Encore has to wait...

[smeagolsfree]

The only problem I think with the below ground parking here is the expense of digging the hole. As soon as you go 6 inches down there is solid rock. Some of you may know what the cost difference is between below ground parking and building a garage on top. I don't. Another factor in So-bro is that when it rains hard, it floods. That may be a problem with the Hampton Inn's below ground parking as well. Dave may remember more about the history of flooding in that area and may be able to shed some light on it.

[Kheldane]

I

[it's just dave]

I remember a couple of flooding events, most notably 1975 when parts of the now Coliseum area had some water, but I don't recall if that affected SoBro or not. I think the historical incidents of flooding in SoBro probably pre-date the dam at Old Hickory and that's been there many, many decades. I don't think flooding will be a problem. I'm sure Hampton's engineers have the rain water covered.

[smeagolsfree]

Hey Dave,

That's good to know. All I know is that a number of times after a heavy downpour is that I end up driving through 5 or 6 inches of water from time to time in that area.

I do think Tony will be mindful of the area when the Encore gets built. I think the building, whatever the final design is will fit in nicely to the area. Remember there is a lot more about to happen in that area and I don't think the height of that building will be an issue after the stadium and other projects get built. Look for some other big projects in So-Bro.

I think by next year, there will be at least 5 different companies working on differing developments. Struever Bros., Novare, Direct Development, Possibly Southern Land, and whom ever the Ragland group gets to work on things they have planned in So-Bro as well. The Encore will not look that out of place. The planned CC could have large developments around it as well. So-Bro is the natural extension of the downtown area.

[bzorch]

This thread has brought up some important fundamental urban design issues regarding this area and others. I have not understood why the large tower building typology is considered desirable over mid-rise buildings. Though towers have their place as those buildings that define a cities skyline and recognizable identity from afar they do not in my opinion contribute to the pedestrian-scaled urban fabrics of great cities and neighborhoods from around the world.

In fact the towers do the exact opposite and disconnect its inhabitants from the site. To take the investment in a large tower and spread it around has the opportunity to create a continuous and lively urban experience, strengthening the whole area verses a single lot. (I recognized economics can play a large part in deciding to construct a tower due to land cost or inability to assembling land)

I also think that it is difficult to create beautiful tower. There are many examples of great skyscrapers, however too often towers fall short. Because of the repetitive floor plates, they begin to look homogenous and boring. Residential tower are especially vulnerable to this. They can easily end up looking like a time share tower on the coast of Miami. As for the glass towers, they have their place as well. A few do provide interesting reflections (i.e. Boston's John Hancock Tower), but too many sucks the life out the city. I would not want SoBro to look like downtown Dallas.

I have attached a few photos as food for thought of how mid-rise could effectively create a wonderful urban environment.

This is an example of mixing the tower with the mid-rise.

[southsideJ]

The high-rise, mid-rise debate is just a matter of taste, but I don't think it is an either/or topic. Sure a tower could fall short--so could a mid-rise, so could a surface parking lot. Our city needs a balance of skyscrapers, mid-rises and other smaller buildings as someone stated previously. Encore is not an exceptionally tall building by any stretch. I don't see the relevance of comparing Nashville's urban landscape to Paris'--but even Paris has a skyline w/modern towers in their CBD. That is where Encore is proposed.

Building a 20-23 story tower is certainly not going to make SoBro unfriendly to pedetsrians. It will actually create about 300 residents and this will help to spur on more res construction and the formation of a neighborhood--then you need retail for that neighborhood--then the residents walk to the stores and hopefully parks and to the Symphony and the Arena and that is pedestrian activity in SoBro.

If the streets and buildings and the environment of the neighborhood is designed w/pedestrians in mind, then the city can have towers, mid-rises and be pedestrian friendly.

[FutureArchitect]

I disagree that the structures built around the Schermerhorn should be based on the same architectural style. In essence, I think if that happens it will take away from the character of the Schermerhorn itself. Look at cities like New York and Chicago, every corner I turn is anticipated with excitement not knowing what you might see next. It would be boring to me to be in an area where all the buildings look alike. I say build the Encore according to its current design and let the Schermerhorn radiate the area with its own architectural style.

[ATLBrain]

In fact the towers do the exact opposite and disconnect its inhabitants from the site. To take the investment in a large tower and spread it around has the opportunity to create a continuous and lively urban experience, strengthening the whole area verses a single lot.

Not necessarily. It's just that too often (unfortunately in the newer cities), the large towers ignore the street.

Also, the economics of urban development (i.e. land acquisition costs) can't be underplayed. If you're going to want density, you need to accommodate it in positive ways. As such, the cost of land in SoBro will continue to go up.

I think this is a good example of not ignoring the street. Also, look at Adelicia. In terms of height, it's close to Encore. Just to emphasize a key point here, the BZA is balking at 35 feet!

[NewTowner]

I disagree that the structures built around the Schermerhorn should be based on the same architectural style. In essence, I think if that happens it will take away from the character of the Schermerhorn itself. Look at cities like New York and Chicago, every corner I turn is anticipated with excitement not knowing what you might see next. It would be boring to me to be in an area where all the buildings look alike. I say build the Encore according to its current design and let the Schermerhorn radiate the area with its own architectural style.

In the end, the elements of this debate which have proved hardest to resolve are most likely rooted in different--and competing--frames of reference. After spending substantial amounts of time in Paris, New York, Rome, Savannah, Edinburgh, Florence, Nimes, and other places which have been--at one time or another, in part or in whole--built with a coherent urban vision, using the size and perspective of human beings as their ultimate point of reference or "design template", I feel that my uniquely skyline-oriented and size-enamored American urban sensibilities were changed. While I still love the grand and magnificent, I have also come to love what can only be called...how shall I say?...COZY...streets and plazas.

Due to the fact that skyscrapers can only be seen by human beings from a distance, we should none of us be surprised to observe and note that every Urban Planet contributor who has spoken in favor of the Encore's current design has referred to it FROM A DISTANCE...the "skyline view"...the "view from I-440"...multiple references to how the building will sit in the context of future SoBro highrises, which assumes the viewer is enjoying a distant panoramic view of the whole area...

Skyscrapers can certainly create compelling views from a distance, particularly when they are grouped together in such a way as to impress and instill a sense of the sublime in the observer. To those of us who grew up in America, watching American movies and perusing futuristic renderings of hypothetical "cities of progress," the skyscraper carries a lot of emotional weight. One cannot over-estimate their picturesque associations with bright lights, big city...

But the acheivement of such dizzying heights is simply not the pressing priority of those of us who argue the Encore should show more deference to the classical dignity of the Schermerhorn. Rather--if I may be so bold--we want the creation of an intimate, cozy, human-scaled, decorous, and intracity vista-friendly fabric. The Shermerhorn has set a magnificant tone for this (while of course the GEC and the Country Music HoF have not), and we do not want to see this squandered. If the amazing and beloved Giarratana (and I do feel that he is amazing, and certainly beloved) would set the building back after the first six or seven stories, and use fine embellishment and detail (cast-iron, anyone? I would prefer classical, but I dare not put my neck on that particular block at the moment) on at least those bottom stories then all would be well.

Maybe the building, as ATLBrain has pointed out, is going to be much more beautiful than the current online renderings suggest. One would think that, given his current negotiations with a public body politic, he would submit any updated designs to the public itself. He has not. We will debate what we have been given.

Some things just require teamwork. Architecture should not be thought of as collection of isolated, independent "objects" which are experienced on their own terms. This would be bad thinking. Buildings make streets...and when good buildings work badly together, they make bad streets. The Schermerhorn is a good building. Let's hope the surrounding architecture shows a little humility and works together with it. Anything less would make losers of the whole party...particularly when it is not viewed from a distance.

[Kheldane]

I doubt anyone will give a rats arse about the building when they pass by on the interstate. Not that we shouldn't care, but what difference is it going to make when you have a building cattie-corner from it that looks like a giant piano?

This is right on so many levels!!!

If one were to find themselves standing in Gateway Park , gazing arcross 4th toward what some have suggested is a sublime scene of architectural perfection (the symphony), and if that same person were to then consider what impact a mid-rise condo would have behind that edifice of perfection, and if that same person were to even conclude that said midrise would in some way compromise the aesthetics of the symphony hall, then that person need only pivot 90

[sleepy]

I don't see anything wrong with Nashville taking a deep breath and pausing for a moment to look at the style and height of new buildings. The mid/high-rises that are being proposed will be around for 100 yrs., and it just makes sense to get them right.

No one wants to look back 20 yrs. from now and say, gawd, what were they thinking?

[Hankster]

Now, knowing that harsh reality, I say we should at least get some height out of this deal. I say make Encore 60 stories!!!

Now I would say that is totally radical, especially when you take into account its proximity to the Schermerhorn. Spoken by a true "hell there's no limit" skyscraper lover !

[bzorch]

Unfortunately, the decision to build mid-rise vs. high-rise is not a matter of taste. It has everything to do with creating a more diverse and livable environment. What do high-rise/towers offer the city, A better view on Monday Night Football or for the citizens traveling our highways, views for the residents? They seem to be a great attention getting device, maybe if done well an identity defining building.

I certainly agree that the architecture style must be diverse. In fact, it is imperative. The Symphony Hall is a beautiful building, but I would be disappointed if all of SoBro looked like it. It has set a high bar for quality that I doubt many can afford to match. What I do expect is that the architecture be appropriately scaled and articulated to create a neighborhood that promotes a since of community.

The Paris and Florence photos had everything to do with SoBro. Not in style, but in potential density and form. It is difficult for towers to create public spaces (Central Park is an exception to this). They are just too large and disconnected from the street. Yes, Paris does have a central business district (La Defense) with high-rises and skyscrapers, but who wants to visit or live there other than to get out of the Metro take in the spectacle or go to work and then go back to the great neighborhoods and public spaces.

Where are the great neighborhoods that have high-rise buildings?

I believe that SoBro encompasses a large area. If we could build this area out over the next twenty-years with 4-12 story buildings (150ft tall) we will be lucky. So spreading the wealth throughout will create not only a great neighborhood, but a great destination. Take a look at the Plan of Nashville and the SoBro Charrette documents. They craft a wonderful vision for a lively SoBro District without high-rise. In fact, all of the planning documents for this area discourage high-rise development. (See Below)

The Rolling Mill Hill development is a great example of a mid-rise neighborhood. Another great example, is 5th and Main. These developments have decided to invest in putting their parking underground or wrapping it with a mix of uses. Of course, there are others in town.

Another downside with high-rise is if it is done poorly then we all suffer or at least have to see it all of the time. So, if we decide as a city to build high-rise then it better be great architecture.

I really enjoy reading this forum and I think this an urban design issue worth discussing because it will shape the future of our city. Its is rare to find such an active forum worth reading. I also do recognize that economics and politics are involved in the decision of what type of typology to build. So if the land is expensive or you can not assemble enough property then you may have to build up to make the numbers work. I just do believe it is not the best way to create a neighborhood.

Sobro (Two Basic Principle of Urban Design page 37)

ftp://ftp.nashville.gov/web/mpc/subarea9/...4Guidelines.pdf

"The Plan for SoBro calls for redevelopment that is built to the property line

whenever possible, but it calls for buildings that are of a height that will

not compete with the towers of the center city.

"The height of buildings is crucial to creating a space out of the street" said team

member, Erin Miller. "Too low and the street lacks definition, too high and its inhumane.The opportunity is to make a room." ...

The plan calls for the height of buildings to decrease gradually as SoBro steps away from the centralcore: Buildings will be seven or eight stories tall along Franklin and to the north, three to five stories to the south."

Plan of Nashville (SoBro Page 190)

http://www.civicdesigncenter.org/policy-SoBro.html

"SoBro...in general called for redevelopment of the district into a mix-use neighborhood of a more dense urban character than is found in East Nashville or the River District, yet of a lesser scale-mid-rise not high-rise-than is found in downtown. The Plan of Nashville endorses these three basic concepts, and expands upon them."

Subarea 9 Plan (Final Plan Page 25)

ftp://ftp.nashville.gov/web/mpc/subarea9/.../03Subarea9.pdf

"This zone (SoBro) is intended to accommodate medium-density urban character and scale within a healthy influx of neighborhood services and pedestrian oriented streetscapes."

[smeagolsfree]

Sobro (Two Basic Principle of Urban Design page 37)

ftp://ftp.nashville.gov/web/mpc/subarea9/...4Guidelines.pdf

What is interesting with this report is that Tony Giarratana helped put it together. What his proposal is with the Encore is different than what was recommended in that report. I wonder when this report was done. Things are changing at a very fast rate in the SoBro area.

[tomcampion]

bzorch, thanks for making this post. A total amateur when it comes to urban design, I've been trying to articulate in my head why a high-rise like Encore across the street from the Symphony Center is not the best idea for SoBro. Although Tony G. was involved in drafting the Plan of Nashville, I think the ideas set forth in the document are of greater importance than Encore, even when taking the proposed building's economic factors into account.

[FutureArchitect]

Isn

[memphian]

Personally I feel the design for Encore does lack some panache. I would however prefer a tall box to a wide and squatty box. Maybe a redesign is in order. Please give us something that has warmth and coziness at street level but height and flamboyance in the air.

Speaking of flamboyance... check this link out:

http://www.smart-travel-germany.com/munich-stadium.html

I would LOVE to see the Sounds Stadium take this route!

[tomcampion]

Isn

[FutureArchitect]

WOW!!! I don't think Nashville is quite ready for the munich stadium. It looks like a big tire lying out in the middle of landfill. LOL...

[smeagolsfree]

Speaking of flamboyance... check this link out:

http://www.smart-travel-germany.com/munich-stadium.html

Wow, It looks like a giant Lifesavers candy. Maybe we can design the new CC to look like a giant Hershey's Kiss.

Or better yet a Giant Goo Goo Cluster since they are made here.

[cdub]

Personally I feel the design for Encore does lack some panache. I would however prefer a tall box to a wide and squatty box. Maybe a redesign is in order. Please give us something that has warmth and coziness at street level but height and flamboyance in the air.

So far the only thing we've heard about wanting the tower design is so people can see it from the interstate. What are some reasons that we should promote towers in this district other than the 'MNF money shot' mentioned before for postcards and passers-through?

Along with that, what kind of neighborhood should we be trying to provide? Is this a neighborhood in which people live? Is this district destined to become the second CBD?

As for the actual delineation of the CBD, it actually stops along Commerce Street, with the exception of the Bell South Tower and future Suntrust (by the way 13 stories). The remainder inside the loop is intended to be support for the CBD, as set forth in the zoning. Support, to me, doesn't mean a structure that is trying to compete with the CBD in terms of height. Check the planning website and interactive maps, they're pretty handy(especially when you want to know what people have paid for property!).

I also have to agree with bzorch that both studies quoted were developed by the citizens and those should be tools used to guide what future development becomes. I'm actually pretty surprised that planning isn't following these documents and are thinking they'd allow heights to this extent in a district that will be guided by the first developments.

In all of these talks I keep thinking back to NYC. When you look at where the height of structures are primarily, that's the Business/Tourist part of town. Look at the areas in which people live for what people want. Little Italy, China Town, Central Park West, all are typically of the mid-rise development type. Another place that reminds me specifically of SoBro is the LoDo district and new development taking off just west of downtown. This district was previously industrial and is now being built out with mid-rise/ low rise residential. It's relevance is how they've taken a blank slate and have still kept development low and at a neighborhood scale. I've got some photos and once I've figured out how to get them up, I'll post photos of both locales.

[cdub]

I've got some photos and once I've figured out how to get them up, I'll post photos of both locales.

As promised...

Just to clarify, the LoDo district is in Downtown Denver. I'm an idiot and forgot that important part. I've actually got a few better pictures that show more of an overall but I've misplaced them. If I can't find them I'll get a couple more but you'll have to wait a month.

LoDo

[it's just dave]

That last picture looks remarkably like the planned 5th and Main which starts in March. East Nashville is getting a whole new attitude.

[Lexy]

That last picture looks remarkably like the planned 5th and Main which starts in March. East Nashville is getting a whole new attitude.

I thought the same thing Dave. The attitude adjustment is welcomed by me!!

[memphian]

Nice pics of LoDo - I like the newer buildings there a lot. Nashville however doesn't have as many of those older type buildings in SoBro. And why should we limit towers to within someone's vision of the "official CBD?" Basically what you're saying is: "Here's a box, think inside of it" and "here's a line - don't cross it." Why?

No one expects that the "Plan of Nashville" is going to ever come into reality because then we'd be living in a Utopian Society. A guideline for development, yes but a strict rulebook, no.