NASHVILLE | 505 | 550 ft | 45 FLOORS - Page 8

scalziand · #**141** Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 6:56 PM**

This original design?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_Tower

munchymunch · #**142** Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 7:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by scalziand

This original design?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_Tower

Hell yeah! To this

animatedmartian · #**143** Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 7:52 PM**

All 3 designs look pretty good and I think all say a lot about where Nashville is heading.

And yea that Signature Tower looks pretty sexy.

Rail>Auto · #**144** Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 8:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by scalziand

This original design?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_Tower

Please, please, please bring that design back!

Busy Bee · #**145** Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 9:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rail>Auto

Please, please, please bring that design back!

The Signature Tower proposal is deader than a doornail. I was referring to the hope they'd build the first amorphous design, there is nothing like it in the country.

chris08876 · #**146** Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 10:11 PM**

I forgot about the Signature tower. It would of been amazing. That crown is something that I wish several projects would get (NY projects cough cough), instead of boxes, but o well. Looks like the Jin Mao crown which is one of my favorites. Anyways, this current design is still very nice. Lets hope for the best!

Austinlee · #**147** Posted **Oct 10, 2014, 12:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariesjow

Tony Giarratana has sold a 0.8 acres of this site to MDHA for a large parking garage. He is planning the proposed all-residential tower for the remaining 0.4 acres of the site. There would be 1,156 spaces in the parking garage which would be enough to accommodate a future residential tower.

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville...kyscraper.html

Neither of those two look BAD but the previous design was alpha city quality - London, Paris, NYC

chris08876 · #**148** Posted **Nov 3, 2014, 7:37 AM**

From the compilation:

NASHVILLE | 505CST | 750 ft | 60 FLOORS

futuresooner · #**149** Posted **Nov 15, 2014, 4:56 PM**

Site is being fenced off and parking meters have been removed. While this is likely for the start of the city garage, strong indications are that this will be starting pretty soon, likely before 3Q next year.

Dr Nevergold · #**150** Posted **Nov 15, 2014, 5:09 PM**

As long as it keeps the curves, I'm happy. Gives it a liquid feel.

Tom Servo · #**151** Posted **Nov 15, 2014, 9:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MIRYDI

Wow. That's slick. Wish we could get quality proposals like this here in Chicago.

JR Ewing · #**152** Posted **Nov 16, 2014, 12:01 AM**

Wow! Nice tower!!

arkitekte · #**153** Posted **Nov 16, 2014, 2:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Wow. That's slick. Wish we could get quality proposals like this here in Chicago.

Well, that was some Chicago home cooking on the design. Unfortunately that design isn't the one that will be built.

Tom Servo · #**154** Posted **Nov 16, 2014, 3:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by arkitekte

Well, that was some Chicago home cooking on the design. Unfortunately that design isn't the one that will be built.

Yeah. Too bad. That design is sick.

ariesjow · #**155** Posted **Nov 26, 2014, 11:41 PM**

A new design for 505 Church Street has been revealed. The tower will be 60 floors and 750 feet tall. The first 49 floors will contain 552 apartments while floors 51 through 60 will be condos.

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville....html?page=all

arkitekte · #**156** Posted **Nov 27, 2014, 12:06 AM**

Don't get me wrong, I love that this lot is being developed and I'm glad that Tony G is going to more than likely build a tower on this lot...the height is nice as well, but I don't like this design as much as the curvy 505CST design and most most recent design. This rendering my no means does this design justice though. I'm looking forward to seeing color renderings.

Yackemflaber69 · #**157** Posted **Nov 27, 2014, 12:08 AM**

personally the curvy design did not do it for me. Im glad they changed the design

KevinFromTexas · #**158** Posted **Nov 27, 2014, 12:21 AM**

I don't like buildings that have funky shapes. I appreciate uniqueness and all, but something being too abstract can be a distraction and come off a little bit obnoxious.

arkitekte · #**159** Posted **Nov 27, 2014, 12:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I don't like buildings that have funky shapes. I appreciate uniqueness and all, but something being too abstract can be a distraction and come off a little bit obnoxious.

I'm generally the same way, I tend to lean more toward simplicity rather than a complex design, but something about the 505CST design set me off.

There is more height with this design though...that's usually not a bad thing.

BnaBreaker · #**160** Posted **Nov 27, 2014, 12:57 AM**

This would've been an interesting proposal in 1987, but not today. That is not to say that it is an unattractive design, but it's about as ho-hum as 750 foot towers come.