Jump to content

Paramount Tower, 65-68 stories, approx. 750', 200 units, $240 million, Church Street Park


markhollin

Recommended Posts

How much of the building do those exposed columns (or whatever they're called) at the bottom actually support?  I know that design has been done many times before, and I have always liked the look of it, but I'm not gonna lie.  It does make me a little nervous.  I know there probably isn't reason to be nervous, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if, say, some person is texting and driving and accidentally plows into it?  Somebody tell me I'm being crazy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


14 minutes ago, BnaBreaker said:

How much of the building do those exposed columns (or whatever they're called) at the bottom actually support?  I know that design has been done many times before, and I have always liked the look of it, but I'm not gonna lie.  It does make me a little nervous.  I know there probably isn't reason to be nervous, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if, say, some person is texting and driving and accidentally plows into it?  Somebody tell me I'm being crazy.  

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2014/04/17/the_citicorp_tower_design_flaw_that_could_have_wiped_out_the_skyscraper.html

Well it can be a lot but hopefully we've progressed a little farther technologically since then!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2014/04/17/the_citicorp_tower_design_flaw_that_could_have_wiped_out_the_skyscraper.html

Well it can be a lot but hopefully we've progressed a little farther technologically since then!

That is EXACTLY the story that comes to mind for me when I see buildings with that feature.  The Citicorp Building has always been one of my favorite towers on earth, but reading that story several years ago definitely spooked me a bit.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BnaBreaker said:

How much of the building do those exposed columns (or whatever they're called) at the bottom actually support?  I know that design has been done many times before, and I have always liked the look of it, but I'm not gonna lie.  It does make me a little nervous.  I know there probably isn't reason to be nervous, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if, say, some person is texting and driving and accidentally plows into it?  Somebody tell me I'm being crazy.  

I was think the exact same thing except I was also thinking what if someone hit it on purpose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, PaulChinetti said:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2014/04/17/the_citicorp_tower_design_flaw_that_could_have_wiped_out_the_skyscraper.html

Well it can be a lot but hopefully we've progressed a little farther technologically since then!

This building is now a case study for many architecture programs. Crazy how sometimes the easy things are missed. Luckily this project wasn't a catastrophe and they were able to fix it (with a lot of money of course!)

43 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

The Citicorp example is a bit of an outlier because of the nature of the design (not the stilts, but the fact that they supported the sides of the building). Most buildings, including Paramount it appears, are supported at the corners. If you want to worry about a downtown building then worry about James K. Polk which I am always half-expecting to see as a heap of rubble on the news one day.

Don't let the rendering fool you, these columns are stinking huge. Big enough so nothing that can roll down Church Street is going to take them out.

Plus, you have to consider that all buildings have these columns, they're just hidden behind cladding. If you have a vehicle that is big enough to do damage to a column supporting a skyscraper then it doesn't really matter if that column is exposed or has a few layers of brick or glass in front of it.

 

Spot on. Architects and engineers are now getting more creative with the bases of towers for city aesthetics and activation. 

Boston recently completed a tower with this design. The Paramount is a bit taller and the columns are further out, but the concept is the same. These suckers are tied into deep pyles and then protected with a lot of reinforcement or if they are steel, they are monster enough where it would probably take more than anything that Church Street can hold. 

Image result for 888 boylston street

 

23 hours ago, BnaBreaker said:

Somebody tell me I'm being crazy.  

Yes. A bit crazy. Not completely, but a bit 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though those columns will be very big, they are supporting a large portion of the building and will need protection. I would expect some type of bollard to be placed  along the street edge of the property as to not risk anything hitting them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Metro Government plans to issue a Request For Proposal (RFP) involving the Church Street =pocket park and Parmount Tower.

“The proposed swap elegantly addresses several important, lingering and compounding issues — such as on-street homelessness, accessible urban public space, and Metro cash flow — not to mention adding additional residential units and residents in a stunning new tower,” Giarratana emailed the Post on Tuesday. “We stand ready to execute the transaction but were recently informed that Metro intends to issue a request for proposal for the park parcel. As we have not yet received a copy of the RFP, we are unable to comment further.”

Giarratana did not noted in the email message if he plans to bid on the site, but he has told the Post in the past he is open to doing so.

Giarratana has stressed that his company has offered to develop Metro’s proposed Permanent Supportive Housing project without any fee or reimbursement of overhead.

“This negotiated bundle of consideration was conservatively valued at $12 million,” he emailed the Post. “Together with the $3 million in new, annual property taxes that our proposed condominium tower would generate, the land swap is a very compelling opportunity for Metro. For its part, Metro is to convey the park parcel to us with the same zoning we received for our 505 parcel back in 2014.”

More behind the Nashville Post paywall here:

https://www.nashvillepost.com/business/development/article/21061523/metro-to-ask-for-proposals-for-pocket-park
 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the current method of biding , Metro has to go through their e-bid site. That is the only way they can bid any Metro owned property according tot he way Bret explained it at the last meet up. Tony may end up saving money  by doing it this way if he does not have to the Anne Dudley Davis Blvd improvements and the Homeless center and not having to give Metro the other land he owns.

Tony will probably end up on the better end of the deal than Metro now. Metro is not going to get what they think is market value for that land I do not think. Its a very small parcel and you have to have something unique like Paramount to make it work .

 

If they do proposals as stated Tony has a huge head start.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, titanhog said:

Yes..if those who oppose the land swap with Tony and demand the city put up the land for sale to the highest bidder get their way...they may end up with less value in the end than what Tony is willing to give them now.

If that happens, it is what is is. It’s better this way in the long run.

I don’t like the idea of developers making deals with the city... (Rolling Mill Hill)

Edited by nashvylle
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Perhaps I’m too dense to not be able to figure this out alone... but what are the chances that Paramount actually ends up materializing now, thanks to the abandonment of the land swap? Clearly nothing’s being done yet, so maybe he’s still got a fighting chance ? I have to wonder whether he’d be able to grab the park from Metro ahead of his opponents at this point... the way the articles have worded things imply the tower is done for, but since when was the news ever trustworthy...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the site will go up for bid. 

On a related note, there is a member of the Parks Commission who's reportedly trying to sabotage the whole Paramount deal. He is the lead executive for Boyle which has a whole bunch of apartments underway two blocks over at Capitol View. A conflict of interest for sure. He was outvoted on approving the original land swap, but then the politics about the project started to heat up from the mayor's office and Metro council. Rumor is that this individual was very involved in stirring up opposition. 

Edited by MLBrumby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • 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.