Jump to content

Mayor wants to build amphitheater on the Thermal Plant site.


chris holman

Recommended Posts

--Before the Sounds deal went stale, it was mentioned that the stadium would provide another possbile venue for things like the CMA festival. So in that way, I guess this amphitheatre proposal makes sense.

--but--it will not even come close to being big enough to replace Starwood--and the riverfront masterplan did propose an amphitheatre down by the new civic square. so i guess that this would replace that? I would think that our city leaders should be discussing which site is actually the best place for an amphitheatre. Also what type of venue is best to build--bigger, smaller? And if we are going to build one, should we attempt to build something big enough to replace Starwood? --there is plenty of land on the other side of the river. Also what type of impact does an amphitheatre have on the SoBro neighborhood as far as noise? Are loud concerts going to be a welcome thing on a regular basis?

--remember all the formal proposals the city reviewed? The city (or the reviewing committee representing the city) decided that none of the proposals was a clear winner. then they said that the sounds proposal would be the non-clear winner to have their proposal developed. maybe we should have suspected back then that there wasn't the political will to get the stadium done. so why did they not go back and start completely over? i know that would really draw things out, but this amphitheatre thing came out of left field in the process and was then just latched on to. I am not against it at all if it is done right and takes full advantage of this prime piece of land. But there certainly seem to be a lot of unanswered questions about this thing. I just hope that they get answered before the city jumps in head first.

This needs to be in the 3500 - 5000 range in terms of seating. The best example of another venue that would be similar is Chastain Park in Atlanta. There are several venues around the country this size and it offers the opportunity to showcase a varied billing of entertainment. You can go to http://www.classicchastain.com and check out their offerings. With 18,000 seats in the arena you would not want to compete 150 yards away. this needs to be different programming geared to all demographics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Right, Chastain should be the model for this... however, I can't get past the very bad idea behind putting residential around the amphitheatre.

I thought the same thing. One on side, you can see free concerts. On the other side, you are forced to watch free concerts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks as if this idea may be dead for the current Council. I doubt this current group of council members will do anything of any consequence the remainder of their term.

http://nashvillecitypaper.com/index.cfm?se...p;news_id=56622

This is what I wanted to hear. Now we can take our time a see what is the best use for the property, explore more options. And not rush into anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks as if this idea may be dead for the current Council. I doubt this current group of council members will do anything of any consequence the remainder of their term.

http://nashvillecitypaper.com/index.cfm?se...p;news_id=56622

Jeeper12 wrote: Feb 8 2007, 09:54 PM Post #202

As difficult as this thing was to put together in the first place I'm not sure the politics will be there to get it extended if the April deadline is not met. I personally would like to see it happen but I think the opponents (some running for mayor) of the original concept will come out of the woodwork with "I told you so's" and advocate a different use for the property. Purcell probably won't have time to get something else figured out so it could become one of the central campaign issues for the next election.

I said this in February and I think that's about how it's going to go. The only thing that surprises me is that Purcell thought he could steal the decision on this site from the next council and mayor so late in the game, no pun intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite how improbable it would be for the mayor to get his amphitheatre done I'm hearing that he has lots of high powered lobbying help from Hall Strategies to try and get key council members to make it happen. They are apparently being compensated by SBER to shepherd the bill through with stipulations (as to public and private areas of the siteplan) that SBER designed and got the mayor and Jameson to help fast track through the lame-duck council.

Once handed over to MDHA they are apparently going to immediately issue an RFP with a VERY short fuse all but guaranteeing that nobody but SBER has time to organize and respond to it. This would practically put SBER in a no bid situation that wouldn't seem to be in the best interest of the city in terms of getting the most for the property. After all the studies and subsequent time allowed SBER and the Sounds to make good on the last deal how ironic would it be for SBER and a few city folks to cook up a plan and then only give the public a month or two to organize a response ? For a mayor who pretended to be so concerned about not risking even a dollar of city funds, if what I'm hearing is true, this would be the mother of all screw jobs to the citizens of Nashville. All so he can claim to have accomplished something in Sobro I guess.

Nothing against SBER, but let's hope the council has the good sense to realize how the mayor is trying to dupe them. No sense in rushing things at this late date, especially knowing that you have only one developer currently involved in the discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^See my 6/13 post just previous to yours. I guess the bottom line is you should never underestimate a powerful lobbyist like Hall Strategies. If this squeaks through it will be the ultimate screwjob IMO. As Briley stated, the part-time council is up to its eyeballs with the budget and other important matters. Definitely not the ideal time to address a bill that has the potential, if not likelihood, to give one behind-the-scenes developer (SBER) a sweetheart deal for one of the most important sites in the city. But then again, maybe that was the whole point of this timing. Unbelievable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Just in case anybody else may still doubt what I was saying here is the e-mail back and forth that was forwarded to me last week by a local broker. Looks like SBER was or is courting Colliers to be a tenant. The e-mail had an attachment that was basically the SBER siteplan mentioned in the 2nd paragraph. I sure hope somebody slows this thing down before it's too late.

-----Original Message-----

From: Michael Hayes [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 5:43 PM

To: Bill Struever; Whelley, Michele L.; Priscilla Carroll

Subject: RE: Mayor Purcell wants stage for riverfront - Nashville, Tennessee - Thursday, 05/24/07 - Tennessean.com

Hi Michelle - to bring you up to date, legislation will be filed tomorrow by councilman Jameson to transfer the site from METRO to MDHA.

The Mayor has taken our idea on this as his own idea for the site and has fully embraced it.

The Ordinance will have a provision in it I believe (this is still a moving target) that will require MDHA to have a RFP with a short fuse.

Furthermore, it will limit the site plan (see attached) to liner buildings around a city park/amphitheater. We expect that the ordinance will be passed in early July and that the RFP will have 45 days for interested parties to respond. I also believe it will mandate a construction start of 3/1/08 and have hurdles in it for design progress, financing progress, etc.

We will not have certainty on our ability to do anything on this site until mid July (if no one else responds to RFP) or mid to late August once the award is made. I passed all of this information on to Greg Coleman today in your Nashville office, as we would still love to have your firm as a Tenant in our building.

The CVB, together with the Country Music Association, International Bluegrass Music Association, the Gospel Music Association and Nashville Symphony are releasing some images tomorrow that will run in the paper Saturday.

I tired to send them to you, but at 5mb, your server said that they were too large.

As to the Sounds, all we've heard is that they have accepted that this is not their site and that they are waiting for the next Mayor. This Mayor has suggested a site on the other side of the river, or north of the capital.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks. Michael

-----Original Message-----

From: Bill Struever

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 3:32 PM

To: Michelle Whelley; Priscilla Carroll

Cc: Michael Hayes

Subject: RE: Mayor Purcell wants stage for riverfront - Nashville, Tennessee - Thursday, 05/24/07 - Tennessean.com

Michael can bring you up to date. This is our proposal that the mayor

loves.

-----Original Message-----

From: Whelley, Michele L. [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 9:09 AM

To: Priscilla Carroll; Bill Struever

Subject: Mayor Purcell wants stage for riverfront - Nashville, Tennessee

- Thursday, 05/24/07 - Tennessean.com

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...0524/NEWS0202/7

05240385

If MDHA is putting this out again, sounds like it might be a while before you know if you can move forward.

And idea of what the Sounds are going to do about a new ballpark?

Colliers International is a worldwide affiliation of independently owned and operated companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Just in case anybody else may still doubt what I was saying here is the e-mail back and forth that was forwarded to me last week by a local broker. Looks like SBER was or is courting Colliers to be a tenant. The e-mail had an attachment that was basically the SBER siteplan mentioned in the 2nd paragraph. I sure hope somebody slows this thing down before it's too late.

-----Original Message-----

From: Michael Hayes [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 5:43 PM

To: Bill Struever; Whelley, Michele L.; Priscilla Carroll

Subject: RE: Mayor Purcell wants stage for riverfront - Nashville, Tennessee - Thursday, 05/24/07 - Tennessean.com

Hi Michelle - to bring you up to date, legislation will be filed tomorrow by councilman Jameson to transfer the site from METRO to MDHA.

The Mayor has taken our idea on this as his own idea for the site and has fully embraced it.

The Ordinance will have a provision in it I believe (this is still a moving target) that will require MDHA to have a RFP with a short fuse.

Furthermore, it will limit the site plan (see attached) to liner buildings around a city park/amphitheater. We expect that the ordinance will be passed in early July and that the RFP will have 45 days for interested parties to respond. I also believe it will mandate a construction start of 3/1/08 and have hurdles in it for design progress, financing progress, etc.

We will not have certainty on our ability to do anything on this site until mid July (if no one else responds to RFP) or mid to late August once the award is made. I passed all of this information on to Greg Coleman today in your Nashville office, as we would still love to have your firm as a Tenant in our building.

The CVB, together with the Country Music Association, International Bluegrass Music Association, the Gospel Music Association and Nashville Symphony are releasing some images tomorrow that will run in the paper Saturday.

I tired to send them to you, but at 5mb, your server said that they were too large.

As to the Sounds, all we've heard is that they have accepted that this is not their site and that they are waiting for the next Mayor. This Mayor has suggested a site on the other side of the river, or north of the capital.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks. Michael

-----Original Message-----

From: Bill Struever

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 3:32 PM

To: Michelle Whelley; Priscilla Carroll

Cc: Michael Hayes

Subject: RE: Mayor Purcell wants stage for riverfront - Nashville, Tennessee - Thursday, 05/24/07 - Tennessean.com

Michael can bring you up to date. This is our proposal that the mayor

loves.

-----Original Message-----

From: Whelley, Michele L. [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 9:09 AM

To: Priscilla Carroll; Bill Struever

Subject: Mayor Purcell wants stage for riverfront - Nashville, Tennessee

- Thursday, 05/24/07 - Tennessean.com

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...0524/NEWS0202/7

05240385

If MDHA is putting this out again, sounds like it might be a while before you know if you can move forward.

And idea of what the Sounds are going to do about a new ballpark?

Colliers International is a worldwide affiliation of independently owned and operated companies.

This a long held method of ensuring you and only you can win the RFP -- basically help write it. SBER is a favorite with nearly everyone in officialdome. Colliers, however, is inking lease with Lionstone for the Roundabout building, provided the fiirm can get the property management for the new office building as well as the strip across the street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow!! IMO, this is major egg on Purcell's kewpy-doll face.

Frankly, it's not a huger surprise to me that he wants to fast track this thing and that SBER is helping. The developer has invested a lot of money figuring out what to do with that area. Not defending the actions just explaining. If I was in their shoes, I be trying to make sure I had the edge, too. Purcell could be look for one last bang before he leaves office. And remember, the CVB and music industry are behind this thing too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole turn of events is absolutely amazing to me. If Purcell had given one-tenth the effort in pushing the Sounds deal as he is pushing this one (obviously, not his idea, but now he's touting it as his idea), the project would be under construction right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, it's not a huger surprise to me that he wants to fast track this thing and that SBER is helping. The developer has invested a lot of money figuring out what to do with that area. Not defending the actions just explaining. If I was in their shoes, I be trying to make sure I had the edge, too. Purcell could be look for one last bang before he leaves office. And remember, the CVB and music industry are behind this thing too.

I don't fault SBER anymore than I'd fault a cat for eating a canary. They don't appear to be doing anything illegal and, like you (the observer not the journalist, I hope), I don't blame them for wanting to stave off any competition. However, I do have a big problem with the mayor, MDHA and the council (you know, the folks in charge of minding our store) essentially complying with their efforts to do this. They're trying to do in a few weeks what should probably take several months to do properly and competently sort out.

There are many reasons for them not to do this but here are a few of the big ones:

1) How will we know that SBER is paying a fair market value for the land ? The "short fuse" scheme planned for the RFP by MDHA and SBER will almost certainly leave SBER in the drivers seat to dictate terms when nobody has time to organize a competitive response. And why hasn't the city ever solicited input from other developers or design firms as they were apparently cooking this deal privately with SBER ?

2) How will the siteplanning requirements that SBER has apparently developed for the RFP get reasonable scrutiny from anyone other than SBER before this plan gets implemented ? There were obvious conflicts in the version Hayes attached to his e-mail. And with all do respect to this mayor and MDHA, I think we ought to have some input from somebody other than an out-of-town firm trying to rush a sweetheart deal down the aisle.

3) Even if SBER is the right firm to develop this property and will pay a fair price (or fair lease rate) why cook a back room deal and cause the public to unnecessarily question the integrity of this process ? I think the answer is probably that there is no more time to let the process work as it should. But that's Purcell's fault and he shouldn't short change the citizens of Nashville for his failure to be more productive when there was still time to do so. So much for government in the sunshine...Nice legacy, Bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not close to this, but I can't help but think this "problem" wouldn't have arisen if Purcell had been out-front (as a good leader would be) to explain that the city could afford to back the bonds for a baseball park for the Sounds. It seems to me that Hank is right: a ballpark would be u/c at this time. I also believe that the ballpark would be the best tax generator of all the ideas proposed thus far.

I realize that I've criticized Purcell a lot, but I absolutely do not respect a lack of leadership from somebody who occupies a "leader's" office. A true leader is one who can build support for ideas that may be unpopular (at first glance) or from a vocal minority. Anybody who has questions as to what I mean can look at my previous posts on this topic in this thread. I've thought all along that a DT ballpark is a "no brainer" in Nashville, Atlanta, Louisville, Birmingham, Chattanooga, etc.

From the latest news this morning... I think that SBER will ultimately walk away from this too. That property will remain vacant for years.

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/index.cf...p;news_id=56751

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand people's dissatisfaction with the Purcell administration, but I think it's worth remembering the projects that have been completed during his term as mayor. I don't know them all offhand, but I think the courthouse renovation/public park/parking garage and Church Street revamps are quite noteworthy and make a good starting point. Those things might be most appreciated by downtown dwellers and workers, but they were both well-executed in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bill was deferred last night and the scuttlebut is that this one's now dead until the next council and administration take it up. Since it was defered there wasn't any discussion but when Summers introduced another bill (2nd reading) to return the land from surplus to metro (to undo what had been done for the Sounds) there was some discussion about all the e-mails flying around that suggested the council suspected the mayor, mdha and SBER had been trying to do an end run on them. Cudos to the CP for digging into all this enough to slow things down. Without their investigative work this thing probably would have sailed right on through. Here is the article in this morning's CP:

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/index.cf...p;news_id=56772

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not close to this, but I can't help but think this "problem" wouldn't have arisen if Purcell had been out-front (as a good leader would be) to explain that the city could afford to back the bonds for a baseball park for the Sounds. It seems to me that Hank is right: a ballpark would be u/c at this time. I also believe that the ballpark would be the best tax generator of all the ideas proposed thus far.

I realize that I've criticized Purcell a lot, but I absolutely do not respect a lack of leadership from somebody who occupies a "leader's" office. A true leader is one who can build support for ideas that may be unpopular (at first glance) or from a vocal minority.

I agree with you. Purcell has never taken a thorny issue and worked to build consensus to get it done. I'm sorry but spending a bunch of our money to build the public square may have been a good idea but it had no political risk for him, only the spoils of the ribbon-cutting ceremony which, btw, was expedited at great cost to the taxpayers to ensure it occurred on his watch.

Getting something done on the thermal site was his one shot at such an accomplishment on a grand scale....and he failed. Not to beat a dead horse but you gotta love the portion of Michael Hayes' e-mail up above where he writes that "The Mayor has taken our idea on this as his own". What more can you say ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had Metro sold this property to Bud Adams four or five years ago for the $11 million like he offered, there would be a minor league baseball park already there with hotels and condo's. The Sounds would be gone and we would have a minor league team that actually made money instead of having religious services with Moses bobbleheads during baseball games.

Nashville is so over cautious we end up losing useful developments. How come the city did nothing to save Starwood, and now all of a sudden the Mayor wants an ampitheater?

This whole scenario is just short of being obscene and unethical. How stupid does the Metro "paid off" Council think we are? Charlie Tygard once told me he would vote against the Sounds deal because seniors would have to walk too far from a parking lot. Hey Charlie, wake up! Most seniors would already be dead by the time this deal is finished! The whole Sounds deal was for future families and generations in Nashville, and how many seniors over 65 go to Sounds games anyway?

Now Mayor Purcell wants a ballpark north of the Capital? We had one for 50 years! It was called Sulphur Dell and the city tore it down in 1969! Now we have a dilapidated Greer Stadium which does not even meet ADA standards, and the namesake Lynn Greer and Greer Real Estate do nothing to keep it up!

Face it, baseball like NHL hockey in Nashville is dead and this property will end up being a surface parking lot like the bajillion spaces behind the GEC/Nashville Arena/Sommet Center.

Let's move on and SBER can go back to Baltimore. I went by Rolling Mill Hill today and there was not a soul working on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had Metro sold this property to Bud Adams four or five years ago for the $11 million like he offered, there would be a minor league baseball park already there with hotels and condo's. The Sounds would be gone and we would have a minor league team that actually made money instead of having religious services with Moses bobbleheads during baseball games.

Nashville is so over cautious we end up losing useful developments. How come the city did nothing to save Starwood, and now all of a sudden the Mayor wants an ampitheater?

This whole scenario is just short of being obscene and unethical. How stupid does the Metro "paid off" Council think we are? Charlie Tygard once told me he would vote against the Sounds deal because seniors would have to walk too far from a parking lot. Hey Charlie, wake up! Most seniors would already be dead by the time this deal is finished! The whole Sounds deal was for future families and generations in Nashville, and how many seniors over 65 go to Sounds games anyway?

Now Mayor Purcell wants a ballpark north of the Capital? We had one for 50 years! It was called Sulphur Dell and the city tore it down in 1969! Now we have a dilapidated Greer Stadium which does not even meet ADA standards, and the namesake Lynn Greer and Greer Real Estate do nothing to keep it up!

Face it, baseball like NHL hockey in Nashville is dead and this property will end up being a surface parking lot like the bajillion spaces behind the GEC/Nashville Arena/Sommet Center.

Let's move on and SBER can go back to Baltimore. I went by Rolling Mill Hill today and there was not a soul working on it.

I am not going to dispute you on the Bud Adams deal. but why would Metro have anything to do with Starwood, it is/was a private facility? I don't think the Mayor wanted a ampitheater, but rather he saw a good idea and tried to make it his own. It is still agood idea if put together properly and run like a Castain Park or any number of very succesful venues across the country that offer programming for a wide variety of demographics. Outside of thhe ballpark, I still think it is the best idea, and maybe even a better one than the ballpark. Many argue against hockey and baseball and that is your right but I will go on record as saying they will both be here to see the new convention center and maybe even the ST.

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.