uberkarnie

While those athletic departments bring in a lot of money, they don't actually make that much profit. I think Alabama made like $175 million in revenue from athletics last year, but only $15 million in profit. Overall, only 24 athletic departments nationwide made more than they spent in 2017. That profit doesn't go back into the University either. These are minor league sports franchises and while I love to go and cheer for my teams, I think it is clear from the way many of the larger schools treat their student athletes that they have misplaced priorities. Vanderbilt students have an incredible quality of life. The condition of one facility for one sport(granted it is the flagship sport) is not negatively impacting their collegiate experience. It's fun for SEC fans to pile on Vanderbilt; I get it. I just think it's ill-informed. The current model of collegiate athletics is a dinosaur in several ways and its long term viability is being questioned by many. I know there are people at Vanderbilt who value athletics, but also want to move cautiously until they have a better handle on how some future changes might impact the industry. All this aside, the Chancellor has said that fundraising is a primary consideration in the hiring of the next athletic director and a capital campaign for the department will be undertaken in the future. Anyway, I'm happy with how the University is conducting itself in recent years. Look at this and other recent residential buildings as an example of how the school is holding itself to a higher standard.

I counter that they are being responsible, unlike their SEC peers. All other sports have top notch facilities for fans and athletes (tennis needs a renovation). Who benefits from pumping huge amounts of money into the football stadium? It isn't the football players, they spend all their time using facilities that have been built new or replaced within the last five years. Also, the University will not tap into the endowment for these projects, that would be recklessly irresponsible. The University has improved itself unbelievably over the last twenty years, it is remarkable how much better the school is now than in the late '90's. I agree that some things can be done better, and am not opposed to fundraising for stadium renovations, I'm just not sure why people freak out over it.

I support the idea that they need a major capital campaign to improve the football stadium, but it's disingenuous to suggest the University does not support athletics. They've invested over $125 million in facility upgrades over the last 15 years. Subsidizing scholarships for athletes costs another $24 million a year. The on campus improvements to housing and other facilities benefit all students (including the athletes). I know I am an outlier, but apart from lines for the bathroom and slow egress, I'm not sure what people complain about with regard to Dudley. I mean, I guess it's ugly. A new stadium would be cool, but how much sense does it make for a school to spend $300 million on a building that's used 6 times a year? I'm proud of the school's priorities, no student is turned away because of financial considerations anymore. The dorms are impressive, but they have improved academic buildings as well and are in the preliminary process for a major facilities campaign for remodeling buildings for the College of Arts and Science. I have always supported the student athletes and will continue to donate to both the Athletic Department and the University, but I don't think the student experience for the athletes is negatively impacted because of the condition of the football stadium.

I live in HWEN and voiced my support for the project if only to get rid of that hideous bank building, but the neighbors all seem horrified.

I wish we could freeze property taxes at the rate at time of purchase. When a property sells, new owners pay whatever the new rate is based on current valuation. The city could actually rase rates more frequently without negatively impacting current homeowners and working class homeowners would never be priced out due to property taxes. My rates have soared in the last 12 years (as has the value of my property of course) but for a variety of reasons I make less money now than I did then and I've since added three children to the mix. I guess this would only work if the average property turnover rate were frequent enough, I have no idea what average length of ownership on residential properties in Nashville is.

Based on student input this spring, the greek row phases were expedited by eighteen months. Lambda Chi Alpha house was demolished and will be replaced with a new house for Zeta Tau Alpha and one for NPHC as they have been using the old Phi Delta Theta house. These should be finished next summer.

I'll never be able to see anything but this.

The second crane went up yesterday.

I wish that building had been saved and that this project were proposed somewhere else but to be fair, it has only been one year since the demo.

Mediterranean Cuisine moved downtown in summer of '11 but only lasted a few months I think. I believe the owners now operate in the Village above Pizza Perfect where the old Lone Wolf Tattoo was located. It has the same name, but I'm not sure if it is Sami or different owners. That Indian place might have been another location of Shalimar, but I don't remember. If so, they still have a location in Green Hills. If you're around campus and want Indian, Sitar is still kicking on 21st just north of West End.

That site will be developed eventually, but it has a pretty steep price tag on it and the owners are in a position to sit until the right offer comes along.

C. B. Ragland bought that lot in 2004 and still owns it as far as I can tell.

That is so cool.

I understand something needs to be done here. I also recognize that Bellevue is a hell of a lot more appropriate place for this type of development than Mt. Juliet; but am I the only one who finds Providence absolutely repulsive? I have a huge bias against massive development in outlying areas for myriad reasons, but what Crosland did out there doesn't seem to have been well thought out at all. I loathe suburban sprawl, but am drawn out there for work once or twice a week and it is hell. It makes Cool Springs seem well reasoned.

This is the one that would require demolition of the 1880's brick home that currently sits on that location. I think someone mentioned that attempts were being made by a group to crowdsource revenue to save and move the structure to somewhere near Belmont, though I might be crazy. Also, I think someone(perhaps WW or smeagolsfree?) indicated that this proposal was quite a ways away from a realistic start date. Again, so much is happening that I might be confusing proposals.

Yeah, I drive by several times a week and haven't seen any activity on the diner side since the stop work order was issued. I was last down there a week ago so things could have changed.

We seem to be treating our Mid-century architecture with the same disregard that our grandparents treated the Victorians. Hillsborough High isn't our best remaining example, but in light of all that has been lost or might soon go, it is worth protecting.