Rebuilding Second Avenue

[smeagolsfree]

That is the problem with Metro Hysterical Commission. They have allowed the bastardization of the majority of the buildings on Second & Broadway while holding the ruins of bombed out shells to medieval standards.

The Historical buildings that are now left in the city are no longer worth saving as the Hysterical commission will just say they are non-contributing structures when they feel like it. After coming back from Charleston and Savannah you get a new appreciation for what old is and I am sure if you travel to Europe, it is even a grander scale. At least when they rebuilt after WW II, they rebuilt to a historic standard in mind. 

I did see mistakes made in Charleston and Savannah as far as allowing new structures in older neighborhoods but there were few. The mindset in this country has been to rip it out, tear it up, kill it, burn it down, exterminate it like the Indians or the buffalo all in the name of money. That culture still exists today. We have bureaucrats that can't seem to see past their own nose because they are caught up in their own non sensical rules and regulations that they break all the time because of tax dollars. Common sense has now gone out the window.

[Luvemtall]

Baronakim as  I’ve mentioned many times before, I value your opinion and definitely appreciate your knowledge. You nailed it with acknowledging the financial ability and I think the same with keeping the facades on 1st intact. But it will take a deep pocketed player to achieve the goals that so many people are trying desperately to accomplish. I’m merely pointing out the obvious current problems with this situation, those structures are going to sit there in this state of despair indefinitely if they are expected to recreate the exact replication that existed before 12-25-20. So my opinion ( hopefully valued) is to loosen up the reigns a bit, and let some creative players such as New City ( Neuhoff ) come in and create something that might just be better than what we currently see and still hold on to the original character of the neighborhood. And that parking lot, IMO is a prime spot for something spectacular. If only the thoughts of it being of the same nature of the surrounding area were to be abandoned, let’s face it the AT&T building is smack in the middle of both Lower Broadway & Second Avenue districts and looks absolutely beautiful. 

[Bos2Nash]

The façade along 2nd Ave is gone and honestly should not be attempted to be rebuilt to the original. There is a fine line to historic preservation, but if there isn't anything there to preserve, then there isn't really a point to it. To that end though, I believe whole heartedly that the materiality and composition (rhythm, spacing, etc) should be influenced by the previous façade. It doesn't have to be the same, but by utilizing some of the defining features of what was there previously should help preserve the overall of this stretch (which IMO is the ultimate goal). 

As for 1st Avenue, I agree with Baronakim. The façade is still there and should be preserved/maintained as part of a redevelopment. We look at Chiefs and also what was done to the 419 Broadway building in which because the existing walls were still standing, a great effort was put into bringing those elements back to life.

While I understand the financial implications of these property owners ($5 million aint gonna get them very far at all), they own property in an area that has long been considered valuable from a preservation standpoint. Again, there is a fine line in which these things work IMO, and in regards to this situation I believe there is some give and take that can occur in which both sides find a way forward. Unfortunately though, the owners will absolutely NOT be able to build on the insurance money alone so they either need to sell the property or find financing (somehow)

[Baronakim]

1 hour ago, Luvemtall said:

Baronakim as  I’ve mentioned many times before, I value your opinion and definitely appreciate your knowledge. You nailed it with acknowledging the financial ability and I think the same with keeping the facades on 1st intact. But it will take a deep pocketed player to achieve the goals that so many people are trying desperately to accomplish. I’m merely pointing out the obvious current problems with this situation, those structures are going to sit there in this state of despair indefinitely if they are expected to recreate the exact replication that existed before 12-25-20. So my opinion ( hopefully valued) is to loosen up the reigns a bit, and let some creative players such as New City ( Neuhoff ) come in and create something that might just be better than what we currently see and still hold on to the original character of the neighborhood. And that parking lot, IMO is a prime spot for something spectacular. If only the thoughts of it being of the same nature of the surrounding area were to be abandoned, let’s face it the AT&T building is smack in the middle of both Lower Broadway & Second Avenue districts and looks absolutely beautiful. 

Duplicating the destroyed facades is a piece of cake compared  with cleaning and fully restoring damage to existing historic construction.  The demolished Second Avenue fronts should be replicable but the real argument is to about using cheaper systems in "character" with the rest of the street.  For conformation, ESa demolished the entire facade of a building at the other end of Second that had 1940s steel windows and such and rebuilt it with a convincing Victorian fascade.  I agree that it is unnecessary to exactly rebuild what was lost but the result should be as close to the Victorian era brick fascades as possible.  I think that anything "creative" like at Neuhoff would be an abomination on Second.  Yes ,the AT&T tower is beautiful, but the buildings it superceded were neither beautiful nor historic.

[Luvemtall]

I’m thinking we are somewhat close to being on the same page, I’m definitely not saying to tear down the existing and replacing with a new modern glass tower or anything like that. I do think that a middle ground could be achieved, whereas to tear out to the 1st ave facade preserving it as they did with Chief’s and replacing the interior and 2nd ave facade to as close to original as possible. But I’m not against a “ new” concept,as long as it achieves continuity with the adjoining buildings. 

[Luvemtall]

1 hour ago, Baronakim said:

Yes ,the AT&T tower is beautiful, but the buildings it superceded were neither beautiful nor historic.

Agree, that’s why I think the parking lot @ 2nd & Church shouldn’t be thought about only for a building that has similarities with other buildings in the neighborhood. If a developer buys it and wants a 750 foot glass tower, if that meets zoning then by all means they should be allowed to do so. 

[Baronakim]

1 hour ago, Luvemtall said:

Agree, that’s why I think the parking lot @ 2nd & Church shouldn’t be thought about only for a building that has similarities with other buildings in the neighborhood. If a developer buys it and wants a 750 foot glass tower, if that meets zoning then by all means they should be allowed to do so. 

These buildings destroyed in 1985 by an  arsonist on that lot were very beautiful Victorian buildings.  Regretably the city also tore the facades down as Second Avenue historic district had not become such a treasured area as it is today.  Whatever goes back MUST be built in the same scale and architectural style.  The vacant land is no excuse to build anything over four stories and other than compatible architecture IMO.  

Edited November 10, 2023 by Baronakim

[Luvemtall]

56 minutes ago, Baronakim said:

These buildings destroyed in 1985 by an  arsonist on that lot were very beautiful Victorian buildings.  Regretably the city also tore the facades down as Second Avenue historic district had not become such a treasured area as it is today.  Whatever goes back MUST be built in the same scale and architectural style.  The vacant land is no excuse to build anything over four stories and other than compatible architecture IMO.  

Unfortunately I will have to disagree on that, the very fact that the structures are gone and it’s basically a clean slate IMO is reason enough. If we try to keep everything as close to the original, then the concept of progression is inherently flawed. We as a society and city have to move forward, and since now there’s nothing there of any historical value it makes sense to use that parcel to its full potential. 

[markhollin]

An overview piece at The Tennessean on where things stand with rebuilding 2nd Ave. 3 years after the Christmas Day bombing of 2020:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/davidson/2023/12/20/second-avenue-project-update-businesses-stay-open-during-road-closure/71912374007/

[thenorthchannel]

1 hour ago, markhollin said:

An overview piece at The Tennessean on where things stand with rebuilding 2nd Ave. 4 years after the Christmas Day bombing of 2020:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/davidson/2023/12/20/second-avenue-project-update-businesses-stay-open-during-road-closure/71912374007/

3 years... don't make me older than I am... haha 

[Luvemtall]

As we age the years go by with a blink of an eye 

[MorganRehnberg]

They certainly don’t seem to be in a hurry to complete the road work and reopen the road. That’s got to be about the best argument for pedestrianizing 2nd Ave you could make. 

[Nathan_in_DC]

On 12/20/2023 at 7:39 PM, MorganRehnberg said:

They certainly don’t seem to be in a hurry to complete the road work and reopen the road. That’s got to be about the best argument for pedestrianizing 2nd Ave you could make. 

Exactly! This is proof that traffic in downtown won't just implode if you close a couple of streets to cars. Second Avenue would become the most popular, highest-demand part of downtown if it was turned into a permanent pedestrian plaza.

[MontanaGuy]

On 12/20/2023 at 6:39 PM, MorganRehnberg said:

They certainly don’t seem to be in a hurry to complete the road work and reopen the road. That’s got to be about the best argument for pedestrianizing 2nd Ave you could make. 

That's actually not a bad idea.  It's open on one lane as far as Church St which I do use sometimes to avoid the crowds and heavy traffic on other streets that cross Broadway but it would certainly energize that whole area!

[markhollin]

NBJ with an update on 2nd Ave. North streetscaping work:

https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2023/12/27/second-avenue-recovery-south-block-mdha.html


And behind the Nashville Post paywall here:

https://www.nashvillepost.com/politics/metro/city-continues-second-avenue-recovery-three-years-after-bombing/article_09061b46-a59f-11ee-84e7-abfdcab174e5.html

 

[markhollin]

New streetscape work update.

Looking north from intersection of Church St. and 2nd Ave. North:

New barriers and fencing up along both sides of 2nd Ave. between Broadway and Church St:

[Bos2Nash]

6 hours ago, markhollin said:

New streetscape work update.

Looking north from intersection of Church St. and 2nd Ave. North:

New barriers and fencing up along both sides of 2nd Ave. between Broadway and Church St:

Look at how wide that sidewalk is there! Love to see it.

[Luvemtall]

Looks like  a manhole and seemingly a light pole , right in the middle of the sidewalk! Really! 

5 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:

Look at how wide that sidewalk is there! Love to see it.

 

[Bos2Nash]

On 1/6/2024 at 6:21 PM, Luvemtall said:

Looks like  a manhole and seemingly a light pole , right in the middle of the sidewalk! Really! 

It does look like those are directly next to a tree well (or something along those lines), so it is probably lighting for the sidewalk, which I am okay with. The manhole isn't too bad as those are not allowed to stick up more than a half inch, so I will expect that to be flush

[markhollin]

On 1/6/2024 at 6:21 PM, Luvemtall said:

Looks like  a manhole and seemingly a light pole , right in the middle of the sidewalk! Really! 

 

According to renders, there will be lots of elevated (approx. 6" high x 3 ' wide x 6' long) brick planters  hugging the curb that will surround the light poles.

[Luvemtall]

Thanks guys, after reading your responses I looked closer at the renderings and realized indeed that there is some planters and such . 

[markhollin]

Blocks from Broadway north to Church are now closed to car traffic; but there is pedestrian flow on sidewalks.

Looking north from intersection of Broadway and 2nd Ave. North:

[Luvemtall]

Such a shame, that the damaged buildings are still held up in limbo. It would have been nice to have this rebuild of the streetscape coordinating with a rebuild of all structures. At some point the renewed sidewalks and landscapes will have to be closed off for reconstruction of whatever comes for those structures, it’s like a never ending battle to get this section completed.

[FrankNash]

^^^So have all the trees been cut down on Second Avenue?

[markhollin]

11 hours ago, FrankNash said:

^^^So have all the trees been cut down on Second Avenue?

Yes.  With the new alignment of sidewalks, curbs, planters, etc. they needed to come down.  New trees will be planted.  

Personally, I thought it was getting overgrown, and welcome the change.