Jump to content

New park behind First Baptist Church?


Skyscrapergeek

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think this could turn into a decent idea. Just as long as they still allow Hume-Fogg students to park in the underground garage, don't want it to be even harder for high school students to be able to park and go to class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a church in downtown Memphis that's building some luxury condo's in their parking lot (like every other parking lot downtown lol) but a park is a neccessary part of an urban fabric. Remember, people downtown don't have backyards so they need some parks nearby to play in. Memphis has alot of parks in the downtown core and its certainly makes the place more vibrant. There is a cultural festival, Africa in April, that happens yearly at Church Park next to Fedex Forum and I think this park can serve a similar purpose in Nashville. This thread has a couple of pictures of how many people this park brings downtown. Plus its an awesome place to just wander around when you don't want to spend anymore money and get away from the crowds on Beale.

Edit:Here's a 360 tour of the park http://www.seebeale.com/beale_12.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a church in downtown Memphis that's building some luxury condo's in their parking lot (like every other parking lot downtown lol) but a park is a neccessary part of an urban fabric. Remember, people downtown don't have backyards so they need some parks nearby to play in...http://www.seebeale.com/beale_12.html

Fascinating and true! But to read this with Nashville's pockmarked downtown in mind, one might think the ideal proposal would be to level the entire city and turn it into a park! And why not? Then it'll be a real "green space" bonanza!!

What Bears and a lot of other people apparently don't realize is that there is already a sizable urban park one block away from this lot. Regardless of who owns what and how for and what for or how many monkeys believe the sandwich is pink, this or that, there are better things to do with urban land, particularly urban land that lies in close proximity to existing "green space," than turning it into more (and disconnected) "green space". Why is this so hard for people to understand?

I'm not angry, I'm not even annoyed. I don't even know why I am posting this. It's obvious that whenever I write anything at this point, most of time people either blow it off or shoot it down--without ever addressing the actual ideas expressed.

The issue, pals, is our Urban Planet. If you disagree with my thoughts on the land use, then give me a better idea. Otherwise, quit laying into me and giving me the goose. This probably sounds like a real winner to most of you here, but if people don't calm the hostility and start showing a little affection, I'm gonzo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NT

We just gave you a better idea...the park. SSG could sing the praises of a 50-story tower for the parcel but it will still be a park. You can revel in 19th century Paris but it will still be a park. So the competition is between a large surface parking lot or an undergound parking garage and a large urban park. A very very very easy choice.

Why is it your way or...what was it....gonzo? I enjoy many of your posts but some are just soliloquies that require no response.

As always be happy. : )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NT

We just gave you a better idea...the park. SSG could sing the praises of a 50-story tower for the parcel but it will still be a park. You can revel in 19th century Paris but it will still be a park. So the competition is between a large surface parking lot or an undergound parking garage and a large urban park. A very very very easy choice.

Why is it your way or...what was it....gonzo? I enjoy many of your posts but some are just soliloquies that require no response.

As always be happy. : )

You don't get it, do you? You honestly don't understand. *Indignant Sigh*...I will try to explain:

The competition is not between a parking lot and a "large" urban park. There is no competition...but if there was one, it would be between a parkling lot and "something else", perhaps a park. In your eager glee to take another--yet another--shot at me, you jumped the gun on this issue and if you're not careful you are going to confuse people.

For the record: this whole thing was just something SkyscraperGeek's intelligent and considerate pastor was kicking around, an idea...

And call me a tin-plate, but I think ideas are worthy of discussion. So in this case I put my two cents in, and a few people agreed or disagreed with dignity and maturity, but inevitably "certain posters" (to use your "words" Nashville_Bound) jumped in fray, taking it all seriously and stuff, and started swinging battle axes around. There are grudges being exercised. It handicaps the conversation and polarizes the crowd. Boo!

If the consensus is that I should take off, I'll take off. That's not a request for reassurance--that's just a declaration that if folks like Nashville_Bound don't get off my case (and please don't pretend your teeth aren't firmly lodged around my ankles) and start treating me like a person, rather than a ideology they don't understand and/or share, I'm out.

That's right, Nashville_Bound_and_Gagged--gonzo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating and true! But to read this with Nashville's pockmarked downtown in mind, one might think the ideal proposal would be to level the entire city and turn it into a park! And why not? Then it'll be a real "green space" bonanza!!

What Bears and a lot of other people apparently don't realize is that there is already a sizable urban park one block away from this lot. Regardless of who owns what and how for and what for or how many monkeys believe the sandwich is pink, this or that, there are better things to do with urban land, particularly urban land that lies in close proximity to existing "green space," than turning it into more (and disconnected) "green space". Why is this so hard for people to understand?

I'm not angry, I'm not even annoyed. I don't even know why I am posting this. It's obvious that whenever I write anything at this point, most of time people either blow it off or shoot it down--without ever addressing the actual ideas expressed.

The issue, pals, is our Urban Planet. If you disagree with my thoughts on the land use, then give me a better idea. Otherwise, quit laying into me and giving me the goose. This probably sounds like a real winner to most of you here, but if people don't calm the hostility and start showing a little affection, I'm gonzo!

To be quite honest, I completely agree with you this time NT. I think that a park would be a poor choice for this area. Now, I don't think it is the worst choice (the obvious being that it would remain a parking lot), but it really seems silly for a church to build a park one block away from a newly finished city-owned park. Of course I know that FBC doesn't have to do anything with this lot. As someone who grew up in this church, I'm well aware that the church gets a sizeable amount of income from leasing out parking which they in turn can use towards ministering to the downtown community. But I think it is ridiculous for us to simply accept every new development that gets mentioned in downtown only because it is taking up a surface lot. With the emphasis being placed on demonbreun street with the new walk of fame, I think we need to have VERY high standards when it comes to anything being developed in the area. As NT has repeatedly said, just because it is proposed doesn't mean its good.

I know that Frank Lewis doesn't HAVE to do anything with the lot. It provides income for the church and doing anything aside from selling it would cost the churchmembers quite a bit. But I think we need to look at the big picture here, just because a church owns this lot doesn't mean that it has any less importance to downtown than any of the lots that Tong G or central parking own. While virtually everyone here agreed that the Titans should lose their massive parking lots for the new riverfront projects, very few people seem to agree that FBC really needs to do anything with their large lots. For a long time there was nothing really to surrounding FBC south of broadway, therefore it wouldn't be expected that FBC should do anything other than provide parking for its members. But now that Sobro is taking off, demonbreun street is being reborn, and people are returning to downtown, keeping a parking lot this size would be a huge mistake for the area. And I think that a park wouldn't make much sense either. Metro is trying to create a "music mile" that will bring more people to the area and provide much more foot traffic - having two parks right next to each other in one of the key areas of demonbreun/sobro will really take away from the potential.

Like NT said, no one is saying that FBC is awful for suggesting that they spend their own money to create something better than a parking lot - it's just that this is not the best use of space. If we want to create a neighborhood in downtown nashville we need to be discourgaging businesses, hotels, residences and churches from using large surface parking lots. We need to be encourgaging them to find the best use for these places. Of course they don't HAVE to...just like the Titans shouldn't have to lose their hold on the east bank. Or that damn junkyard.

Again this isn't a swipe at the church, the pastor or SSG or anyone else. I went to FBC for quite awhile and really thought they were doing a great job in the downtown community. But i think we need to be a little more open to NT every once in awhile - cause he's right, while the westin, BBS, and this new park might be great for the area, that doesn't mean that better things couldn't be built - and because none of them have been finalized, NOW is the time to push for higher standards and maybe the developers will get the hint that we want what's best for Nashville, not what will make them the most money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be quite honest, I completely agree with you this time NT. I think that a park would be a poor choice for this area. Now, I don't think it is the worst choice (the obvious being that it would remain a parking lot), but it really seems silly for a church to build a park one block away from a newly finished city-owned park. Of course I know that FBC doesn't have to do anything with this lot. As someone who grew up in this church, I'm well aware that the church gets a sizeable amount of income from leasing out parking which they in turn can use towards ministering to the downtown community. But I think it is ridiculous for us to simply accept every new development that gets mentioned in downtown only because it is taking up a surface lot. With the emphasis being placed on demonbreun street with the new walk of fame, I think we need to have VERY high standards when it comes to anything being developed in the area. As NT has repeatedly said, just because it is proposed doesn't mean its good.

I know that Frank Lewis doesn't HAVE to do anything with the lot. It provides income for the church and doing anything aside from selling it would cost the churchmembers quite a bit. But I think we need to look at the big picture here, just because a church owns this lot doesn't mean that it has any less importance to downtown than any of the lots that Tong G or central parking own. While virtually everyone here agreed that the Titans should lose their massive parking lots for the new riverfront projects, very few people seem to agree that FBC really needs to do anything with their large lots. For a long time there was nothing really to surrounding FBC south of broadway, therefore it wouldn't be expected that FBC should do anything other than provide parking for its members. But now that Sobro is taking off, demonbreun street is being reborn, and people are returning to downtown, keeping a parking lot this size would be a huge mistake for the area. And I think that a park wouldn't make much sense either. Metro is trying to create a "music mile" that will bring more people to the area and provide much more foot traffic - having two parks right next to each other in one of the key areas of demonbreun/sobro will really take away from the potential.

Like NT said, no one is saying that FBC is awful for suggesting that they spend their own money to create something better than a parking lot - it's just that this is not the best use of space. If we want to create a neighborhood in downtown nashville we need to be discourgaging businesses, hotels, residences and churches from using large surface parking lots. We need to be encourgaging them to find the best use for these places. Of course they don't HAVE to...just like the Titans shouldn't have to lose their hold on the east bank. Or that damn junkyard.

Again this isn't a swipe at the church, the pastor or SSG or anyone else. I went to FBC for quite awhile and really thought they were doing a great job in the downtown community. But i think we need to be a little more open to NT every once in awhile - cause he's right, while the westin, BBS, and this new park might be great for the area, that doesn't mean that better things couldn't be built - and because none of them have been finalized, NOW is the time to push for higher standards and maybe the developers will get the hint that we want what's best for Nashville, not what will make them the most money.

Thank you, Lukin...thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Skyscrapergeek:

I know that you said in one post that you almost didn't post this information about Dr. Lewis' intentions because you figured it would turn into a debate like this...but I'm really glad you did. It means that people are starting to look at this often overlooked parking lot in a new way. And it means that the pastor of a local baptist church is thinking further ahead and more progressively than the owners of the Titans when it comes to the development of downtown. While Bud adams seems quite content with the east bank remaining a huge ugly surface parking lot, FBC seems to think that their land could better benefit the community. I really want to make it clear that I think it is wonderful FBC is cosidering doing something...and I think that now is the time for the community to help Dr. Lewis and his congregation shape what will go on this lot, so that it can be something that benefits the church, the local community, tourists, and the growth of sobro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears to me that it's just a church parking lot and will remain that. The preacher is saying they are considering making an underground garage with a green space on top that will be a park. So...I don't think FBC is considering anything other than this possible idea. For those of you who think a building should be placed there instead, well...good luck. That doesn't appear to be listed as one of the "multiple choice" answers you can choose from. So start an argument and say something other than the surface lot or park should go there seems to be a waste of time considering the options.

And NT...I too enjoy some of your posts. But you also ASK for the negative attention by ALWAYS posting long diatribes, with the emphasis on LONG, of your opinions, with the emphasis on OPINIONS. We all have an opinion, but it seems as if you believe yours should be taken more seriously because you appear to be a person of considerable IQ. Architecture and urban landscape is not all about human scale...it's not all about proportion...it's not all about technique...it's not all about color...sometimes it's about the people with the money building something that the majority of the people want...or need. We dont, and never will, live in Utopia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is never used because as a park, it sucks. lol

It's less than ideal, but I don't think it 'sucks.' At least it isn't a big parking lot for the HoF and Hilton. It looks like it was designed/programmed to visually compliment the HoF from the air. If anything, it's way over-thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna guess the park that people say exists is in front of the Hall of Fame. But as BNA said, its not a real park. More of a plaza or meeting place for tour groups. A park has a more intimate vibe to it but with that plaza, you can still tell your in a bustling city. Look at the 360 I posted about Church Park. Your less than 400 yards from Peabody Place but its still quite peaceful. Most people prefer to go by the riverfront or Mud Island but Church Park is a much better place to do some martial arts, read, or play fetch with the dog uninterrupted. I don't think anyone is proposing to bulldoze any signifigant amount of downtown Nashville. Its only three blocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although there is a park right around the GEC, I think Nashville is a little lacking in the downtown parks department and any additions are welcome from me. I think this is a great opportunity, however, with the monstrous convention center being proposed right behind this property, there is a distinct possibility that it could become a park that nobody uses (depending on how they design the convention center).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's less than ideal, but I don't think it 'sucks.' At least it isn't a big parking lot for the HoF and Hilton. It looks like it was designed/programmed to visually compliment the HoF from the air. If anything, it's way over-thought.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the fact that it is there. I just think that when it is labelled a park it falls well short of what it should be. It's more like a glorified courtyard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the fact that it is there. I just think that when it is labelled a park it falls well short of what it should be. It's more like a glorified courtyard.

I don't think it's been 'labelled' a park anywhere except when being referred to here on UP. The official name is Gateway Commons. It might help some [including me] to take a look at basic, applicable definitions. In those terms, you are correct -- it is a courtyard. Makes no difference to me, as long as there is room for throwing frisbee!

court-yard  [kawrt-yahrd, kohrt-]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I've changed my mind and will try to take one more stab at this. First, let me say that I in no way intended for this thread to generate a lot of ill will between members of this forum because after all, this should be very good news.

As I said before, I do not mind at all imagination and wishful thinking when it comes to possible uses for this property. However, I think what this discussion lacks is a foundation, if you will, in reality. What seems to cause a dividing line in this and many other instances on this forum is the phrase "proper use" for any given property.

To determine a "proper use" we first must determine what we want to accomplish or what purpose/function this property should serve. It should go without saying again that this is private property, owned by the church which is under no obligation to do anything further with its development. Which leads me to the ultimate point of the matter. The "proper use" of this property is what the church deems necessary to meet its own needs as it ministers, first to the congregation and second to the community.

Therefore, with all due respect, it is irrelevant that there is another park/plaza/green space a black away. It cannot possibly meet the needs of the church. Possible uses for this property that would meet the needs of the church might be a large green space for family and children's activities, a prayer garden, space for outdoor bible study or picnic areas. As you can see by the satellite photos, we have nothing of the kind.

The area behind the Hilton addresses none of these needs. Even if it did, in today's climate, I hardly see the city allowing church activities to take place there.

If you had a large family and needed a minivan, would you buy a motorcycle instead because your neighbor already had a minivan? SoBro has more than enough space for many minivans.

A quick parable might better describe the situation. :D

Neighbor "A" decides that he/she would like to plant a garden in his/her backyard and makes plans to do so. Neighbor "A" informs the entire neighborhood of his/her plans and says that everyone is welcome to share in the produce from the garden.

But the neighborhood says, "We already have a grocery store right down the street. We don't need a garden here. What we need is a library. That is what you should build."

Neighbor "A" says, "But I don't know the first thing about libraries nor have the means to build one, what I need and want is a garden."

The moral and reality of the story is, you can either enjoy free vegetables or build your own library. Thus sayeth the geek.:w00t:

In the end, the church may or may not build a park/ green space. But if it does, I know for sure, everyone will be welcome. No "Field of Dreams" jokes please. <_<

Again, nothing in this post is meant to be offensive. So please do not take it that way. Besides, I can always get myself on the building committee and lobby for that 50 story skyscraper nashville bound was talking about. I'm sure we could make it an 800 footer with a big cross on top. :whistling:

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.