PHofKS

5th & Broadway | 501 Commerce | NMAAM | 34 story apt, 26 story office, + 183,000 sq. ft. of Retail

Recommended Posts

I think the design as far as the attention to detail is alright, the proportions are a little bit unattractive, but for the most part I think that this is fine.  

 

I agree with BNA on the Ryman comment as far as something classy that would compliment it...I'm just not seeing what would be expected; especially after what has been there for the past few decades. 

 

I also don't understand the knocks on modernism. Are we expecting an Art Deco or Gothic Revival tower to be proposed and built in the CBD???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


That... is... no. Just no. The redevelopment along Broadway is HIDEOUS. The tower itself isn't that bad but it's orientated wrong - I don't want another Renaissance Hotel to block the rest of the skyline. It's got no curvature which, I think, would help tremendously. Playing with malformed lego bricks looks like a... oh right. It looks like a guy who does a lot of great suburban projects had the lead.

 

No thanks.

I agree, this combined with the Renaissance will block the view of an entire chunk of downtown from the south, It should be oriented north-south, not east-west.  

 

 

I really dont like this kind of architecture, so I dont like this. at all.  it is ugly. plain and simple.

I look forward to finally making a meet up this weekend though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the tower goes, it's got a little more going on than most of the boxy gray towers downtown; it could use some more color (maybe the glass will be bluer or greener than in the illo) but I like it and I like the terraces or balconies facing onto lower Broad, echoing the open windows and rooftops there.

 

My only real concern is too much blank unfenestrated space filled with that orange lattice-y looking stuff, and not enough openings along Broadway.  If that black box at the far end up the hill on Broadway is another opening (maybe that's the AA Music Museum? or an IMAX, an IMAX downtown would be cool), that's still a long uninviting gap you have to walk past.

 

The setback at the corner seems too big, but maybe it can be filled with street food vendors or something.

 

And if they are going to echo the orange-y stuff on the MCC, it wouldn't hurt to have just a touch of curvilinear form which is a theme at the MCC, CMHofF, and the Arena right across the street. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also don't understand the knocks on modernism. Are we expecting an Art Deco or Gothic Revival tower to be proposed and built in the CBD???

Why not ? Where is it written we can't do just that (or even neo-Second Empire, my personal favorite) ? Tulsa built an Art Deco tower in the '80s atop an existing shorter building to compliment it and it is the most beautiful high-rise there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, it looks a bit like a rehash of the equally ugly Medical Mart design (is it from the same architectural firm ?). No, I'm not suggesting a duplication of the Ryman, just something that would be respectful, complimentary and classy. It simply possesses none of those traits (which is why I'm appalled by it, to answer your question). I'm not an architect, so I couldn't draw quite what I had in mind, but surely someone could come up with an elegant design that pays tribute to its neighbor.

Generally, I'm not the biggest fan of modernist architecture, though I won't dismiss it all out of hand without seeing it first. The 505CST is modernist, but it gets the thumbs up from me. That design is sleek and does have an unusual shape, but it doesn't have these jarring, weird, awkward, jutting blocks and angles. No section of this proposal is attractive, from the aforementioned tower to the entry. It's not inspiring, it's frankly insulting.

For the record, I've never been a fan of the hotel tower atop the old Convention Center, either. I think it ranks as perhaps the ugliest building downtown above 250 feet.

 

Understood.  Thanks for the clarification!  I see your point, and for the record, though I'm not in love with any of it, I'm definitely more a fan of the tower itself than I am the base.  The base definitely needs some refinement and does look rather haphazard.  Perhaps I'm just so tired of seeing the same general, seemingly uninspired design proposed for buildings in this city, that I reflexively latched on to this simply because it was different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, it looks a bit like a rehash of the equally ugly Medical Mart design (is it from the same architectural firm ?). No, I'm not suggesting a duplication of the Ryman, just something that would be respectful, complimentary and classy. It simply possesses none of those traits (which is why I'm appalled by it, to answer your question). I'm not an architect, so I couldn't draw quite what I had in mind, but surely someone could come up with an elegant design that pays tribute to its neighbor.

Generally, I'm not the biggest fan of modernist architecture, though I won't dismiss it all out of hand without seeing it first. The 505CST is modernist, but it gets the thumbs up from me. That design is sleek and does have an unusual shape, but it doesn't have these jarring, weird, awkward, jutting blocks and angles. No section of this proposal is attractive, from the aforementioned tower to the entry. It's not inspiring, it's frankly insulting.

For the record, I've never been a fan of the hotel tower atop the old Convention Center, either. I think it ranks as perhaps the ugliest building downtown above 250 feet.

Yeah, it's the same firm that did the Medical Mart design (my dad is one of the partners at GS&P, healthcare division though). I'm kind of disappointed in the modernist design of it. I'll talk with my dad sometime next week and see if they may have anything else on the table. I was hoping to see more of this...(Jasper Tower that they did in Shanghai)

Zhongrong-Jasper-Towerlarge.jpg

Edited by satalac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The base is OK. Not really my thing, but OK. The tower, if done in an all glass skin (like 12th and Laurel glass) would look 1,000% better. The metal covering or whatever...is horrid. Don't do it. That building will be dated the instant it is built. 

 

Hopefully this is just the initial 'idea' for a rendering, and the architect will get some f*cking sense before submitting the final design.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not getting too worked up (negatively or positively) over the rendering. This is still 4 years from being started at the earliest which is a lot of time. By that time we may be entering boom times for condos and it may include more residential, or we could have a major corporate relocation downtown which would demand more hotel and office space. The AMP will hopefully be operational and be a huge success which would make retail a much better option.

Like everyone, I'm not in love with this proposal, but I do like that there appears to be a focus on ground level retail, especially along 5th Ave. Hopefully that retail will extend to Broadway with the museum being put on the second level.

Makes you wonder what the other proposals looked like.

Anyone ever filed a state version of a FOIA request before? If this was proposed to Metro then it has to be open record I would think. I've never done anything like that before so it may not work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not ? Where is it written we can't do just that (or even neo-Second Empire, my personal favorite) ? Tulsa built an Art Deco tower in the '80s atop an existing shorter building to compliment it and it is the most beautiful high-rise there.

 

That building in Tulsa isn't Art Deco.

 

To answer your question on why we can't have that...it would be way to expensive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg, it reminds of the Westin Charlotte on steroids. The design is already dated and the setback has a  strange new urbanism vibe to it. I could easily see this in Cool Springs, but it will be out of place among the other proposals (if built) and the Ryman. I guess the classy crowned towers are a thing of the past in place of metal boxes. I understand things have to be modern, but they should still reflect the character of the city. On the positive side, I am glad they incorporated a decent amount of retail and included the National Museum of African American Music, and even with the renderings this is welcome news as a catalyst for other projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will go out on a limb and say this is Butt Ugly and the architect needs to go back to school. With that I mean start over with pre school, kindergarten, and so on.

This is down the road and we have seen things redesigned before and I don't think this will be any different, if it gets built at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arkitekte wrote:

That building in Tulsa isn't Art Deco.

To answer your question on why we can't have that...it would be way to expensive.

Pardon me, it's Neo-Gothic. I'd rather that a bit more money be sunk into a building to make it classic than just throwing up another tasteless modernist fiasco.

P.S. I'm having a terrible time with posting. I can't get the quote function to work and copying and pasting from elsewhere isn't working right, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure about this at all. Yes it would nice to see Nashville have something "out of the box" as far as design goes, but not boxes coming out of a giant box. At least reposition the tower. There's going to be a giant wall if this is built next to the Renaissance. Maybe it'll go through 10 design changes before being built. Kind of seems like the way things go in Nashville.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I'm in the disappointed camp too. Agree with the criticisms above on the bulk, choice of materials, angles, etc. I'm not opposed to modern, in fact love it in the right context. This isnt the right context.

My main issue with it is that it doesn't address the biggest problem with the old CC, which is the long expanses of blank walls on three streets - Broadway, 5th and Commerce. If anything the new design perpetuates that problem and even raises the blank walls from 2 stories to 4 or 5 in places. TPAC anyone? I mean why not use this as the chance to connect the pedestrian fabric of lower broad on up to the Masonic Hall?

Ok the specs were to include the AAM museum at the corner, so the architects had one hand tied behind their backs. But does a museum structure have to include large dead space walls at street level? Look how we just avoided doing that on the 5th ave side of the CMHOF expansion.

Oh, and the big NASHVILLE sign? Total cheese. Lose it. We know where we are.

Not losing too much sleep though. I agree the design will morph several more times before this ever gets built, if it gets built. 2017 is a long way away.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pardon me, it's Neo-Gothic. I'd rather that a bit more money be sunk into a building to make it classic than just throwing up another tasteless modernist fiasco.

P.S. I'm having a terrible time with posting. I can't get the quote function to work and copying and pasting from elsewhere isn't working right, either.

 

I completely agree. Unfortunately, most developers don't. Some of these people have a budget so tight that architecturally nothing can be done other than the average, and the average is sinking pretty damn low in certain places. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to pile on, those renderings are complete garbage. MC Escher couldn't have drawn a more spatially implausible space. It literally hurts my eyes to look at. And this is the winning proposal? How are Nashville's standards so shamefully low? It's so damn cheesy. Design by committee crap. "Yeah, and put a big Nashville sign on it. And then a cantilevered doodad. And some snowflake decals!" It reminds me of the Simpsons episode when Homer got to design a car for his brother's car company and the resulting monstrosity bankrupted him. I really can't express how dismal this whole thing is.

 

I don't really like having a museum at that location, either. There are too many big box "destination" places, and not enough places where the city can grow more organically and support more than tourists and office workers. Metro needs to back the hell out of the development process. What a mess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although, short of demolishing the old CC, a big box sort of destination space is by default the only option for the site. I guess they could do worse than a museum, but why would they dress up the museum in such a gaudy, godawful costume?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew this proposal looked familiar.  Here is a rendering for LA City Center project in Los Angeles:

 

lacentralnew20070809jv2.jpg

 

Yeah, but those towers look a lot better.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but those towers look a lot better.

 

Well, I just meant the layout was similar.  I don't agree though.  Though our proposed tower definitely does need some polishing and refinement, I much prefer it's general format to those bland, faceless towers proposed in Los Angeles.  There is nothing whatsoever memorable about either of them.  I know Nashville loves it's khakis and penny loafers, but maybe it's time we got a couple tattoos.  ;)

 

Ideally, I'd combine the LA base and the BNA tower. 

Edited by BnaBreaker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2013/12/nashville-reveals-plans-for-convention.html details on the development, this will also have over, 840,000 sf of office space , which would be Nashville's largest, 244,000sf retail space, plazas and balconies the Museum of face Broadway , everything sounds great I just hope that's not the final tower design.

:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At street level, I would like to see something similar to the design proposed for Griffin Plaza in the Gulch a few years back.  Lots of openness, and multiple levels of retail along 5th Avenue, then connected to a meandering "crescent" corridor linking Broadway to Commerce. The height could be oriented at an angle toward the Masonic lodge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about a flood of new news for development the last few days! Driving in this morning from Franklin I could almost picture the height and placement if this medium sized tower and I really believe it will fit in well. Especially since the street elevation is much higher than the rest of Broadway at this spot. I'm not a huge fan of the design yet but like everyone is saying, it may change slightly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think having the National Museum of African American Music in this building is a big mistake for one. I am African American and I hardly ever go to Broadway and most African Americans that I know don't frequent that area. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great area and very vibrant, but honestly, I feel so out of place there. I believe the Museum would be empty the majority of the time. I don’t understand why the city would consider putting that there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the developer has put on the table, and Metro has selected, is pretty much the shopping mall concept.   Inward-facing, with museum, retail and office all on the inside, and a big f-you to lower broad, the Ryman and especially Commerce.    If the specs did not require that project contain active street fronts, then that was an unforgiveable omission and the city should start over.    But I put this equally on the developer.    There are plenty of architects who have figured this out - how to put a big box on an urban street corner and make it blend in with the surrounding fabric.   How many big box department stores, hotels and conference centers line Michigan Ave?   You would never see anything this grotesque go in there.     Actually, I did lose sleep over it...

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.