgrass would be a vast amount of office space to lose that would have to be leased somewhere else.  I know that the same is true of Cordell Hull, but at least that is supposed to be temporarily replaced by parkland, not a parking lot.

[Griz83]

I work in Snodgrass.  It is currently being renovated top to bottom.  I doubt the State has any immediate plans on ditching it.  In other news, it will be interesting to see how the latest building maintenance scandal will affect the outcome of the Hull.  To me, the Hull wouldn't be as tragic a loss as the Ben West; but that is just my personal opinion.  That said, the prospect of either coming down to become parkland or parking is ludicrous.

[UTgrad09]

I found this to be interesting:

 

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20130613/NEWS0201/306130077?gcheck=1

 

...not really the bit about Haslam, but about Jones Lange LaSalle getting an initial consulting contract, then kept adding on to the contract without exploring other bids. I do think it is concerning that they are now not only consulting, but managing/overseeing state office space (12.5 million square feet of it) and negotiating/collecting on lease deals. Too much, too quick, and from one company.

 

Chicago-based Jones Lang LaSalle and four other firms competed in 2011 and early 2012 for a consulting deal to review 33 major state properties. A scoring matrix released by the state shows CB Richard Ellis received a slightly higher grade based on its qualifications, experience and project approach, but Jones Lang LaSalle offered to do the work for less money.

So...basically the state is doing this on the cheap and quick, and we might pay for it with the loss of buildings (and we're not the only complainers -- I read some grumblings from the Memphis thread on SSP about the state shifting office workers out of a large building there).

I do not have a problem with the state being consulted on office space, or even having it managed by an outside company. But I am afraid that if they take every single bit of cost-cutting advice, we'll end up with our state being run out of Plus Park off of I-24. I do not like the idea of the state leasing space, either. Government buildings should be government owned. And they should be responsible for their upkeep. Perhaps they should seek consulting on their consulting choices.

[MLBrumby]

I have heard many questions in my circles on the fringes of government surrounding the proposed demolition of the Hull building. One of the questions is if Jones Lang LaSalle wants to do it to force more Tennessee workers into buildings they own downtown. They wonder if there is really anything wrong with the Hull, as has been stated. 

[captainwjm]

I have heard many questions in my circles on the fringes of government surrounding the proposed demolition of the Hull building. One of the questions is if Jones Lang LaSalle wants to do it to force more Tennessee workers into buildings they own downtown. They wonder if there is really anything wrong with the Hull, as has been stated. 

I don't believe that JLL "owns" any buildings [at least in Tennessee].  The contract was for its service as a broker for state in securing leased space.  As far as the 'functional obsolence" of CHB, that is a matter of legitimate debate, although the existence of significant deferred maintenance is without question.

[arkitekte]

I found this to be interesting:

 

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20130613/NEWS0201/306130077?gcheck=1

 

...not really the bit about Haslam, but about Jones Lange LaSalle getting an initial consulting contract, then kept adding on to the contract without exploring other bids. I do think it is concerning that they are now not only consulting, but managing/overseeing state office space (12.5 million square feet of it) and negotiating/collecting on lease deals. Too much, too quick, and from one company.

 

So...basically the state is doing this on the cheap and quick, and we might pay for it with the loss of buildings (and we're not the only complainers -- I read some grumblings from the Memphis thread on SSP about the state shifting office workers out of a large building there).

I do not have a problem with the state being consulted on office space, or even having it managed by an outside company. But I am afraid that if they take every single bit of cost-cutting advice, we'll end up with our state being run out of Plus Park off of I-24. I do not like the idea of the state leasing space, either. Government buildings should be government owned. And they should be responsible for their upkeep. Perhaps they should seek consulting on their consulting choices.

 

Yeah, our biggest complaint was we all figured they would be moved from downtown, which would take hundreds of workers from downtown, however, they're being moved into another tower downtown for now, but eventually they'll probably be moved out into an office park off of 385.