Interesting for Memphis?

[gaushell]

Since we are here in Memphis, I thought I would point you to a project we are working on in Nashville

Signature Tower - I'm sure some of you are familiar with it, but drop by the website if not www.SignatureTowerNashville.com

Should be posting over 100 units reserved early tomorrow - that is 1/4th in 4 days. Not bad.

Memphis needs more new construction downtown.

[ricky_the_great]

Since we are here in Memphis, I thought I would point you to a project we are working on in Nashville

Signature Tower - I'm sure some of you are familiar with it, but drop by the website if not www.SignatureTowerNashville.com

Should be posting over 100 units reserved early tomorrow - that is 1/4th in 4 days. Not bad.

Memphis needs more new construction downtown.

we all know about the tower already, we can read about it all the time in the nashville forum. Thanks

[memphian]

I think its great that a Memphis company is a big resource for projects across the state. I think its always been a bit sad that there hasn't been a big promotion of intra-state commerce. On a side note - the developers of the new Westin in downtown are form Nashville.

[gaushell]

we all know about the tower already, we can read about it all the time in the nashville forum. Thanks

Didn't know how many Memphians were checking it out.

Just trying to be helpful. Would love to see similar work here in Memphis.

[Clobber]

There are four towers in the works. Vue (28 stories?), Horizon Towers (2 16-story buildings), and 1 Beale (27 stories?). Nothing as tall as Nashville's . . . yet. Who knows? Vue was originally much shorter (around 20 stories). Residential construction in downtown Memphis has only gotten stronger lately, and has only lately started venturing into new tower construction territory. In the past, it has been either low-rise high density construction or renovations of our stock of historic towers.

Hopefully we'll see a continued market for downtown highrise condos and apartments to justify infill towers. And maybe some more businesses will move back to market to the new downtown population base, and maybe that will trigger another office development, or combine purposes into a multi-use tower.

[Clobber]

I think its great that a Memphis company is a big resource for projects across the state. I think its always been a bit sad that there hasn't been a big promotion of intra-state commerce. On a side note - the developers of the new Westin in downtown are form Nashville.

Definitely. It's great that gaushell is here and hopefully he can help Memphis' downtown development continue its momentum as well. Also, last I checked Mike Rose was CEO of Gaylord. I don't know how IPIX is doing in ETenn, but the Memphis Angels were investors. Rhodes is a feeder into Vandy grad schools (so unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a whole lot of reciprocity in that respect). And there's the state biotech efforts which include collaborations among all three divisions.

[Psalm 91]

The Sig Tower in Nashville looks cool (after seeing it on other forums).

I look forward to the day when Memphis gets its own "signature tower."

What a great time that will be - and hopefully its not far off.

[cdarr]

I would also like to see some new highrise construction, but I don't think it would be necessary for a 700 to 1,000 foot skyscraper to be built for Memphis to have a skyline equal to that of Nashville. Perhaps more practical, and more likely, would be for the skyline to extend to the south so that it fills the area "between the bridges". One Beale and Horizon, if built, would help towards that goal. So would those rumored twin condo towers in the South Bluffs area.

Personally, if given the choice between a "Signature Tower" in Memphis or a completely restored Sterick Building, I would take the latter.

[soverbey]

I agree with cdarr, the sterick is a classic building that would be a wonderful use of a wonderful building in a thriving downtown. A signature tower would work well along the Poplar Corridor in East Memphis but I do not see it ever coming to fruition Downtown.

[gaushell]

I agree with cdarr, the sterick is a classic building that would be a wonderful use of a wonderful building in a thriving downtown. A signature tower would work well along the Poplar Corridor in East Memphis but I do not see it ever coming to fruition Downtown.

I'm not suggesting a Sig type in Memphis necessarily either. Just some nice new construction - something bold might be nice, but not required. Good solid architecture in lieu of ugly boxes. Looking forward to seeing the other condo projects come about.

Sterick rehab would be awesome. Looks like a long shot though.

[cdarr]

I'm not suggesting a Sig type in Memphis necessarily either. Just some nice new construction - something bold might be nice, but not required. Good solid architecture in lieu of ugly boxes. Looking forward to seeing the other condo projects come about.

Sterick rehab would be awesome. Looks like a long shot though.

I think One Beale will fit the "bold" category if it gets built.

The downtown skyline is dominated by modernist boxes because Memphis had a skyscraper boom from 1963 to 1972, and then everything essentially stopped. Nashville has similar towers in its skyline...Snodgrass (1970) is similar to 100 N. Main (1965) , AmSouth (1974) to Commerce Square (1972), and SunTrust (1967) is like First Tennessee (1963). Of course, Nashville's boxes have since been overshadowed and/or hidden by a number of big postmodernist buildings. All downtown Memphis has since since the early 70s is Morgan Keegan. So it's not like Memphis has inherently bad architecture...we just haven't seen much new skyscraper construction in a long time. We're stuck in the 70s!

[gaushell]

I think One Beale will fit the "bold" category if it gets built.

The downtown skyline is dominated by modernist boxes because Memphis had a skyscraper boom from 1963 to 1972, and then everything essentially stopped. Nashville has similar towers in its skyline...Snodgrass (1970) is similar to 100 N. Main (1965) , AmSouth (1974) to Commerce Square (1972), and SunTrust (1967) is like First Tennessee (1963). Of course, Nashville's boxes have since been overshadowed and/or hidden by a number of big postmodernist buildings. All downtown Memphis has since since the early 70s is Morgan Keegan. So it's not like Memphis has inherently bad architecture...we just haven't seen much new skyscraper construction in a long time. We're stuck in the 70s!

You nailed it.

1 Beale will be very nice. Great views from that location. I looked out from my desk at an architecture firm for 7 years from there. Some of the best unobstructed views in downtown.

[Clobber]

I would also like to see some new highrise construction, but I don't think it would be necessary for a 700 to 1,000 foot skyscraper to be built for Memphis to have a skyline equal to that of Nashville. Perhaps more practical, and more likely, would be for the skyline to extend to the south so that it fills the area "between the bridges". One Beale and Horizon, if built, would help towards that goal. So would those rumored twin condo towers in the South Bluffs area.

Personally, if given the choice between a "Signature Tower" in Memphis or a completely restored Sterick Building, I would take the latter.

I forgot about the additional twins rumored by the candy factory. 29 stories, I believe. So, depending on who you trust, there are 4-6 towers proposed/planned over 15 stories.

[Psalm 91]

I believe a sig tower would be a good fit for downtown Memphis, but not along the river...It could be put around Marshall Ave., towards the Medical Center.

Downtown should extend east, where 700-1,000 footers could begin to create a much more diverse CBD.

[AmandaHugginkiss]

I would prefer a 500+ tower to over by Clark, (the very nice) Hilton Hotel, etc since it looks a bit more modern and the city of Memphis won't have to wory about the suspect soil downtown? I don't know much about the height limitations but I remember hearing that the soil along the river won't permit buildings to be built over a certain height.

But a buidling that height isn't required; buildings don't make cities, character makes all of the difference. I think Memphis is on the right track with urbanizing and beefing up the downtown nightlife.

Did FedEx have a choice to build a tower downtown? I do not know where I heard this but if they did not choose to move out east, it would have been a very impressive tower..Someone correct me if I am wrong..

Are these two cities competing with each other?

[bluff2085]

^Maybe another decade or so will be enough time for FedEx to reconsider a DT move. A new tallest with a sparkling FedEx logo would be nice!

[cdarr]

Did FedEx have a choice to build a tower downtown? I do not know where I heard this but if they did not choose to move out east, it would have been a very impressive tower..Someone correct me if I am wrong..

FedEx certainly could have built a downtown tower if they wanted to. There wouldn't have been opposition from anywhere. But the economics of such a headquarters building didn't make as much sense as building a campus.

Skyscrapers are more expensive to build and maintain, so unless you need to build in some strategic place, and real estate at that place is at a premium, it is very difficult to financially justify a high rise. So many of the FedEx HQ employees live in East Memphis, Germantown, Cordova, Collierville, and DeSoto County, and the Hacks Cross site was much more convenient to those people's homes, their children's schools, their doctors offices, and other places they frequent. Since there was no buisness reason to locate downtown (for example, an abundance of customer/supplier offices that FedEx needs to be near), the company's primary concern became finding a place that would make for a content workforce. Land was plentiful and relatively inexpensive at that site, so a skyscraper wouldn't have made sense for anything but vanity.

These are the economic realities that make high rise office towers a hard sell in downtown Memphis...or anywhere in Memphis for that matter. Things could change as the downtown population grows, but for now the scenic river views and hot entertainment scene make downtown real estate far more valuable for something else....condos and hotels.

[Psalm 91]

These are the economic realities that make high rise office towers a hard sell in downtown Memphis...or anywhere in Memphis for that matter. Things could change as the downtown population grows, but for now the scenic river views and hot entertainment scene make downtown real estate far more valuable for something else....condos and hotels.

An office tower of 700 ft. or more downtown wouldn't be too smart, but, why can't it be a mixed use 'scraper? I didn't know the soil was a big issue. What is the difference between the soil say, near Marshall Ave. and East Memphis? If the soil (and the New Madrid Fault) is terrible along the river, why build One Beale so tall?

[cdarr]

I didn't know the soil was a big issue. What is the difference between the soil say, near Marshall Ave. and East Memphis? If the soil (and the New Madrid Fault) is terrible along the river, why build One Beale so tall?

I'm no expert on this, but I have seen some maps that show areas in danger of liquefaction in a major earthquake. Soil close to the Mississippi or to one of the tributaries such as the Wolf or Loosahatchie Rivers are saturated with ground water and, during an earthquake, would have the rigidity of Jello. Some areas of East Memphis that are far enough away from the Wolf River are not in the high risk zone, and while they would probably face serious damage anyway, they would be less succeptible to partial or total collapse.

There are probably engineering methods to work around this, such as driving a building's piers deeper into the ground than normal. Then again, maybe our building codes aren't as strict as they should be?

[AmandaHugginkiss]

FedEx certainly could have built a downtown tower if they wanted to. There wouldn't have been opposition from anywhere. But the economics of such a headquarters building didn't make as much sense as building a campus.

Skyscrapers are more expensive to build and maintain, so unless you need to build in some strategic place, and real estate at that place is at a premium, it is very difficult to financially justify a high rise. So many of the FedEx HQ employees live in East Memphis, Germantown, Cordova, Collierville, and DeSoto County, and the Hacks Cross site was much more convenient to those people's homes, their children's schools, their doctors offices, and other places they frequent. Since there was no buisness reason to locate downtown (for example, an abundance of customer/supplier offices that FedEx needs to be near), the company's primary concern became finding a place that would make for a content workforce. Land was plentiful and relatively inexpensive at that site, so a skyscraper wouldn't have made sense for anything but vanity.

These are the economic realities that make high rise office towers a hard sell in downtown Memphis...or anywhere in Memphis for that matter. Things could change as the downtown population grows, but for now the scenic river views and hot entertainment scene make downtown real estate far more valuable for something else....condos and hotels.

That makes sense. A lot people on here say how Memphis needs a tallest, but I agree that Memphis is not in any immediate rush to get a skyscraper with the amount of land. But isn't Memphis expected to run out of land soon?

[ricky_the_great]

That makes sense. A lot people on here say how Memphis needs a tallest, but I agree that Memphis is not in any immediate rush to get a skyscraper with the amount of land. But isn't Memphis expected to run out of land soon?

no memphis still has another 20-30 years before it runs out of annexation land. theres still plenty of the parts of the county that are rural.

[Clobber]

I would prefer a 500+ tower to over by Clark, (the very nice) Hilton Hotel, etc since it looks a bit more modern and the city of Memphis won't have to wory about the suspect soil downtown? I don't know much about the height limitations but I remember hearing that the soil along the river won't permit buildings to be built over a certain height.

But a buidling that height isn't required; buildings don't make cities, character makes all of the difference. I think Memphis is on the right track with urbanizing and beefing up the downtown nightlife.

Did FedEx have a choice to build a tower downtown? I do not know where I heard this but if they did not choose to move out east, it would have been a very impressive tower..Someone correct me if I am wrong..

Are these two cities competing with each other?

Many political and business leaders (Read: mayors and chamber of commerce) wanted FedEx to build downtown. They also wanted International Place to have been built downtown as well years ago. I think FedEx wanted a campus, and with IP, it was less expensive in east Memphis than downtown to build a new complex.

[AmandaHugginkiss]

Thanks guys..

[HKG]

Thanks guys..

Leave the crazy sky towers to Nashville as far as I'm concerned. Nashville bulldozed a lot of old buildings to get where they are. If I wanted Memphis to be Atlanta, I would've moved there already.

[Clobber]

Leave the crazy sky towers to Nashville as far as I'm concerned. Nashville bulldozed a lot of old buildings to get where they are. If I wanted Memphis to be Atlanta, I would've moved there already.

Looking at some other cities, I've come to the conclusion that having one building stand out is not a horrible thing. Chicago is widely regarded as one of the top skylines in the world, and the Sears stands out. Similar things can be said of other cities. Cleveland as well. A 50-60 story building wouldn't destroy our skyline. But, I agree on what the priorities should be. It is much more important to preserve the existing treasures and to build quality towers regardless of size. I'd rather have a Frost Bank than something like the Louisville tower.

I just don't agree at all with the notion that a 700+ footer is anathema to downtown. If there's a demand for it, and if it's beautiful, and isn't built on the destruction of a historic treasure, bring it. If you can top a tower with a beautiful crown, do it, especially in Memphis, where such a building would bring much-needed diversity to an otherwise rather boxy skyline.

I'm not saying to do it just to do it. But I don't think it would be a bad, or unsightly, or unwise addition either on the mere principle of the height differential. Whether it's bad, unsightly, or unwise would be more a product of the architecture of the building, rather than the height, and I might regard a beautiful 700 footer more positively than an ugly 300 footer.