What Might Have Been

[urbanbna]

I so wish this project would have heppened. Nashville would be so much futher along if it were here.

[fieldmarshaldj]

I so wish this project would have heppened. Nashville would be so much futher along if it were here.

Maybe, maybe not. The problem was that by the time NCC1 was completed in '87-'88, there was a ton of vacant office space that meant building NCC2 would've been economically unjustified. For all we know, it might have had a negative impact that would've prevented the then-South Central Bell Tower project from taking off. Take a look at places like Dallas or Houston which built up their skylines like crazy by 1990 (overbuilt, to the point). Until a new hotel went up (as we speak), Dallas hadn't built a single solitary 350+ footer since 1988 (and again, not an office tower). Houston has had nothing go up at all between 1987-2003. This was about the worst period for high-rise office-tower construction for some of these cities since after the Depression. As one who grew up in the '70s and '80s, I was rather spoiled thinking it was normal and natural to get one of these big-boys rising 1 or 2 per year. Of course, as Nashvillians, we all may be fixing to get spoiled again !

[nashvol85]

But you could've had this to feast on. Thanks to Dave for the pic.

The tower is facing the wrong way. It should be turned about 180 degrees.

[it's just dave]

Well, gee, dad, it was just for sticking to the refrigerator door.

[Rural King]

Thanks for the old rendering from the old Banner! Thats a great image IMO, and shows how cool twoo NCCs would have been.

As many know, NCC2 is one of my favorite concepts that never materialized for Nashville. I think it would have been awesome to have two towers of that design in the skyline.

[dragonfly]

Maybe, maybe not. The problem was that by the time NCC1 was completed in '87-'88, there was a ton of vacant office space that meant building NCC2 would've been economically unjustified. For all we know, it might have had a negative impact that would've prevented the then-South Central Bell Tower project from taking off. Take a look at places like Dallas or Houston which built up their skylines like crazy by 1990 (overbuilt, to the point). Until a new hotel went up (as we speak), Dallas hadn't built a single solitary 350+ footer since 1988 (and again, not an office tower). Houston has had nothing go up at all between 1987-2003. This was about the worst period for high-rise office-tower construction for some of these cities since after the Depression. As one who grew up in the '70s and '80s, I was rather spoiled thinking it was normal and natural to get one of these big-boys rising 1 or 2 per year. Of course, as Nashvillians, we all may be fixing to get spoiled again !

Correct in one sense -- this was the thinnest period, '87 ~ '97 for large construction since the '60's in Houston. However, this amazing Southern city still put them up during its recovery from the worst local recession in American history, which was 1983 ~ 1989, the year I moved here. However, during the period you refer to, here in order of decreasing height, is what was built, and this doesn't include buildings of less than 15 floors, with year and # of floors (BTW I grew up in Nashville):

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=100445 2002 40

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=132362 2002 27

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=100451 2001 30

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/cx/?id=112602 1999 21

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/cx/?id=104723 1991 25

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=174536 2001 23

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135806 2002 16

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=117808 2000 20

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=117775 2000 27

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=134814 2002 20

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=117659 1992 20

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/cx/?id=104723 2003 15

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135810 1998 16

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=166707 2001 15

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135631 2002 23

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135803 2001 20

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=117760 1992 19

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=134837 2002 17

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/cx/?id=112602 1987 17

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135812 1998 17

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=166707 2001 15

[doormanpoet]

Another problem that hurt NCC2 is Maryland Farms, Cool Springs, Metro Center, and the Nashville Airport Office Complex. This is four suburban office parks that took tennants away.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Correct in one sense -- this was the thinnest period, '87 ~ '97 for large construction since the '60's in Houston. However, this amazing Southern city still put them up during its recovery from the worst local recession in American history, which was 1983 ~ 1989, the year I moved here. However, during the period you refer to, here in order of decreasing height, is what was built, and this doesn't include buildings of less than 15 floors, with year and # of floors (BTW I grew up in Nashville):

I realized after I posted that, I should've said until 2001-02 (instead of '03). But I was more or less referring to major high-rises, of which aside from that '02 40-story building, Houston didn't build a substantial "landmark" structure in a 16 year period. I tend to refer to anything below 350 feet tall (at least in a city of Houston's calibre) as being a mid-rise. The smaller skyscrapers that rose during the period seemed to be mostly either apartments, hospital or government buildings, or out-of-the-downtown structures. I wonder if any city in the U.S. will ever again have that spate of construction that places like Houston and Dallas saw in the late '70s through the mid '80s. Of course, it was fiscally reckless and irresponsible for a lot of them to rise, but it sure made for nice skylines (and it has taken decades to absorb a lot of the office space).