Modera SoBro, 825 6th Ave. South, 3.9 acres (Phase I: 8 stories, 404 units; Phase II: 11 stories, 309 units)

[Deepdish53]

Long time lurker, first time poster.

@smeagolsfree I believe that ROW acquisition line is just illustrating that sliver along Division Street being dedicated to the city's ROW. Right now, the sidewalk is bumped out to avoid an existing structure - I'm sure the city would prefer to make that a straight path and provide continuous street parking for that whole block. I'd be surprised if that kept the developer from being able to put a building on anything north of the yellow line.

[markhollin]

3 minutes ago, Deepdish53 said:

Long time lurker, first time poster.

Welcome to the forum, Deepdish53!  : )

[smeagolsfree]

Welcome to the forum Deepdish53! Glad to have you here.

In your opinion, do you think that the developer would put a structure on the entire lot, knowing how Metro is doing things with bonus height with the other developments in SoBro?

I think they are going to limit their building to part of the lot and offer a park like feature as an amenity. A large garage on such a large parcel will be so uninviting, IMO.

[Luvemtall]

3 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

 

I think they are going to limit their building to part of the lot and offer a park like feature as an amenity. A large garage on such a large parcel will be so uninviting, IMO.

I sure hope this to be the case, it does make sense and will provide the best of both a taller more prominent structure and the green space so desirable for residential use. 

[Deepdish53]

You certainly could be right! With how we've seen proposals for other parcels this large in SoBro be presented, I wouldn't be surprised if this one went a similar way. I was just pointing out that I don't think the ROW acquisition line along Division Street precludes the developer from building up to Division. The leader lines from the "Interior of Building/Garage" label seem to be very general in nature and aren't necessarily delineating where any structure would go, IMO.

[Bos2Nash]

I think this lot is unique due to Divison being elevated and the grade change along 6th Ave climbing approximately 16'-0" and dropping approximately 20' along Mulberry down to Vine (see parcel clip below). I agree with @Deepdish53(welcome to the forum by the way, thanks for joining!) in that the Future ROW shouldnt hold back the developer. I think because the building was there when the Division Street bridge was built, they jogged the sidewalk to avoid, but they still acquired that ROW for the Division Street ROW. The developer is probably anticipating having to acquire that portion of the ROW back from the city. 

Additionally, Vine and Mulberry are considered "Other Streets" according to the Downtown Code which means these streets are governed by the other frontages of the parcel (so Division as a Primary and 6th Ave as a Secondary street) and while I agree that it would be ashamed that Vine and Mulberry is all parking garage fronted, it appears the property owner is not obliged to do anything else and planning would need to incorporate something into the presumed SP for this parcel to get the developer to do otherwise. Personally I don't see them pushing too hard for the frontages along Vine and Mulberry because Division is such a hard divide from the rest of the city. I would hope Vine could be activated though so the funky triangle lot across Vine could be activated as well.

I would envision the developer proposing covering the site with a single garage and lining said garage along Division Street (City shouldn't budge on this street frontage) and possibly lining along 6th Ave. Trash, Loading, Generator, etc. would most likely be off of Vine Street. The main entrance may very well be at the ROW acquistion point along Division (height wise it may be above the highest level of parking). The image below is the corner of Division and 6th and one would hope that this is an active corner with possibly stoops or something. Because no retail is mentioned, it is unfortunate that this corner wouldn't be activated by that, but maybe they will do walk-outs units along 6th Ave and create almost like a brownstone effect.

As for open space/park like we have been seeing on the Cumulus site and the 2nd & Peabody site. I think they will incorporate that on top of the parking structure (or at least should) and have that be the division between the two structures. 

Thnking crudely through it I could see the east and west sides getting the structures and either a connector at the ROW acquired spot or keep that open for public access to the open space.

Another option is a single tower, but I don't that many unit getting into it unless it is a multi-pronged building

As unfortunate as it is, I feel like this will not be a publiclly accessible open space like the recent big proposals have put out just because of the proximity to other locations doesn't allow for it. The Cumulus and 2nd & Peabody is close enough to others that is could easily extend the walkability of downtown, but I don't think it is as feasible here (could totally be if the city and developer worked through it though).

Lastly, looking through the Bonus Height program, this building (which has a base zoning of 8 stories) is allowed to gain 11 extra stories of Bonus Height (for 19 stories total) if they checked all the boxes. That may be difficult here as each category gives a max of 2 stories. The realistic categories I see them checking are LEED (+2 stories), Underground/lined parking (+2 stories) and public parking (+2 stories). Open Space and pervious surface could be plausible (which would be +4 total), but doubtful. I would think this developer will work through the Bonus Height program and then go for an overal height modification then to get up to around 20 stories as the is what Albion went up to. But I do not anticipate going above 20. That's completely speculation and who know what is actually gonna happen. They may come in and ask for 30 and get worked back to 20. But the large footprint of covering the whole site may be why the unit count is so high because they are looking to pack a ton of units into a shorter building(s).

 

[nashvylle]

@Bos2Nash can you explain what you mean by "jogged the sidewalk to avoid, but still acquired the ROW"? Thanks

[Bos2Nash]

13 minutes ago, nashvylle said:

@Bos2Nash can you explain what you mean by "jogged the sidewalk to avoid, but still acquired the ROW"? Thanks

Similar to what DeepDish mentioned, the preferred treatment of the sidewalk would be to get it straight, but the warehouse building was already built. You can see in the image below how the sidewalk (blue line) moves out and around a portion of the property in discussion (and a tiny corner of the building), yet the property line runs straight. What Metro most likely did (IMO) is they acquired a portion of land that the existing warehouse and its subsequent access (hence the trapezoidal shape) is built of for a straighter ROW for the Division Street bridge. The developer is probably in talks to acquire that chunk of land back from Metro.

[smeagolsfree]

Based on what planning is doing with the district bonus height program, I think all bets are off, They will probably seek an DTC modification much the same as all of the other projects seem to be doing.

My question though is this. Are you suggesting that they would do a curb cut off of Division into this Project? If so, and I am not saying that you are saying that, but I don’t think Metro will do that as there are none for the other projects off of the viaduct that I know of. I have a hunch this is going to be another Special type of project. 

I know of someone that knows what the plan is and they are being tight lipped and will or cannot say anything. 

[nashvylle]

51 minutes ago, Bos2Nash said:

yet the property line runs straight. What Metro most likely did (IMO) is they acquired a portion of land that the existing warehouse and its subsequent access (hence the trapezoidal shape) is built of for a straighter ROW for the Division Street bridge. The developer is probably in talks to acquire that chunk of land back from Metro.

 

Thanks for your explanation, but the existing building ends where it ends. Metro had to build their sidewalk because of the existing building. Why did metro need to acquire any land (the trapezoid) at all? Was the property line redrawn after this warehouse was built, and therefore metro had to purchase it, or did the warehouse have an entrance to where Division Street Connector is now, and Metro had to purchase it? Thanks

Edited October 22, 2021 by nashvylle

[smeagolsfree]

Seeing what you folks are saying now. That’s a whopper of a garage. I don’t like that at all. Had to blow up a lot and hard to do on this tiny a$$ screen.

[smeagolsfree]

This tower can go any  number of ways, It could be a V shape, 2 towers stacked, orrrrr, a large curved tower atop the garage. The orientation could be interesting.

[Bos2Nash]

2 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:

My question though is this. Are you suggesting that they would do a curb cut off of Division into this Project? If so, and I am not saying that you are saying that, but I don’t think Metro will do that as there are none for the other projects off of the viaduct that I know of. I have a hunch this is going to be another Special type of project. 

I don't think there would be a curb cut on Division. At least I don't believe there should be one. Who knows want the developer could be thinking. If I was part of planning I would move all vehicular access to Vine/Mulberry, but it wouldn't shock me if there is a primary vehicle entrance on 6th Avenue.

2 hours ago, nashvylle said:

Thanks for your explanation, but the existing building ends where it ends. Metro had to build their sidewalk because of the existing building. Why did metro need to acquire any land (the trapezoid) at all? Was the property line redrawn after this warehouse was built, and therefore metro had to purchase it, or did the warehouse have an entrance to where Division Street Connector is now, and Metro had to purchase it? Thanks

I have no idea what actually occured to construct the Division Street bridge. The ROW acquisition is just my thought on why Metro would own that little sliver. 

2020 Aerial via the Parcel Viewer

2014 Aerial via the Parcel Viewer

It looks like the to get the ROW for the Division Street bridge alignment they had to take the northwest corner of the parcel. The alignment just so happens to appear to take the northwest corner of the building so there was a funky alignment condition here. The Wild Wild South that is Lafayette area haha.

2 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:

Seeing what you folks are saying now. That’s a whopper of a garage. I don’t like that at all. Had to blow up a lot and hard to do on this tiny a$$ screen.

It's certainly would be a MASSIVE garage, but if it is lined and developed correctly we may never know it exists. Guess we will just have to have some patience haha.

[Luvemtall]

Question here, wasn’t this once proposed as 3 buildings with one being 40 stories? If so, why wouldn’t it be able to go that high again? 

[Flatrock]

1 hour ago, Luvemtall said:

Question here, wasn’t this once proposed as 3 buildings with one being 40 stories? If so, why wouldn’t it be able to go that high again? 

I think because the project you're referencing was (as you correctly stated) - just a proposal. Never a viable project. It bit the dust in early, early stage, without any real permissions/entitlements given by city planning. If I remember, one of the principals passed away and everything stopped. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

[smeagolsfree]

1 hour ago, Flatrock said:

I think because the project you're referencing was (as you correctly stated) - just a proposal. Never a viable project. It bit the dust in early, early stage, without any real permissions/entitlements given by city planning. If I remember, one of the principals passed away and everything stopped. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

You are correct and the specific plan that was proposed was withdrawn.

[smeagolsfree]

Looking at the Sub-district zoning for this address, it looks as if they can go 12 by rights and 16 max in bonus height since they front Division. Now I don’t know if they have to have a Division street address or not to qualify. That will be a sticky subject. Depending on the way this plays out the garage levels may not count against the overall floor count.

So they could in effect go up to around 28 by maxing the bonus height.

This also sits outside the MDHA design review purview as well.

[PillowTalk4]

What would be the reason for there being a 12 story height restriction for a lot that has nothing but light industrial and a porn shop in the area?  Was someone afraid a taller building close to the interstate would be a hazard to drivers?  I'll never understand Nashville and these silly height restrictions in the downtown core.  Codes really need to be revisited for new buildings proposed from Jefferson Street to I-40/65 on the south side of town.  If not all the way to the fairgrounds.  There has to be someone in a capacity that can influence rewriting codes to remove such restrictions and presenting new less restrictive codes especially in SoBro and the area around the Sounds Stadium.

[smeagolsfree]

I do think the DTC is going to be revisited sooner rather than later from what I have heard through the grapevine.

[MLBrumby]

12 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

I do think the DTC is going to be revisited sooner rather than later from what I have heard through the grapevine.

Are you hearing that the changes will allow taller buildings to be approved more easily? 

[Bos2Nash]

22 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:

Looking at the Sub-district zoning for this address, it looks as if they can go 12 by rights and 16 max in bonus height since they front Division. Now I don’t know if they have to have a Division street address or not to qualify. That will be a sticky subject. Depending on the way this plays out the garage levels may not count against the overall floor count.

So they could in effect go up to around 28 by maxing the bonus height.

This also sits outside the MDHA design review purview as well.

Not sure where you get that Division has special treatment. According to the currently adopted DTC base zoning would start at 8 stories and only Lafayette and Transitional Properties get special treatment.

Here is my height assessment quoted from above.

On 10/22/2021 at 10:34 AM, Bos2Nash said:

Lastly, looking through the Bonus Height program, this building (which has a base zoning of 8 stories) is allowed to gain 11 extra stories of Bonus Height (for 19 stories total) if they checked all the boxes. That may be difficult here as each category gives a max of 2 stories. The realistic categories I see them checking are LEED (+2 stories), Underground/lined parking (+2 stories) and public parking (+2 stories). Open Space and pervious surface could be plausible (which would be +4 total), but doubtful. I would think this developer will work through the Bonus Height program and then go for an overall height modification then to get up to around 20 stories as the is what Albion went up to. But I do not anticipate going above 20. That's completely speculation and who know what is actually gonna happen. They may come in and ask for 30 and get worked back to 20. But the large footprint of covering the whole site may be why the unit count is so high because they are looking to pack a ton of units into a shorter building(s).

 

[smeagolsfree]

You are right, EYES, Playing tricks on me switching back from screen to screen on this stupid little machine. I went from looking at the general area to the Rutledge area and Primary and secondary streets. I will bet they go with a DTC modification.

I can always do a split screen but that just makes things worse for me as far as seeing. Since I have been using this iPad for everything my eyes have gotten worse and played for tricks on me that the Joker has on Batman.

Hopefully computer will be back from my service soon.

 

[Bos2Nash]

Smeag to his current situation

How we all imagine the delivery guy with his new computer

[smeagolsfree]

Pretty much everyday…yep!

[PillowTalk4]

So, if I'm interpreting the DTC correctly, this building more than likely will not exceed 17 stories?  They can start at 8 stories and get a bonus height of 9 stories provided all criteria is met except historic building preservation?

If that's the case, the DTC needs to be revamped ASAP.  There's just no reason for the maximum height in that area to be restricted to 8 stories.

You can see the DTC Bonus Height chart here... Metro Nashville DTC - Bonus Height Chart go to page 99.

Edited October 26, 2021 by PillowTalk4