Signature Tower

[Duke32]

It looks like it is going to happen after all. Construction dates have been set. Three months for rock excavation and construction to start in June '07. We also have been told that including underground parking, the total number of floors will be 81.

[MidTenn1]

It looks like it is going to happen after all. Construction dates have been set. Three months for rock excavation and construction to start in June '07. We also have been told that including underground parking, the total number of floors will be 81.

Great information!

I suppose the overall height, 1047', hasn't changed?

[QuietMike]

It looks like it is going to happen after all. Construction dates have been set. Three months for rock excavation and construction to start in June '07. We also have been told that including underground parking, the total number of floors will be 81.

Well that's certainly good news! So is the excavation work considered "construction" (such that the excavation will start in June) or will excavation start in March, then they'll start building the tower in June?

[monsoon]

It looks like it is going to happen after all. Construction dates have been set. Three months for rock excavation and construction to start in June '07. We also have been told that including underground parking, the total number of floors will be 81.

We here at UrbanPlanet have have seen plenty of construction dates on a lot of projects that have not been built. One common element of is they specify dates far in the future as this one has. If you see them move that date, then that will be the sign this project isn't happening. We are tracking a project that was announced in 2001 and the construction date has been moving forward every 6 months and now sits sometime in 2007. Until they stick some shovels into the ground, I don't think anyone that is posting on this site has any information that would indicate whether this project is happening or not. Stalling sales are not a good sign, especially for a project that has gotten as much exposure as this one has.

And this is certainly a matter of opinion, but I personally don't think much of the design of the building myself. They have made all of the typical mistakes that are made on these kind of projects at ground level and the rest of it is an unremarkable tower with a gaudy crown bolted to it. The word trailer trash comes to mind. The only thing going for it is it's size which ironically is also it achilles heel. And before anyone throws bottles at me, I have said the same thing about many 'scrapers that are built in the South. Most of them are unremarkable when compared to their peers around the world, and this one is right up there in that category.

[barakat]

And this is certainly a matter of opinion, but I personally don't think much of the design of the building myself. They have made all of the typical mistakes that are made on these kind of projects at ground level and the rest of it is an unremarkable tower with a gaudy crown bolted to it. The word trailer trash comes to mind. The only thing going for it is it's size which ironically is also it achilles heel. And before anyone throws bottles at me, I have said the same thing about many 'scrapers that are built in the South. Most of them are unremarkable when compared to their peers around the world, and this one is right up there in that category.

Trailer trash? Where is the intelligent, constructive criticism I would expect from a UP mod? You don't know anything about the ground level of Signature Tower, as you aren't on the project team and it isn't even built. What is the point of that comment?

Anyway, How about giving an example of an existing building, anywhere in the world, that is more suitable for Nashville, on the Signature Tower site.

[satalac]

We here at UrbanPlanet have have seen plenty of construction dates on a lot of projects that have not been built. One common element of is they specify dates far in the future as this one has. If you see them move that date, then that will be the sign this project isn't happening. We are tracking a project that was announced in 2001 and the construction date has been moving forward every 6 months and now sits sometime in 2007. Until they stick some shovels into the ground, I don't think anyone that is posting on this site has any information that would indicate whether this project is happening or not. Stalling sales are not a good sign, especially for a project that has gotten as much exposure as this one has.

And this is certainly a matter of opinion, but I personally don't think much of the design of the building myself. They have made all of the typical mistakes that are made on these kind of projects at ground level and the rest of it is an unremarkable tower with a gaudy crown bolted to it. The word trailer trash comes to mind. The only thing going for it is it's size which ironically is also it achilles heel. And before anyone throws bottles at me, I have said the same thing about many 'scrapers that are built in the South. Most of them are unremarkable when compared to their peers around the world, and this one is right up there in that category.

signature is far from a giangantic pink flamingo. maybe we could put tire planters in front of the building and string christmas lights on it all year also. i got an idea, maybe we could take another crowned tall tower, i dunno, say the boa in charlotte and put it in a homemade dress with a pregnant belly and no shoes and nashville and charlotte could be the trailer twins!

[Duke32]

Well that's certainly good news! So is the excavation work considered "construction" (such that the excavation will start in June) or will excavation start in March, then they'll start building the tower in June?

Excavation is scheduled to start in the Spring, actual construction in the Summer.

[Skyscrapergeek]

Thanks very much for the info, Duke32!

Now, bring on the trailer trash!

Hey, wait a minute. Follow me on this. If this is indeed "trailer trash", then downtown might be considered a "trailer park". This would make perfect sense because downtown was hit by a tornado several years ago. As we all know, trailer parks are magnets for tornadic activity. AND with downtown being a trailer park, it would fit in with the whole "hick" image on Broadway.

Tony is a marketing GENIUS!

[Duke32]

Early construction mock-up of the Signature.

[Skyscrapergeek]

[monsoon]

Trailer trash? Where is the intelligent, constructive criticism I would expect from a UP mod? You don't know anything about the ground level of Signature Tower, as you aren't on the project team and it isn't even built. What is the point of that comment?

Anyway, How about giving an example of an existing building, anywhere in the world, that is more suitable for Nashville, on the Signature Tower site.

The crown reminds me of the aluminium trappings they used to put on old trailers. Trailer trash was most likely a bad choice of words as there are often a lot of other negatives that go with that term, but I do stick by my opinion this is not a world class piece of architecture. In fact it's so unremarkable that I suspect that beyond skyscraper fans, it will go unnoticed by much of the world and it won't do anything to gain Nashville more attention.

There have been renderings posted here in the past on what this thing will look like at street level. This tower does nothing to improve the urban fabric from the street which is a common problem of many skyscrapers that are looking to make a "statement". This commentary is based on those renderings and if they are not reflective of what is being proposed then all bets are off, but lack of representative renderings is not a good sign either.

BTW, we are a site that promotes better cities. We are not a site that cheerleads for proposed skyscrapers. If there is a definite plan that is under construction, promotes sustainablility, has something to offer the residents of a city, and generally adds to the urban streetlife then we are all for it. But honestly beyond the size of this building I don't see where the Signature tower does any of this for Nashville. It would seem they are proposing a "Vertical McMansion" in the sence of what it attempts to accomplish. (There is a thread here on Vertical McMansions if you need to know what that means.) Honestly I think Nashville would be better off not having such an out of place building.

I realize this is an unpopular opinion here especially considering some of the other comments that have appeared since the last post I made. As you mention we are here to have intelligent, constructive criticism and I just offered some. If anyone wants to discuss these points, then please do so. However I won't stand for any further SS Fanboi comments that only serve to attack the opinion without offering anything relevant.

[barakat]

However I won't stand for any further SS Fanboi comments that only serve to attack the opinion without offering anything relevant.

Then by God, take your own advice and start off with better things than 'trailer trash'! ;-) I value all opinions as long as a good argument or useful perspective is presented.

The previous, 55-story Signature included a large ground-level grocery store, and I believe at least 2 or 3 other retail spaces. The newer renderings are more vague, and I'm not sure what retail is planned. Also, now that the Palomar is signed, that could change a lot at street level. I'm hoping you don't lump me into your 'SS Fanboi' category, because I don't fit there. If it doesn't have retail at the street I can use, Signature or any other building is scenery.

[rocky top buzz]

metro makes a good point. Last December they annouced a groundbreaking date of January 2007. Now it's moved to June 2007? That of course begs the question, why was it moved? What did the contract with the hotel say, and will this now break that contract?

Smyrna was told that Target would be building a new store off Sam Ridley parkway beginning spring 2006. Now it is Fall 2006, and no sign sits on the property announcing the Target, and no dirt has been turned.

Is there a sign on church street touting the location of the tower? I am quickly falling into the category of pessimist on this project. B

[Dale]

Rarely do projects adhere to their originally prohected timetables. There is time, and their is developer's time. This ought to be common knowledge on a board like this. Delays in themselvesare in no way indicative of trouble.

[Jeeper12]

Rarely do projects adhere to their originally prohected timetables. There is time, and their is developer's time. This ought to be common knowledge on a board like this. Delays in themselvesare in no way indicative of trouble.

Ever ?? Using this logic one would never question the viability of a project until the developer himself announced it was dead. That seems quite courteous even in the south. Why do so many on this board get a twitter when anyone engages in rational discussion about certain steps and hurdles that a prospective development must overcome. It doesn't need to be an emotional discussion. I hate to break it to some but no excessive amount of optimism or pessimism on this board is going to influence a go no-go decision on this tower.

[Hankster]

metro makes a good point. Last December they annouced a groundbreaking date of January 2007. Now it's moved to June 2007? That of course begs the question, why was it moved? What did the contract with the hotel say, and will this now break that contract?

Smyrna was told that Target would be building a new store off Sam Ridley parkway beginning spring 2006. Now it is Fall 2006, and no sign sits on the property announcing the Target, and no dirt has been turned.

Is there a sign on church street touting the location of the tower? I am quickly falling into the category of pessimist on this project. B

All they did was move groundbreaking from January to Spring (when excavation starts), roughly three months. In a project of this magnitude, that's absolutely no cause for thinking this project any less likely to happen. Anyway you look at it, excavation and ground breaking are one in the same.

[monsoon]

...... I hate to break it to some but no excessive amount of optimism or pessimism on this board is going to influence a go no-go decision on this tower.

Indeed. If they don't get enough people to sign up, it won't be built. The page after page of boosterism posts for this project where some insist it is going up regardless ignore this reality. Unless someone wants to share the business plan that proves otherwise, nobody here knows what is going to happen to this project. Beyond that, stalled reservations (if that is true) and moving construction dates are not positive signs.

And while I don't know about Nashville's goverment in particular, I can tell you that most cities would not invest in a project to build luxury condos for the rich should this project turn out not to be financially viable. There are better uses for tax money and an attempt to do something such at that would no doubt be very controversial. I would not count on that source to save this project. Again if someone wants to provide a list of politicians that would support such a plan, please feel free to post it here.

[nashvillwill]

The crown reminds me of the aluminium trappings they used to put on old trailers. Trailer trash was most likely a bad choice of words as there are often a lot of other negatives that go with that term, but I do stick by my opinion this is not a world class piece of architecture. In fact it's so unremarkable that I suspect that beyond skyscraper fans, it will go unnoticed by much of the world and it won't do anything to gain Nashville more attention.

There have been renderings posted here in the past on what this thing will look like at street level. This tower does nothing to improve the urban fabric from the street which is a common problem of many skyscrapers that are looking to make a "statement". This commentary is based on those renderings and if they are not reflective of what is being proposed then all bets are off, but lack of representative renderings is not a good sign either.

BTW, we are a site that promotes better cities. We are not a site that cheerleads for proposed skyscrapers. If there is a definite plan that is under construction, promotes sustainablility, has something to offer the residents of a city, and generally adds to the urban streetlife then we are all for it. But honestly beyond the size of this building I don't see where the Signature tower does any of this for Nashville. It would seem they are proposing a "Vertical McMansion" in the sence of what it attempts to accomplish. (There is a thread here on Vertical McMansions if you need to know what that means.) Honestly I think Nashville would be better off not having such an out of place building.

I realize this is an unpopular opinion here especially considering some of the other comments that have appeared since the last post I made. As you mention we are here to have intelligent, constructive criticism and I just offered some. If anyone wants to discuss these points, then please do so. However I won't stand for any further SS Fanboi comments that only serve to attack the opinion without offering anything relevant.

monsoon

With all due respect, you must remember that all of us here in this forum are cheerleaders for Nashville. Having said that, I don't think that anyone in this Nashville forum believes that the Signature Tower will honestly make us an international superpower. We don't have delusions of being the next NY, Paris, Tokyo, or Amsterdam. We simply want a figure that people see and think "oh...that's Nashville". We dont have a Statue of Liberty, a Eiffel Tower, a brand of t.v.'s, or legal marijuana. Yes, we have country music, but the genre relatively, has a small fanbase. We want a symbol! That's where siggy comes in.

I won't argue asthstetics(we all have our opinion, rightly so), I just want to point out that it would be a significant project in our fair town. Since our city is small, with limited history, it would be our way to say "Look! We have arrived!" It is a good argument of "wants" vs. "needs", but sometimes the "wants" pervail. Keep in mind we do have many wealthy celebrities in town with piles of expendible income.

Finally, to address what it does for our urban fabric my answer is this.....hopefully ANYTHING! If you have spent any time in Nashville you will know that we are lacking in that department. We have good diversity, a short (but rich) history, nice eats, nice venues, healthcare, good higher-education, technologies, and Fortune 500's. But when you walk our city street's you might go many blocks without passing a thing. Not just a lack of something that a certain person might want, but a lack of anything....for anyone. Nothingness! We are a suburban-car culture. So if Signature has anything more than a doorway to the elite, it will be a improvement. Whether it's only a Starbucks, or a multi-unit retail area & grocery. Anything is an improvement!

I hope she get's built.

[franktown]

How is the 48 page Signature Tower thread 'boosterism' different or worse than the 94 pages on the Wachovia thread in the Charlotte thread? Do we need to post more to make it acceptable? While we may not have fianancing secured or enough condo's reserved, we have firm renderings to discuss, a notable difference.

[LA_TN]

metro makes a good point. Last December they annouced a groundbreaking date of January 2007. Now it's moved to June 2007? That of course begs the question, why was it moved? What did the contract with the hotel say, and will this now break that contract?

Smyrna was told that Target would be building a new store off Sam Ridley parkway beginning spring 2006. Now it is Fall 2006, and no sign sits on the property announcing the Target, and no dirt has been turned.

Is there a sign on church street touting the location of the tower? I am quickly falling into the category of pessimist on this project. B

This is an easy one.

Remember the TIF? Originally, Tony got TIF money approved from MDHA in return for some 'affordable housing' units. Construction is required to start on or before the TIF offer expiration date, which is Jan. 31, 2007. Since the TIF has since been declined, that has allowed some flexibility and Tony had already stated previously that it would be a tight schedule to have the drawings completed by Dec/Jan. Add Duke's earlier comments and 2+2=....

Once the TIF was declined, I knew this would never start in Jan; but watching ICON, Viridian, Encore, Adelica, and others all break ground 2,3,4+ months late.....Hey, I'll take June!

[chris holman]

The crown reminds me of the aluminium trappings they used to put on old trailers. Trailer trash was most likely a bad choice of words as there are often a lot of other negatives that go with that term, but I do stick by my opinion this is not a world class piece of architecture. In fact it's so unremarkable that I suspect that beyond skyscraper fans, it will go unnoticed by much of the world and it won't do anything to gain Nashville more attention.

The proposal of the tower alone is getting national attention unless you think USA Today and your very own Charlotte Observer articles are not creditable sources of journalism.

monsoon I'll give you this much credit, you are right about its not a official until the shovels hit the ground, But I take a lot of pride in my city and there is no reason why Nashville shouldn't have this tower if demand is there.

Nashville is growing at rate that I've never seen before, and most of us are very excited about it but Signature Tower is only a part of it. There are condos being constructed all over the city, new hotels being proposed, and a new office tower's planned. And unless you live here its hard to anyone to understand Nashville position.

Nashville's condo boom isn't affected as much as the rest of the country's. The condo market is still strong here right now, which brings up a question as why isn't any other of our condo development's in doubt from others from the outside? Why is Signature Tower in question of doubt?

I still stand by my last post when the tower was only 55 stories and at (500) UNITS there wasn't any doubt or criticism towards this tower from the outside but only when the tower became 1057 ft when the attacks came. Tony G has taken this tower further than he ever has before.

But he's use to the naysayers when it comes to any of his developments, proposed or all ready constructed.

[monsoon]

How is the 48 page Signature Tower thread 'boosterism' different or worse than the 94 pages on the Wachovia thread in the Charlotte thread? Do we need to post more to make it acceptable? While we may not have fianancing secured or enough condo's reserved, we have firm renderings to discuss, a notable difference.

The bank 'IS' building that building. It does not require a number of people to sign up and buy condos in it. However if you bothered to look at the other threads in that section for proposed condo towers, including the 20 50+ story ones, and the thread "who is going to buy all of the condos" you will see where I have posed exactly the same questions for Charlotte's condo market. I notice that you failed to see those threads in your attempt to discredit what I have posted. Before jumping to conclusions and wasting our time here in doing so in yet another post that has nothing to do with the signiture tower, take the time to read what was actually posted.

[monsoon]

The proposal of the tower alone is getting national attention unless you think USA Today and your very own Charlotte Observer articles are not creditable sources of journalism.

I believe I said the tower has gotten a great deal of exposure. You may look back above. I also said that despite this exposure, people are reporting that reservations have stalled. Not a good sign.

I still stand by my last post when the tower was only 55 stories and at (500) UNITS there wasn't any doubt or criticism towards this tower from the outside but only when the tower became 1057 ft when the attacks came. Tony G has taken this tower further than he ever has before.

Then you have not done much reading on this forum because I posted exactly the same thing about the lackluster design of this building when it was first posted here in UP in its shorter incarnation. The fact of the matter is that while you may disagree with the prognosis that I have posted, you have not posted any reasons as to why that prognosis may be wrong except again to dismiss it as unwarranted naysaying.

[ATLBrain]

Obviously, this building is still speculation. Until the steel rises from the ground, it will remain so. I agree with Metro about the demand for anything like this anywhere in the South outside of Atlanta. Still, I want to see this thing get built b/c I do happen to like the design. Overall, I think it would be a real positive for Nashville's DT, which has seen so much of its livelihood (in the form of businesses) flee to Williamson.

As far as the skeptics go, I would be much more skeptical about this building if Tony hadn't already zoomed ahead with Viridian and Encore. Plus, I read just yesterday that the Nashville housing market is still very strong (one of three in the country showing rises in y/o/y sales and prices). In addition, I think Nashville is unique among cities in the South for continued strenght in DT housing. There's something very intangible, but just as important as any huge project that might go DT. Of course, I'm referring to the riverfront. At this point, the city has only just begun to utilize the river. As such, the city seems to recognize that residential is the greatest hope for DT's revival.

No doubt, this project is still very iffy, and for reasons stated above it has become a greater gamble as its size has grown. Here's to hoping it becomes reality.

[Jeeper12]

As far as the skeptics go, I would be much more skeptical about this building if Tony hadn't already zoomed ahead with Viridian and Encore.

If Tony had been largely responsible for these projects I would agree with you but the folks I know at Novare indicate he's had only front end city approval involvement on those projects. And he's also handled the sales much as Village or Zeitlin would for other projects. All development and financing activities have been handled by Novare in Atlanta. The cold hard truth is that the last project Tony had sole responsiblity for was the Cumberland 10 years ago. Although Cumberland got built it was not a success in the eyes of it's lenders and partners.

That said, I think Tony deserves a lot of credit for partnering up with more capable firms to do Viridian, Encore, Benny Dillon & Harris Teeter in Belle Meade. As a result of his partnering decisions I expect all of these projects to be successful. The big question is whether Tony has the experience in-house to pull off a project as ambitious as the ST on his own. Is he whistling past the grave yard where other more experienced players would be more cautious ? No one knows this answer but my sense is that this project will ultimately cost too much and sell for too little in order to justify a start.

If and when that becomes apparent to Tony I expect him to again partner up with Novare on a project that is more scaled to the Nashville market. As much as I think it would be neat to have the tallest building in the south I just don't think it's in the cards. If I'm wrong about this I know you guys will be kind enough to remind me of my errant prognostication. But please try and resist the urge to do so until excavation (not the groundbreaking party) begins.