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

[DDIG]

44 minutes ago, MLBrumby said:

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. 

All I know is it is still a homeless toilet. No matter how fired up the "opposition" gets, it will remain that until the day it is swapped, sold or developed.

Edited June 3, 2019 by DDIG

[PianoKing03]

Thanks; I hadn’t heard about whether it was still supposed to be up for bid.  I’d say if that’s the case, Tony ought to be in good shape.

 

Perhaps this sets me as an oddity, but I actually rather like Steve Maher’s (MJM Architects)  idea of a raised tower above a park, if it’s feasible. However, it may not be, with the tower being so large. Perhaps if those arguing for the sake of green space are so irritated, they should try to compromise with some solution like this, not claim they can make a park “that works”. It’s going to be the same regardless of what they do... something really ought to change, and I personally think Mr. Giarratana has the right idea... But that doesn’t mean I don’t understand the aggravation of lost nature in the city center. That’s why perhaps a raised green space would be a solution. Or at least, that’s how I see it. Is it just me, or is all of this incessant hubbub about the whole ordeal not severely overstated anyway? You’d think it was life or death... Oh well. I can’t make a difference myself; I can only have an opinion, I suppose.

11 minutes ago, DDIG said:

All I know is it is still a homeless toilet. No matter how fired up the "opposition" gets, it will remain that until the day it is swapped, sold or developed.

That’s exactly right; it’s nothing short of ridiculous. It will NOT change if it stays a park, I personally believe.

[Mr_Bond]

9 hours ago, PianoKing03 said:

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...?

Welcome to the forum, @PianoKing03.

[Andy20]

If Briley does not win the election, can a new mayor come in and say the land is no longer for sale? Briley has sold a lot of metro land, and I think a lot of other candidates, like Cooper, would not be for selling as much land, if any. Personally, I wish the land swap had occurred and the tower had already started. I love the design and the slenderness of it.

[PianoKing03]

10 hours ago, Andy20 said:

If Briley does not win the election, can a new mayor come in and say the land is no longer for sale? Briley has sold a lot of metro land, and I think a lot of other candidates, like Cooper, would not be for selling as much land, if any. Personally, I wish the land swap had occurred and the tower had already started. I love the design and the slenderness of it.

I unfortunately don’t know about that... I would assume so. I personally hope he does.

11 hours ago, Mr_Bond said:

Welcome to the forum, @PianoKing03.

Thank you kindly!

[DDIG]

18 hours ago, Andy20 said:

If Briley does not win the election, can a new mayor come in and say the land is no longer for sale? Briley has sold a lot of metro land, and I think a lot of other candidates, like Cooper, would not be for selling as much land, if any. Personally, I wish the land swap had occurred and the tower had already started. I love the design and the slenderness of it.

Not to get political but Cooper is bad for downtown and business period. One of his core campaign talking points is downtown has grown enough, it is time to work on the surrounding areas. The idea that you are done growing downtown is absurd. It is the economic lifeblood of your city, without it there's not anything else to work on. Sure we need to do more to address the needs of surrounding areas, but you need to keep downtown progressing and hopefully climb out of the budget mess the current Mayor inherited to do a better job at that.

Edited June 4, 2019 by DDIG

[Andy20]

Yeah, but we all know how politicians are. They say one thing and do another. Saying he wants to send money back to the neighborhoods is the right message at the right time for everyone who doesn’t live downtown. It’s the perfect message, with his name recognition, to get elected. I can’t imagine he would actually stop all growth downtown. He will most likely minimize giving developers money. I’m predicting Cooper will win this one after a run off. 

[BnaBreaker]

2 hours ago, DDIG said:

Not to get political but Cooper is bad for downtown and business period. One of his core campaign talking points is downtown has grown enough, it is time to work on the surrounding areas. The idea that you are done growing downtown is absurd. It is the economic lifeblood of your city, without it there's not anything else to work on. Sure we need to do more to address the needs of surrounding areas, but you need to keep downtown progressing and hopefully climb out of the budget mess the current Mayor inherited to do a better job at that.

That's ridiculous.  It is their job to walk and chew gum at the same time.  He might as well be saying 'the fire department has been funded enough, time to work on the police department.' 

[CenterHill]

3 hours ago, DDIG said:

Not to get political but Cooper is bad for downtown and business period. One of his core campaign talking points is downtown has grown enough, it is time to work on the surrounding areas. The idea that you are done growing downtown is absurd. It is the economic lifeblood of your city, without it there's not anything else to work on. Sure we need to do more to address the needs of surrounding areas, but you need to keep downtown progressing and hopefully climb out of the budget mess the current Mayor inherited to do a better job at that.

I don't hear Cooper saying he wants to stifle growth downtown or anywhere else.     If you've followed his tenure on Council, he advocates for fiscal responsibility and has been opposed to many of the incentive packages offered to private companies.    He's saying the allocation of tax dollars have become disproportionately weighted to tourist-focused purposes downtown, and not where 98% of county residents live and send their kids to school.     For example, he's talked about restructuring the downtown tourist development zone so that fewer tourist dollars are dedicated to the MCC and the NCVC, and more can be used for general revenue needs that benefit the city's residents, like education and infrastructure.    

[DDIG]

46 minutes ago, CenterHill said:

I don't hear Cooper saying he wants to stifle growth downtown or anywhere else.     If you've followed his tenure on Council, he advocates for fiscal responsibility and has been opposed to many of the incentive packages offered to private companies.    He's saying the allocation of tax dollars have become disproportionately weighted to tourist-focused purposes downtown, and not where 98% of county residents live and send their kids to school.     For example, he's talked about restructuring the downtown tourist development zone so that fewer tourist dollars are dedicated to the MCC and the NCVC, and more can be used for general revenue needs that benefit the city's residents, like education and infrastructure.    

I guess. I've seen a few of his more off the cuff speeches that come across as more hostile to business, downtown and growth than his official campaign message. Also I know him to often slightly misrepresent the truth without proper context to invoke emotional  reactions. I don't have a problem exploring diverting some of the tourism tax dollars, however there are realities that if a recession hits and tourism and conventions slow suddenly we lose the income to pay down MCC debt and we got big problems.

Edited June 4, 2019 by DDIG

[AronG]

Yeah, I'm always appreciative of the council members that try to dig into the structure of our incentives and budgets, make sense of them, and make constructive recommendations to improve them. Bob Mendes does a great job on this (e.g. http://www.mendesfornashville.com/a-better-budget-for-nashville/). The problem with Cooper is he seems to spend more effort demagoguing  anything that gets any traction, regardless of whether it has any merit or substance. Recent examples would be the cherry trees and the parking plan. It's probably a smart strategy in this day of social media outrage, but it rubs me the wrong way. It's too bad; I definitely have my problems with Briley and I'd love to find an urban-friendly alternative.

[MLBrumby]

I've had minimal personal professional associations with Cooper, but I'm not impressed by him. He's a dullard who seems to like the latest, trendy political memes. So yes, that does sound like a demagogue, #AronG. Don't want anyone to think I'm piling on at this time, but frankly I don't see much to like about Nashville's current crop of mayoral candidates. Good thing, I can't vote there.  

[PaulChinetti]

If Briley and company could get out of their own way they would totally be a middle of the road/left leaning candidate that could easily get elected in Nashville.

Except - all the recent fiascos, be it budgets, parking meters, scooters, the land swap for the building which is this threads namesake, and even the cherry trees. They just seem like they have either no experience or common sense. 

[titanhog]

4 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

If Briley and company could get out of their own way they would totally be a middle of the road/left leaning candidate that could easily get elected in Nashville.

Except - all the recent fiascos, be it budgets, parking meters, scooters, the land swap for the building which is this threads namesake, and even the cherry trees. They just seem like they have either no experience or common sense. 

The last 2 mayors we've had makes me realize how good Dean and Bredesen were.

[12Mouth]

There is a lot of talk from Cooper and JRC about protecting our neighborhoods. While I’m sure this plays well, and I’m in favor of building strong neighborhoods, this language has historically been code for anti-density/anti-development/anti-change. This makes me nervous about both.

I will say that JRC seems like the only candidate who has the leadership/personality to push through major reforms like transit.

[Armacing]

We need someone to give Tony G a definitive "No" so he can drop this idea of building over the homeless park and start looking for other places to build his tower.

[smeagolsfree]

Well, there could be an alternative and that is if TG built on the lot one block east where the parking lot is he tuns, but not sure he owns, then it is .05 acres larger than the park.

[Pdt2f]

9 hours ago, titanhog said:

The last 2 mayors we've had makes me realize how good Dean and Bredesen were.

Dean pushing debt obligations down the road is half the reason we’re in the financial mess we’re in. I do admit that he’s a far cry better than the past two losers. 

[archilove]

On 6/4/2019 at 2:19 PM, titanhog said:

The last 2 mayors we've had makes me realize how good Dean and Bredesen were.

Exactly.  And I think we've run out of luck on candidates. By the way, didn't  Briley also say that we were not to be judged by what we build and it was time to allocate money to the suburbs?

[deletethisaccount]

On 2/11/2019 at 11:26 AM, NashvilleObserver said:

A view of our skyline with Paramount tower.

 

[markhollin]

The newly formed Historic Capital Corridor Foundation (a group opposed to the Paramount Tower at Church Street pocket park) has hired Dan Biederman, who helped revitalize NYC's Bryant Park, to try anddo the same here.

He is being asked to to craft recommendations on how to repurpose and program the downtown pocket park, in addition to Anne Dallas Dudley Boulevard, Legislative Plaza, the War Memorial Building and the Hermitage Hotel.

Thomas Mulgrew, Mayor Briley's spokesman, said, "An RFP to redesign Church Street Park is still being considered. However, before moving forward with any of that process, the Planning Department, in consultation with other departments, will hold a series of public discussions to gather community input and feedback."

Biederman is tasked with:

• Creating options to activate the downtown corridor throughout the year.
• Creating a business plan and strategies for operating the corridor, including keeping it clean, landscaped, programmed and staffed.
• Creating a revenue plan to develop and implement a redesign of the park.
   

More at NBJ here:

https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2019/07/23/group-hires-new-york-planner-to-redesign-church.html?iana=hpmvp_nsh_news_headline

[PillowTalk4]

It seems to me, by building another residential tower on Church Street you accomplish the first bullet.  Especially if you add more retail and dinning options along with them.  The second bullet can be accomplished through a joint strategy combining the city and the businesses located along Church Street.  After all it is in their best interest to keep Church Street looking good and creating a vibrant community.

[DDIG]

You aren't going to reprogram that tiny park. It isn't Bryant Park. It is a lost cause. Sorry. As long as those bathrooms are available across the street and other services down Church, it will be the congregation area. There were about 30 homeless there yesterday as I drove by. A lot of them have fold out tailgate chairs and just hangout and smoke. 

[Bos2Nash]

The NCDC has chosen Anne Dallas Dudley Blvd to the be the primary corridor for this years Park(ing) Day. This is the 8th year for Nashville with this event and 16th year globally. The parallel parking spots along the street will be turned into temporary parklets for the day and continue the discussion surrounding Church Street Park. I for one am very excited that they are moving away from Broadway and will attempt to grab more of the every day Nashvillian by being more in the heart of the downtown district. Many of the large design firms in the city participate in the event and should be interesting to see what each group comes up with collectively.

[Armacing]

On ‎7‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 10:20 AM, DDIG said:

You aren't going to reprogram that tiny park. It isn't Bryant Park. It is a lost cause. Sorry. As long as those bathrooms are available across the street and other services down Church, it will be the congregation area. There were about 30 homeless there yesterday as I drove by. A lot of them have fold out tailgate chairs and just hangout and smoke. 

What other "services" are located on Church street?  Just curious because I couldn't immediately figure out what you were referring to...  I agree with you about the park, by the way.