Thermal's Best Use?

The property is a prized chunk of earth—10 acres of downtown riverfront with a lovely view. One of these days, it will make someone—or something—a very nice home.

At last glance, the development ideas for the site—and we're only covering the basics—include:

♦ a baseball stadium for the Sounds with retail and residential components;

♦ a convention center;

♦ a boat marina with a multistory office and residential tower;

♦ a mixed-use residential, entertainment and retail proposal;

♦ a Peabody Hotel.

The property is one of the more valuable pieces of developable land in the county. Strangely, its recent history has been herky-jerky. First, the Sounds expressed an interest in it. Negotiations with the Purcell administration went up and down, and then eventually flat-lined. Then, Titans owner Bud Adams flashed on it, faxing the mayor an offer of $10 million with the condition that the millions go to the city's schools. Then rumors began filtering out that others were interested in the site—this newspaper, for instance, broke news that the luxury Peabody Hotel wanted the land. Some even spoke of building water or amusement parks.

To his credit, Metro Council member Charlie Tygard proposed creating a task force to consider what to do with the property. Tygard was upset that the Purcell administration wasn't communicating well about its vision for the site. The 19-member task force's charge appeared two-fold: to determine the value of the land, and to investigate the proposals for it. So far, so good: it seems a reasonable enough idea to have development muckety-mucks study the various proposals.

But there's still a major problem here. The cart is somewhere out in front of the horse. In our judgment, before the task force keyed in on the various proposals, someone should have conducted what policy wonks call an "urban design review." Someone needed, first of all, to articulate how the 11.5 acres should be used, regardless of any developer's blueprint. And because the city owns the land, the review process should involve lots of consultation with the general public, not merely the stakeholders in the area.

A design review could have answered a myriad of questions that would then have illuminated the various projects being considered. What can the land handle? How contaminated is the site? How should new development connect with surrounding properties in terms of transportation infrastructure? How can we create public access and sightlines to the river? How does the river influence a potential development? How do such important new capital projects nearby like the Shelby Street Pedestrian Bridge, the symphony hall, the Gateway Bridge and the forthcoming Rolling Mill Hill Development affect the site's ultimate use? Should preserving views of the downtown skyline from Rutledge and Rolling Mill Hills influence the height of new development?

These questions should be answered not by those who want to develop the property, but by urban planners, architects, transportation specialists and others of a similar ilk. Our own Civic Design Center has staff who could fill that bill, people who could chart some clearly defined objectives for the type of project that should fill the property.

We at the Scene were intrigued by Metro Council member Buck Dozier's own suggestion to the chairman of the council task force: that a master plan be written that would include the thermal site, Rolling Mill Hill and a significant chunk of SoBro (a broad swath of land lying south of Broadway). We agree.

A good next step might be to put the wheels in reverse and call upon some experts to express their opinions. Being proactive about how we want this land to contribute to downtown makes a lot more sense than being reactive to five specific real estate proposals.