Westin on Lower Broad

[Nashvillain]

^You really should touch a honky-tonk next time you find yourself in Nashville. They're a ton-o-fun. I am no fan of country music, either, I'm almost morally opposed to it but you can't not have fun at Tootsie's and the like.

[prguy]

Follows is a short essay, solicited by the Barber Group, regarding the impact of development around historic areas. I thought the readers of this thread might find it interesting and worthy of discussion.

Keith

Historic Districts and New Development

By John M. Tess

President, Heritage Consulting Group

December 29, 2006

What is the impact, if any, of new construction on a historic district?

Perhaps at the risk of being overly simple, the impacts are two: Design and Capacity.

The most common impact considered is that of design. Here, the issue is dominated by compatible massing, scale, materials and vocabulary. As with any design discussion, there is no purely right answer and the design issue will vary from city to city, district to district. In approaching an answer, the question parallels that of an adaptive re-use project: What is the relative importance of the resource? Why is it significant? What are the character-defining features? And will the proposed new construction undermine those values and the character-defining traits? Most often, the question of new construction design in a historic district is resolved through a community

[BnaBreaker]

^You really should touch a honky-tonk next time you find yourself in Nashville. They're a ton-o-fun. I am no fan of country music, either, I'm almost morally opposed to it but you can't not have fun at Tootsie's and the like.

[Kheldane]

... it'd be nice if you held off on the personal jabs now and again. ....I typically tend to hear the term thrown around more in reference to giant big box stores and things like that....

[smeagolsfree]

Smart cities are embracing a parallel notion where historic districts become the authentic centerpiece for revitalizing the core with new development.

[Richard Lawson]

The whole concept of "people-scaled" or "human-scaled" is the most ridiculous, insidious, malicious, half-witted concept to be espoused by these self-described "urban-planners" ever. The phrase is meaningless to any objective observer, and each person who (malevolently?) makes use of the term employs such subjective judgement that others who hear the term used quickly realize the user has no real philosophy, only an odd collection of opinions and catch-phrases picked up from television. Are the pyramids human scale? Is the Pantheon human scale? Is a grass hut in the jungle human scale? Is the Empire state building human scale? Every one of these structures was designed by humans, built by humans, used by humans, admired by humans!!! By definition: buildings are human scale in the sense that termite mounds are termite scale. Could a termite mound, by reaching lofty heights, cease to be termite-scale and become human-scale? Take the larger view people: Only one species on planet earth is building complex structures like skyscrapers- and that is humans - thus they (buildings) are all freakin' human scaled. If you're against tall buildings because you think limiting new construction to mid-rises will increase density, then say that! Just don't buy into this human-scaled BS.

[edited for spelling]

[Hankster]

^You really should touch a honky-tonk next time you find yourself in Nashville. They're a ton-o-fun. I am no fan of country music, either, I'm almost morally opposed to it but you can't not have fun at Tootsie's and the like.

[it's just dave]

Okay, I'll do the practically unthinkable for a Nashvillian to do. I'll admit it, I love country music. That being said, yes, I attend the symphony, my radio is on Fisk's 88.1, NPR, or Lightning 100 most of the time, but after a few years in the music business and getting intimate with that industry, I became a country fan, too. Like it all, of course not, but I like a big chunk of it. I do remember a long time ago when stopped at a traffic light that IF I came across a country station the first move was to move on fast so no one else would hear it...even though I just pushing buttons.

I'm really glad I feel the way I do. Being a fan of a genre headquartered in your town and that which permeates a certain segment of the city's personality is quite the privilege. Call me a weirdo, call me a hillbilly, but don't call me obligated to diss an entire musical genre to preserve my cool. Those days are over, and I'm still cool. A country boy, I think not, a country fan, you betcha.

Beside, none of this Westin/Lower Broadway discussion would even be happening without it. We'd be just like anywhere U.S.A. How boring would that be.

Maybe we should start a 12-Step program to admit that the Golden Goose isn't so bad. It's not, you know.

I think I'm only on Step 8 since I seemed to have found it necessary to list my favorite radio stations to preserve some of my "cool", but hell, I'm trying.

[BnaBreaker]

No personal jabs intended BNABreaker, I didn't name names in my post. Heck, I didn't even bother to read back and see used the term most recently. But, I have seen it use on this board, although I don't remember by who. But I do remember the context and someone criticized tall buildngs for not being human-scale. Anyway - no offense intended and sorry if I offended.

It is worth noting that I only indict those who use the term human-scale as a means of attacking other people's property rights. Of course, if a private business owner makes design decisions about his own property he can employ any concepts of architecture or aesthetics that he pleases. Remember NewTowner's phallus building? I definitely respect all tastes and styles of building and any concepts that go into desigining those buildings. You are right to make me clarify: I'm not opposed to the concept of human scale in and of itself - just that it has been used by government (or those attempting to influence government) to infringe upon people's rights. Sorry if that wasn't clear in my first post. I was just trying to illustrate how weak a foundation of subjective opinion the concept sets on. I think everyone agrees "human-scale" is subjective - which it is perfectly fine if one employs subjective judgement when designing a building. However, a concept as nebulous and subjective as "human-scale" just doesn't cut it when it comes to making public policy to be enforced by government police power. You need damn well more than a general consensus on design aesthetics to justify taking someone's property rights away - that's all I'm saying.

And I do enjoy reading your posts BNABreaker, good luck with your career aspirations!!

[smeagolsfree]

Call me a weirdo, call me a hillbilly

[producer2]

This subject really confuses me, are we worried that people come to Nashville becasue of the architecture of Tootsie's or Robert's or Legends Corner or do they come for the music inside? What Honkey Tonks are being displaced to build a hotel that could house people within a stones throw of all of the music?

[Nashvillain]

^None, dingleberry. But you're confusing the issue. It's not just about tearing down buildings it's also about building a new building that is of a vastly different scale and character than the existing buildings in the district. It's about maintaining the heritage and charm of the area and trying to insure that future development plays nicely with the neighbors. You can disagree that the building is out of scale, that's fine, but don't misrepresent the argument against the building and get the discussion moving down irrelevant tangents.

[barakat]

^ There's no need to resort to childish name-calling. The person you disrepected has a legitimate question, and it's obvious he/she did not intend to 'misrepresent the argument.' Everyone is not equally educated on the debate.

[producer2]

I guess color me stupid then, I just thought that the heritage and charm of the area only came to be by the advancement of commercial projects in the area, i.e. Wildhorse, etc. Before that it was pretty much a place nobody wanted to visit, so I don't think the tangent is irrelevant, just maybe irreverant to some. What would you put on that site that would have a greater economic impact on the area?

[Nashvillain]

^ There's no need to resort to childish name-calling. The person you disrepected has a legitimate question, and it's obvious he/she did not intend to 'misrepresent the argument.' Everyone is not equally educated on the debate.

[Nashvillain]

Okay, I'll do the practically unthinkable for a Nashvillian to do. I'll admit it, I love country music. That being said, yes, I attend the symphony, my radio is on Fisk's 88.1, NPR, or Lightning 100 most of the time, but after a few years in the music business and getting intimate with that industry, I became a country fan, too. Like it all, of course not, but I like a big chunk of it. I do remember a long time ago when stopped at a traffic light that IF I came across a country station the first move was to move on fast so no one else would hear it...even though I just pushing buttons.

I'm really glad I feel the way I do. Being a fan of a genre headquartered in your town and that which permeates a certain segment of the city's personality is quite the privilege. Call me a weirdo, call me a hillbilly, but don't call me obligated to diss an entire musical genre to preserve my cool. Those days are over, and I'm still cool. A country boy, I think not, a country fan, you betcha.

Beside, none of this Westin/Lower Broadway discussion would even be happening without it. We'd be just like anywhere U.S.A. How boring would that be.

Maybe we should start a 12-Step program to admit that the Golden Goose isn't so bad. It's not, you know.

I think I'm only on Step 8 since I seemed to have found it necessary to list my favorite radio stations to preserve some of my "cool", but hell, I'm trying.

[producer2]

Nashvillain,

I am sorry if I offended your sensebilities on this subject. I am up to speed on the discussions on this and many other forums. I just thought it might be good to discuss the realities of the project and not just is it going to be a lot taller than the buildings around it.

[Nashvillain]

Nashvillain,

I am sorry if I offended your sensebilities on this subject. I am up to speed on the discussions on this and many other forums. I just thought it might be good to discuss the realities of the project and not just is it going to be a lot taller than the buildings around it.

[producer2]

Agreed, and I applaud your efforts to make it the best possible. Still that is a subjective matter at best and as long as the end result is;

"a new mixed-use hotel will be a great thing for downtown, bringing new retail spaces and a sprinkling of residential to the area as well, not many debate that I'm sure. "

I am a happy camper. I just want the city to move forward and live up to it's full potential, not get stuck in a rut as did my hometown of Louisville, where there were many who work diligently to not accept change and therefore lag behind.

[titanhog]

The developers have stated more than once that they are not interested in any other site in Nashville to build this hotel. It's this location or Nada.

[ariesjow]

I've been wavering back and forth on the Westin debate for a while but I believe its' passage will ultimately be the right decision. However, this project is walking a very fine line because of its height. From a few of the angles, the hotel does appear to "hover" over Broadway quite a bit. It'll dominate that intersection from a height prospective but I don't believe it'll obliterate the historic character of Lower Broadway like some would have you believe.

I took a look at the area in question over the holidays when I was in town. This block currently feels a little lifeless compared to elsewhere on the street. Grit gives a city life but I'd be hard-pressed to call the buildings in question good grit. There's certainly nothing significant about the R&R building other than its' age.

While I'm not a huge fan of the hotel design, it's much better use of the space than what is currently there and will bring even more activity to this area. The tower is demure because, if it wasn't, it would look way more out of place. The Broadway elevations are a big improvement and should allow the hotel to do well without raping the character of Lower Broadway. I definitely do not buy the slippery slope argument that allowing the Westin will set a dangerous precedent. The fact that this project has been debated as much as it has bodes well for Nashville's future preservation efforts.

[cheeriokid61]

I agree about the fact that some of those renderings make it appear to be looming over Broadway, but I think it'll be fine. It really won't destroy the historic feel of the district, and will really help the street level with both appearance and pedestrian traffic. I look forward to it starting up.

The only thing that worries me isn't the height of it, it's the length. I really don't like all these extremely long skyscrapers that seem to be a fad. I mean, we've got this, Viridian, the Cumberland, the Encore, and the Icon. How many more of these are we gonna get?

[Nashvillain]

I definitely do not buy the slippery slope argument that allowing the Westin will set a dangerous precedent.

[Hankster]

Why not? The Encore set the precedent for SoBro and the passage of the Crown by the Metro Council confirms this. Without a Historic Zoning Overlay for Lower Broadway why wouldn't any future be able to do the same as Barber?

[ariesjow]

It could set a precedent for projects similar to the Westin, possibly. What I don't think this project does is set any precedent or provide any possibility of high rise buildings rising directly up over Broadway. I think there will always (well, at least during the rest of my lifetime) be lowrise buildings directly on the street with early 1900's architectural style. I fully expect most of the existing buildings to survive, some of which will be restored.