Jump to content

Westin on Lower Broad


QuietMike

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 955
  • Created
  • Last Reply

FYI folks you can now link to the images story and see the whole thing. There's a hot link in it that shows the layout by floor.

http://www.nashvillepost.com/news/2006/5/2..._on_lower_broad

Very interesting and thanks so much for providing the link. I count 336 hotel rooms and 49 condos, 16 of which are affordable housing. It's a very big project. I sure hope they can get thing thing approved, but there are big hurdles to cross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize the developer may totally different, but I would hope Nashville's Westin could be a little more striking, like the one built in Charlotte. Honestly I don't yet have a solid opinion on that Westin, as I haven't seen it in person. I look at the rendering for Nashville's and I see a bulky block building, although it does have some nice looking features. I realize various restrictions like skyplanes and design guidelines dictate the overall appearance to varying degrees. Don't get me wrong, it's a great site. But I think that empty block at Church Street and 2nd Ave begs for something like this as part of a larger project. Alternately I think the southeast corner of Church and 3rd Ave. would be a great spot for a slender hotel around 15-20 stories. Almost like a skinnier, shorter Adelicia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar.../606070381/1003

Westin update. I will be interested to see if it impacts the historic designation of "LoBro" I know The District and others play that up quite a bit in their marketing of the area.

Yes, I thought that it was interesting that the area could lose its designation simply because there may be tall towers built nearby. But you can clearly see the BellSouth building over the rooftop of Tootsie's and others from the street on Broadway, and it definitely doesn't look historic! And Encore is going to be a lot taller than the Hilton. That sentence puzzled me, too.

It seems that some sort of compromise must be reached now, or for future buildings in Sobro. But I do hope that it is done in a way that doesn't ultimately threaten the historic designation. Like in Chicago, the flying saucer was built landing inside the collonades of historic Soldier Field with the result that now that building has lost its listing on the National Register. All for the benefit of corporate box holders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have to give credit for giving something old a new lease on life. In this case, Sage and the other company could very easily take their westin idea to Knoxville or Tucson.

I am all for a compromise on the Westin deal. Although I think I would prefer the westin to be the CC hotel. Or maybe Omni could be that for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have to give credit for giving something old a new lease on life. In this case, Sage and the other company could very easily take their westin idea to Knoxville or Tucson.

I am all for a compromise on the Westin deal. Although I think I would prefer the westin to be the CC hotel. Or maybe Omni could be that for us.

It will be interesting to see if a compromise can be reached. I couldn't get down to the review because of other things. I wish I had been able to do it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the direction in which considerations for this project are going. These developers obviously want this project off the ground soon. Their concept design plan shows that they've taken into account the aesthetic conventions of the surrounding area: They set the tower back from Broadway and surround it with structures akin to those already found along the strip. That says a great deal.

I do not believe the tower's planned height (19 stories) will be such a gross distraction. It is not as bulky as some have made it seem. (It appears L-shaped.) It may be a bit of a stretch, but I liken its potential affect to that of the Caremark Building. (I hope that's what it's called.) The setback is sufficient to allow LoBro to maintain its character, yet it also lends itself to SoBro's development, much like the Caremark Building adds to the CBD.

I agree with Nicole Nathan, one of the Westin project architects, when she says this project would link Third Ave. (and Second) to SoBro. After all, The Symphony Center and Encore would be very close, and it's not as if that portion of Third Ave. has any character at all as it currenty stands--gritty or otherwise. In addition, there will be people living in the building along Broadway as well as residences in the tower.

Now, if I had to recommend another site for this project it would be--hands down--that ginormous parking lot on the south side of the Shelby St. Bridge.

As things are, I am hopeful that this project will be allowed to get underway and that the area will be able to maintain its National Historic District status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the project proposed to planning scaled back from 22 to 19 (b/c it "sounds" shorter)? Or is this just another case of our good friends at the Tennessean screwing up the count.

My theory: If this plan hasn't been revised since the rendering was announced and reported by Richard Lawson on NP, then it still stands at 22 floors. However, the debate at the planning commission might have revolved on the "19" floors above the existing 3-story buildings. Accordingly, the Tennessean reporter didn't see/understand/mention the distinction.

Yes, my Tennessean bashing is probably a bit visceral. Oh well, this way I can vent.

After looking at this project a second time, I'm becoming more accepting of the concept. If they were also to design a great terraced area facing the Schermerhorn, then that would be quite nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the project proposed to planning scaled back from 22 to 19 (b/c it "sounds" shorter)? Or is this just another case of our good friends at the Tennessean screwing up the count.

My theory: If this plan hasn't been revised since the rendering was announced and reported by Richard Lawson on NP, then it still stands at 22 floors. However, the debate at the planning commission might have revolved on the "19" floors above the existing 3-story buildings. Accordingly, the Tennessean reporter didn't see/understand/mention the distinction.

Yes, my Tennessean bashing is probably a bit visceral. Oh well, this way I can vent.

After looking at this project a second time, I'm becoming more accepting of the concept. If they were also to design a great terraced area facing the Schermerhorn, then that would be quite nice.

Don't worry Brain. The Tennessean deserves all the bashing they can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly can't see how this project with it's huge setback from Broadway should affect the status on the National Register of historic Buildings in any concievable way. The whole idea of it totally confounds me. Surely, they can get the park service to assure no change in status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the direction in which considerations for this project are going. These developers obviously want this project off the ground soon. Their concept design plan shows that they've taken into account the aesthetic conventions of the surrounding area: They set the tower back from Broadway and surround it with structures akin to those already found along the strip. That says a great deal.

I do not believe the tower's planned height (19 stories) will be such a gross distraction. It is not as bulky as some have made it seem. (It appears L-shaped.) It may be a bit of a stretch, but I liken its potential affect to that of the Caremark Building. (I hope that's what it's called.) The setback is sufficient to allow LoBro to maintain its character, yet it also lends itself to SoBro's development, much like the Caremark Building adds to the CBD.

I agree with Nicole Nathan, one of the Westin project architects, when she says this project would link Third Ave. (and Second) to SoBro. After all, The Symphony Center and Encore would be very close, and it's not as if that portion of Third Ave. has any character at all as it currenty stands--gritty or otherwise. In addition, there will be people living in the building along Broadway as well as residences in the tower.

Now, if I had to recommend another site for this project it would be--hands down--that ginormous parking lot on the south side of the Shelby St. Bridge.

As things are, I am hopeful that this project will be allowed to get underway and that the area will be able to maintain its National Historic District status.

Man...how silly. Some of the advocates of Historic Preservation in Nashville would have a tough time in NYC, Chicago...and the list goes on. The juxtaposition of modern, contemporary, and historic structures tell a story about the development of any city...its people....economic health...and values.

I like the concept. It would serve as a welcomed addition to this area...I agree with the architect in that it begins to bridge the gap between SoBro and Lower Broadway. In addition, it would be nice to have a building that tempers the Tuscan Symphony Hall

HISTORIC PRESERVATION NASHVILLE STYLE

1. If you search...you will find a dated document where a well know historic preservation figure in Nashville thought that the building housing the Courtyard by Marriott downtown was not a siginificant structure and could be torn down or significantly altered.....I would have to go back and check that fact...but it is what I remember.

2. I remember a silly argument concerning the Viridian and the L&C. It had to do with contextual agreement which is important. However, if the same argument had been used when the L&C was proposed it would have never been built. I believe you can find this in the archives of the SCENE....

3. They need to learn how to pick battles...see the Jacksonian - Walgreens.

All in all conflict is good because it brings development. However, it can still make you want to pull your hair out.

Nice proposal....solid architecture.....will add additional activity to the area....will begin to provide a good sense of scale to the street....will help to create a more diverse sense of place.... With all that in mind...how could it be bad?

cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I was scanning the internet tonight and came across this article (must have missed it online since I can't get the print edition). Not to start the historic preservation arguements again, but I think Ms. Kerr's opinion is what alot of people feel when they see this project. Just an interesting (and probably common) take...

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...388/1092/NEWS01

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is something to ponder. I find it interesting that there are folks so intent on protecting historic downtown Nashville. What it really is trying to protect was is left. Nashville long ago wiped away many old buildings. Largely because it could and that downtown never dipped to such lows as Memphis for example. I've been to Memphis many times and there is a lot of stock of old buildings. St. Louis too. Both are old big river towns where trade was huge and the warehouses and old factories had to be close to the river, a main artery of transportation. St. Louis, for example, still has many of the old garment factories and they are being converted into lofts and apartments. Nashville never had much of that. Second Avenue or Market Street as it was known had some. The downtown grid was filled with many old buildings but those have been wiped out over the years, or rather decades. Harvey's was torn down for example, but what was there before it? What was on the L&C site before it was built? A hotel sits on the site of a former governor's mansion which had been torn down in the early part of the 20th century and replaced with an apartment building that was later torn down for the Best Western or Comfort Inn or whatever it is now. Was Nashville just as bad for allowing the mansion to be torn down as it was for tearing down it's replacement decades later? The same question can be asked of Tennessee Theater office building something old was torn down to build it, yet people decried it's demolition. So what really constitutes historic.

My point is, it seems to me that downtown Nashville has always regenerated with new stuff. That's the nature of this particular city -- it's always sort of new, representing what the city is now becoming as people move here for work and new companies that have set up headquarters here. I've never been to Charlotte but my impression is it is the same way with pockets of historic buildings but a lot of new stuff downtown. Lower Broad is like a highway, in fact I think the state considers a portion as such or something like that. If the city wanted to maintain the historic feel, why not put a median downtown the middle with some street parking along it with cuts in like Gateway? Create something in the middle that makes it more pedestrian friendly. I'm still amazed that the Gateway Bridge didn't connect Broadway to the other side of the river. It seems that would have been a more direct shot. Nothing like have a big wide road like Broadway that dead ends into the river.

Or instead of a median put a darn street car system in that runs up the middle of Broadway and down West End some feeder lines or something. The Memphis system is cool and so is the one in Portland, Ore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ms. Kerr failed to take into consideration the phenomenon of change that more-often-than-not accompanies growth. What was Broadway before it was crowned by "kitschy glory"? Was Nashville less "Nashville" then?

I've spent the best years of my life in Nashville, and I can assert with little trepidation that our city has no more "gritty soul" than Vanderbilt University (est. 1873).

Regardless, I am confident that residents and visitors have/will have no trouble distinguishing Music City from other cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am working on the first edition of Spotlight over at UrbanBNA.com and was zooming thru the forums to get local thoughts on the Westin project. I got what i needed, but found it interesting that no one had posted a pic of the building.

Here is the building currently occupying the site :

current.jpg

Here are a couple of renderings of the propsed Westin :

westin.gif

Westin-LowerBroad-2.gif

sorry for the quality of the main rendering, some quality was lost in the resizing for the web

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.