The entrance to the Velocity condos is located on the Pine Street side of the building. This side of the building is currently 95 percent complete and looks quite modern.
The main lobby in the Velocity is not the largest lobby in downtown, but it might be the most interesting. There are a variety of materials used as well as patterns and colors. You can see the computer screen in the middle of the room, this is Velocity’s online concierge that is available when the onsite concierge is not. There will only be a live onsite concierge on duty during normal business hours.
The hallways of Velocity feature many modern works of art and other architecturally interesting items to jazz things up a little. The building is certainly not a plain apartment-like structure.
This is the elevator lobby on the 5th floor on the back side of the building. Directly behind me is the entrance to the sky lounge that features panoramic views of the Nashville skyline.
The gym at the Velocity is the only gym in a downtown condo building that really feels like a high end fitness center. The space is cavernous and is filled with nice equipment. This picture only shows about half of the gum’s equipment.
This is the downtown Nashville view from the sky lounge on the 5th floor at the Velocity in the Gulch. The Cummings Station building is the red brick building in the foreground.
The sky lounge on the roof at Velocity. There is a good amount of seating available as well as a very cool outdoor fireplace. The space could be a little larger for the building’s size, but it’s a nice touch since there is not a pool.
Here is a western view of the interior courtyard in Velocity. I was really happy to see that the developers spent a little extra scratch to plant more mature trees.
This is an exterior view of the Velocity on the Pine Street side of the building. This paver roundabout is the resident drop-off driveway. I have not seen it at night, but I suspect that the lighting out here is very interesting.
This is another view of the interior courtyard in the Velocity. The fountain is actually quite large and is lit in several places creating very cool effects. There are a few different seating areas available as well as resident only entrances to 3 different retail spaces. No word yet on who the retail tenants are going to be, but rumors speculate on a trendy clothing store, a grocery store (Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods) and a deli.
July 1, 2009, 5:25 am
Very modern and classy. The sky lounge is a nice spot for family get together. This looks like a good investment.
July 1, 2009, 5:25 am
Very modern and classy. The sky lounge is a nice spot for family get together. This looks like a good investment.
June 30, 2009, 10:25 pm
Very modern and classy. The sky lounge is a nice spot for family get together. This looks like a good investment.
July 1, 2009, 9:41 pm
Looks overpriced and the developer is in breach of a lot of these contracts which required the units to be complete in 2 years.
July 1, 2009, 9:41 pm
Looks overpriced and the developer is in breach of a lot of these contracts which required the units to be complete in 2 years.
July 1, 2009, 9:41 pm
Looks overpriced and the developer is in breach of a lot of these contracts which required the units to be complete in 2 years.
July 1, 2009, 2:41 pm
Looks overpriced and the developer is in breach of a lot of these contracts which required the units to be complete in 2 years.
July 1, 2009, 10:05 pm
I am not so sure that the developer is in actual breach of contract, but would love to hear what else you may know regarding a possible breach. Have you been able to get a binding legal opinion or an actual release from the developer?Thank you in advance for sharing.
July 1, 2009, 10:05 pm
I am not so sure that the developer is in actual breach of contract, but would love to hear what else you may know regarding a possible breach. Have you been able to get a binding legal opinion or an actual release from the developer?Thank you in advance for sharing.
July 1, 2009, 3:05 pm
I am not so sure that the developer is in actual breach of contract, but would love to hear what else you may know regarding a possible breach. Have you been able to get a binding legal opinion or an actual release from the developer?
Thank you in advance for sharing.
July 1, 2009, 10:44 pm
Great pics Grant. I'd love to reblog this if you don't mind.
July 1, 2009, 3:44 pm
Great pics Grant. I'd love to reblog this if you don't mind.
July 1, 2009, 11:00 pm
Steph – Absolutely, feel free to use the pics anywhere you like.
July 1, 2009, 4:00 pm
Steph – Absolutely, feel free to use the pics anywhere you like.
July 3, 2009, 5:04 am
85 of these units had contracts signed on May 17, 2007. From what I understand, all of these contracts have language that requires an occupancy permit to be issued within 2 years. Many of them still do not have those permits. The developer is relying on a force majeure clause just as they did in Icon. The problem with that position is that force majeure is not the same thing as poor planning of a construction site. There has to be an intervening event. The developer did not break ground until Oct. of 2007. These units could have been completed timely and indeed, some of them were.The way I see it, the Icon and other condo law suits are the canaries in the coal mine for Velocity contract holders. None of this addresses the ILFDA claims, which also could be an issue for Velocity.
July 2, 2009, 10:04 pm
85 of these units had contracts signed on May 17, 2007. From what I understand, all of these contracts have language that requires an occupancy permit to be issued within 2 years. Many of them still do not have those permits. The developer is relying on a force majeure clause just as they did in Icon. The problem with that position is that force majeure is not the same thing as poor planning of a construction site. There has to be an intervening event. The developer did not break ground until Oct. of 2007. These units could have been completed timely and indeed, some of them were.
The way I see it, the Icon and other condo law suits are the canaries in the coal mine for Velocity contract holders. None of this addresses the ILFDA claims, which also could be an issue for Velocity.
July 3, 2009, 2:54 pm
The contracts did have a 2 year deadline, but they also had built in extensions in addition to the force majeure clause. It is my understanding that developer is still well within the extended time as outlined by the contract, but again, I am not an attorney and would love to get a legal opinion asap.
July 3, 2009, 2:54 pm
The contracts did have a 2 year deadline, but they also had built in extensions in addition to the force majeure clause. It is my understanding that developer is still well within the extended time as outlined by the contract, but again, I am not an attorney and would love to get a legal opinion asap.
July 3, 2009, 7:54 am
The contracts did have a 2 year deadline, but they also had built in extensions in addition to the force majeure clause. It is my understanding that developer is still well within the extended time as outlined by the contract, but again, I am not an attorney and would love to get a legal opinion asap.
July 6, 2009, 6:42 pm
Go back and read the contract carefully; the built in extensions are for the closing date, not the 2 year c/o deadline. In either case, Bristol waited until Oct. of 2007 to break ground. If they had started the project timtely, Velocity would have been complete months ago.
July 6, 2009, 11:42 am
Go back and read the contract carefully; the built in extensions are for the closing date, not the 2 year c/o deadline. In either case, Bristol waited until Oct. of 2007 to break ground. If they had started the project timtely, Velocity would have been complete months ago.