Peabody Union (27 story residential, 354 units, 251,000 sq. ft. office, 50,000 sq. ft. retail), Peabody Plaza (9-story, 280,000 sq. ft. office), & 4 smaller buildings, MDHA Trolley Barn sites

[bmkTN]

I've always believed that Hensler would be the saving grace for this whole thing.  Eakin is crap, but I knew Hensler (with his deep-pocketed backers) would recognize the iconic potential of this location and build something really notable.  

Also, we always celebrate a height increase in a project and this one has now had TWO (!!)  Originally it was 20, then 25 or 26, and now 32.  That's just fantastic, and 32 stories at that location will be awesome!

[OnePointEast]

Imagine the view now from the I-24 overpass overlooking the metal place and downtown. Its going to be a killer view with Second Ave. Partners and this. Also, since the overpass has a good height to it, the views give justice to the height of all the buildings. They just look more massive from that view.

[MLBrumby]

If you look at the office portion that Hensler is going to do, it's obvious that he understand Eakin should have gone much bigger. There is demand!! 

[Bos2Nash]

I like the oversized "tunnel" that passes below the residential tower. I also really like this geometry of the tower much better than the previous iteration. This one respects the residential buildings at the top of Rolling Hill Mill much better. I am also very excited for a large pedestrian corridor that will run between the 5-story office building and the tower podium. I will be excited to see the more detailed renderings materiality. I think the riverfront portion of the site has some amazing potential as well, so I am excited to see how they approach that part of the site. With the connection of Crockett hopefully that will also prompt a new crosswalk across KVB as well.

I am not thrilled with several items regarding the KVB frontage though.

1. I'm not thrilled with the "stilts" look of the office building. I'll reserve a harsh critique until the materiality comes through, but the "stilts" look feels dated and is reminiscent of old modernist buildings that have not aged well.
2. WTF is up with all the hardscaping and steps that lead to a highway?? This is not a pedestrian corridor so it really won't be used as such. They should replace some of the softscaping they are removing and limit the amount of hardscape.
3. With the added parking and increased office load, I understand improving access to the site (although I'm NOT happy about a new road, even if it is reconnecting), but Crockett is too big! It should be right turn only for exits. if you want to head into the city, use Hermitage. left hand turns out of this street will be disastrous and will only cause problems.
4. It appears the development is approximately doubling the size of the ROW for the street. Currently Crockett street is used for perpendicular parking for the Energy building. Remove that, place those spots in the new garage and use the current ROW and expand the pedestrian zone along the office building. This could allow for increased greenery as well. 

[markhollin]

MDHA Design Review Committee approved the increase in height today.  Also, another new massing render.

More behind the Nashville Post paywall here:

https://www.nashvillepost.com/business/development/article/21069760/mdha-oks-rolling-mill-hill-tower-plan

 

[BnaBreaker]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that MDHA more or less always approve requests for height increases, which of course begs the question, what's the point of the height restrictions being there in the first place?  Apologies for sounding like a broken record, but it really is just so absurd.

[nashvylle]

as glad as I am to see this height increase, I'll repost this photo of the surface parking lot, as I believe whatever is developed here will be much more important to the entire Rolling Mill Hill development. It has to be iconic. 

[OnePointEast]

38 minutes ago, nashvylle said:

as glad as I am to see this height increase, I'll repost this photo of the surface parking lot, as I believe whatever is developed here will be much more important to the entire Rolling Mill Hill development. It has to be iconic. 

Who has the lot purchased and what's the max height for it?

[markhollin]

2 minutes ago, OnePointEast said:

Who has the lot purchased and what's the max height for it?

MDHA has not sold this piece yet.  They are awaiting completion of Peabody Plaza and Peabody Union (or at least near completion) and their respective parking garages, as well as Asurion's move from their 1st Avenue site so that the surface lot spaces are no longer needed.

Joe Cain, the Dir. of Urban Development at MDHA, told me several years ago that their vision for that site was a minimum 30 story tower, and he said that many developers are quite keen to land it when they finally open it up for bids.

[markhollin]

Peabody Plaza (9 stories, 230,000 sq. ft. of office space, retail, underground garage) update. Up to 2nd level along Peabody Street.

Looking NW from intersection of Hermitage Ave. and Lea Ave:

Looking north from intersection of Hermitage Ave. and Lea Ave:

Looking south from intersection of Lea Ave. and Peabody St:

Looking SW along Peabody St., at intersection with Crockett St:

[Sean blackdog]

Update from Facebook, last Wednesday. 

I can’t find out if they have a camera online. 

Edited May 27, 2019 by Sean blackdog

[titanhog]

From the Eakin FB page:

 

[MLBrumby]

I know it's silly but I resent the hell out of Eakin using those skyline shots to sell his office space. I mean, dude could have put up a much bigger, truly-urban style building, but instead puts up a squatty suburban building. Just want someone to put up a huge tower to block his precious skyline view. 

[titanhog]

1 minute ago, MLBrumby said:

I know it's silly but I resent the hell out of Eakin using those skyline shots to sell his office space. I mean, dude could have put up a much bigger, truly-urban style building, but instead puts up a squatty suburban building. Just want someone to put up a huge tower to block his precious skyline view. 

Yeah...it won't be long until those views are all gone when something is built on the two corners of KVB and Hermitage / 1st.

[BnaBreaker]

1 hour ago, MLBrumby said:

I know it's silly but I resent the hell out of Eakin using those skyline shots to sell his office space. I mean, dude could have put up a much bigger, truly-urban style building, but instead puts up a squatty suburban building. Just want someone to put up a huge tower to block his precious skyline view. 

I totally agree... it's like, YOU didn't make any efforts to contribute to the betterment of that view at all with your stupid squat blob, so you don't get to try and capitalize off the work of others to sell your blob.

[Nashvillain]

5 hours ago, MLBrumby said:

I know it's silly but I resent the hell out of Eakin using those skyline shots to sell his office space. I mean, dude could have put up a much bigger, truly-urban style building, but instead puts up a squatty suburban building. Just want someone to put up a huge tower to block his precious skyline view. 

Am I the only one who thinks it's entirely reasonable and appropriate to have severe height restrictions on Rutledge Hill? And that this building is doing that one thing right? (Even if it's botching a lot of other factors like its relationship to the street and suburban style car access.) Tall buildings on that elevation would be severely imposing and...IMHO, degrade the beauty of the river bluff.

I kind of think the new Belmont dorms are way too tall perched on their hill as well. 

[MontanaGuy]

13 hours ago, Nashvillain said:

Am I the only one who thinks it's entirely reasonable and appropriate to have severe height restrictions on Rutledge Hill? And that this building is doing that one thing right? (Even if it's botching a lot of other factors like its relationship to the street and suburban style car access.) Tall buildings on that elevation would be severely imposing and...IMHO, degrade the beauty of the river bluff.

I kind of think the new Belmont dorms are way too tall perched on their hill as well. 

I have to respectfully disagree with you about height restrictions.  The very premise of having them in the first place would suggest that we already know how we want to see new developments happen in the future and how it's all supposed to look when it's completed.  This idea is keeping our area of actual skyscrapers confined to a very small part of downtown as well as restricting the adjoining areas so that only lower bulky looking buildings are being constructed and it's killing any bold designs that might have become iconic new landmarks of Nashville in the future.  I would suggest that we should ease up on the height restrictions or possibly get rid of them entirely and let creativity and innovation set the direction of the future instead of mindless bureaucratic controls.  When you state that "tall buildings on that elevation would be severely imposing" I don't have the slightest idea what you're trying to say but if I had to guess it might be that a tall building constructed on a hill would look taller than one constructed on flat land.  The word "imposing" also means dramatic, spectacular and awe-inspiring as opposed to any negative connotations like oppressive or overwhelming!  Opening up the area where very tall buildings could be constructed would allow the skyline to develop in new and unpredictable ways that I believe would be exciting and interesting to watch unfold.  By the way, I don't get into online arguments and I never insult anyone but I do enjoy intelligent discussions and the exchange of ideas which is a healthy thing so any other viewpoints on height restrictions would make for a good conversation!  Thanks.  

[PaulChinetti]

Yeah I don't think there should be any height restrictions inside the inner loop at all.

Outside of that it can start to make sense because there are more neighborhoods but it should taper off. 

[MLBrumby]

I thought Eakin didn't get anywhere near the height limit at that location. Thought it was 30 stories, or maybe 12 a block away. What was/is it? 

My beef is not that he kept sight lines for people on RMH, but the building doesn't do a damn thing about activating the main thoroughfare beside it and 'turns away' from it. I can understand a developer being cautious, but this looks like something drawn up for Cool Springs that he just decided to plop down in the middle of town. I realize he's dropping a chunk of change on the u/g parking. I have no beef with that. 

[smeagolsfree]

You let the market dictate what height a building gets built at. If someone is crazy enough to by an acre of land for 35 million and build a 5 story building, they will never get a ROI. The higher the land price the taller the building and if the city dictate the height a building can be it will stagnate the land prices as no one will get a good ROI. That is when the developer go to planning and get the zoning changed.

[PruneTracy]

22 hours ago, Nashvillain said:

Am I the only one who thinks it's entirely reasonable and appropriate to have severe height restrictions on Rutledge Hill? And that this building is doing that one thing right? (Even if it's botching a lot of other factors like its relationship to the street and suburban style car access.) Tall buildings on that elevation would be severely imposing and...IMHO, degrade the beauty of the river bluff.

I agree, height should be stepped up from the river and Interstates south of KVB as consistent with the SoBro master plan.

[titanhog]

• ^^But...a 700' "Space Needle" type tower on the top of Rutledge Hill would be pretty cool.

[LA_TN]

22 hours ago, Nashvillain said:

Am I the only one who thinks it's entirely reasonable and appropriate to have severe height restrictions on Rutledge Hill? And that this building is doing that one thing right? (Even if it's botching a lot of other factors like its relationship to the street and suburban style car access.) Tall buildings on that elevation would be severely imposing and...IMHO, degrade the beauty of the river bluff.

I kind of think the new Belmont dorms are way too tall perched on their hill as well. 

 

36 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

I agree, height should be stepped up from the river and Interstates south of KVB as consistent with the SoBro master plan.

^^ valid points

Originally, the SoBro area was supposed to be less than 20 stories to provide a step below the downtown skyscrapers. That concept was imposed on the Encore, then thrown out the window 2 years later when Pinnacle was announced. And then again with Four Seasons because first avenue buildings were supposed to, again, provide a step below the towers beyond

But yes, your argument is valid for the Eakin building. The Hensler residential tower will stick out, until something is built at KVB/Hermitage

[nashwatcher]

Most of the land in lower SoBro is currently owned by developers. They’ll be forced to build a bunch of 6-12 story buildings. Once that land is gone, no more opportunities for increased density from taller more ambitious towers that could have gone there. In 50 years we’ll be looking back wondering why we warped the free market with height restrictions and didn’t allow increased density in our core IMO...

Height restrictions should be thrown out

[Ingram]

Ohhhhh the horror, no densayteeeeeeee!!!

These people know what they're doing and are preserving a quality of life. I didn't know ordinary citizens are supposed to be subservient to "elite" oligarchs and their mindless psycophants. I'm glad there's a system to keep them in check.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Ingram