Jump to content

Nashville Yards, 15 acres/4 million sq. ft./ $1 billion, Phase I: Grand Hyatt Hotel (25 stories), Phase II: Amazon (26 & 22 stories), Phase III: AEG District (4 K theater, 34 & 35 story apts); Phase IV: Pinnacle Tower (35 stories), Amazon 3 (43)


Guest

Recommended Posts


Not much we can do as the city does not own the building. It is not protected by any legislation or landmark protection. In as few words as possible , we can kiss it good bye cfor a bunch of generic looking buildings. If the entire development had mulitple architectural companies doing the work, it would not be as harsh.

The hard truth is that all of this will be replaced bt generic looking buildings,  just like Capitol View. Going to be bland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

There is nothing the Mayor can really do. It takes an effort from the members of the council. In may ways the Mayor is like any other legislative leader. They are powerless without the support of the body they are in charge of.

 

Could she not apply political pressure and put it in the public view, i.e. guilt trip?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but property rights are a tricky thing, but it is very hard to govern individual property owners ability to do what they want to do with their own property. If it is not protected, then not much they can do. Even then, a property that is on the National Register of Historical places could be demolished, if the deem it unsafe . Here is a quote from the National Register of Historic Places Program website.

 

What are the restrictions, rules, regulations for historic property owners?
Under Federal Law, the listing of a property in the National Register places no restrictions on what a non-federal owner may do with their property up to and including destruction, unless the property is involved in a project that receives Federal assistance, usually funding or licensing/permitting.
http://www.nps.gov/nr/regulations.htm

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:

Maybe, but property rights are a tricky thing, but it is very hard to govern individual property owners ability to do what they want to do with their own property. If it is not protected, then not much they can do. Even then, a property that is on the National Register of Historical places could be demolished, if the deem it unsafe . Here is a quote from the National Register of Historic Places Program website.

 

What are the restrictions, rules, regulations for historic property owners?
Under Federal Law, the listing of a property in the National Register places no restrictions on what a non-federal owner may do with their property up to and including destruction, unless the property is involved in a project that receives Federal assistance, usually funding or licensing/permitting.
http://www.nps.gov/nr/regulations.htm

This is why local preservation ordinances are so important. In many cases, an owner must provide evidence to an economic hardship (can't sell the property over a specific period of time, can't develop an adaptive re-use project and and can't produce a reasonable rate of return on a redevelopment...all of those together, not an either or) in combination with the design of the new construction. After that comes specific demolition fees based on the square footage of the new construction. This more than usually requires a developer to preserve the historic structure. Codes written like that are written to make demolition nearly impossible. 

Has the State of Tennessee passed the state level tax credit for historic preservation? National Register properties here in Texas are eligible for both state and federal tax credits that often equal up to 40 to 50% of the rehabilitation cost. This often times makes it financially feasible to rehabilitate the structure rather than demolish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had lunch today with the same source that initially told me of the project, said the Cross hi-rise would be razed not rehabbed, and said the Sullivan would not remain. He said many more details will be released in 2-3 weeks. Also, the Hyatt will be there most upscale hotel in town...JW, Omni be dammed, and the AEG (LA LIVE Clone) project would commence with the hotel. He was very impressed with the timeline and plans.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nashville_bound said:

I had lunch today with the same source that initially told me of the project, said the Cross hue-rise would be razed nor rehabbed, and said the Sullivan would not remain.

I'm sorry, but it's just appalling nothing can be done here. That building deserves to be saved. We hardly have any buildings left of that style in the city (consider the loss of its contemporaries: the Sudekum & Tennessee Theater and the Genesco Building, nevermind the stretch of buildings demolished along the west side of 7th avenue next to the Snodgrass Tower). With some creative thinking, they could find a way to preserve it and incorporate it into this new project.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, fieldmarshaldj said:

I'm sorry, but it's just appalling nothing can be done here. That building deserves to be saved. We hardly have any buildings left of that style in the city (consider the loss of its contemporaries: the Sudekum & Tennessee Theater and the Genesco Building, nevermind the stretch of buildings demolished along the west side of 7th avenue next to the Snodgrass Tower). With some creative thinking, they could find a way to preserve it and incorporate it into this new project.

Especially with all the space they actually have to work with!  They can't tell me that there's no way that with a little creativity they couldn't fit in all they want to fit in AND save this one building.  Pretty ridiculous.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The downtown in SA is very nice, especially with the river walk. The Menger Hotel is beautiful and I hope you got the chance to go there. One of the things that has affected SA is the amount of sprawl they have vs the size of the downtown. SA believe it or not is the 10th largest city in the US but the downtown does not reflect that.

 

Image result for how large is san antonio

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason San Antonio's downtown is relatively unimpressive is because the metro area population is only 2.5 million (to put things in perspective, that makes it smaller than St. Louis, Pittisburgh and Cleveland). 

As Atlanta, Boston, San Francisco and Detroit all show, you can't measure a city's weight based only on the population of the city proper.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason San Antonio's downtown is relatively unimpressive is because the metro area population is only 2.5 million (to put things in perspective, that makes it smaller than St. Louis, Pittisburgh and Cleveland). 
As Atlanta, Boston, San Francisco and Detroit all show, you can't measure a city's weight based only on the population of the city proper.


Nashville greater metro is only 1.8 million. Our downtown is getting impressive fast.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, NoChesterHester said:

 


Nashville greater metro is only 1.8 million. Our downtown is getting impressive fast.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

To be fair, the circumstances with Nashville are sort of unique, with it being a major tourist destination (thus all of the high rise hotels under construction or in the pipeline), a major music recording center outside of LA / NYC as well as it being a capital (thus getting very special attention from state leaders). It also benefits from being the only other centrally located Sunbelt alternative for those who can't cut it in Atlanta or Charlotte.

San Antonio, meanwhile, not only sits in the shadow of Houston / Dallas / Austin, but really has nothing else going for it other than the military operations.

Edited by urbanplanet17
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, urbanplanet17 said:

To be fair, the circumstances with Nashville are sort of unique, with it being a major tourist destination (thus all of the high rise hotels under construction or in the pipeline), a major music recording center outside of LA / NYC as well as it being a capital (thus getting very special attention from state leaders). It also benefits from being the only other centrally located Sunbelt alternative for those who can't cut it in Atlanta or Charlotte.

San Antonio, meanwhile, not only sits in the shadow of Houston / Dallas / Austin, but really has nothing else going for it other than the military operations.

SA's main draw is tourism. Apparently they're the most visited city in Texas by tourists (30 million+ per year). As far as business and development, though, they're totally behind their Texas peers. There's just a lack of development in general downtown. They do great with rehabs, but I think the Marriot Rivercenter is the only substantial building built in their downtown since the '60s, and that one was built in 1988. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pdt2f said:

SA's main draw is tourism. Apparently they're the most visited city in Texas by tourists (30 million+ per year). As far as business and development, though, they're totally behind their Texas peers. There's just a lack of development in general downtown. They do great with rehabs, but I think the Marriot Rivercenter is the only substantial building built in their downtown since the '60s, and that one was built in 1988. 

I completely forgot that they have The Alamo and Sea World. :tw_grin:

I guess I never really think of San Antonio as a tourist destination. It's certainly not on the top 10 or 20 list of places myself or anyone I know would want to visit (not because it's a bad city, but it's nothing special).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Antonio's staples are tourism/conventions and military/defense. Outside of that S.A. really isn't known as a massive business center. Plus, a lot of companies would rather be up I-35 not even 2 hours away in Austin. That and San Antonio never became an economic powerhouse with a substantial industry, such as Dallas and Houston with energy and related sectors. 

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.