Nashvillain

What a coincidence. More great reading material on zoning and how it broke cities

I'm not arguing in favor of a stadium at TSU, but I think it's important to remember why there is such little connectivity to TSU and North Nashville in the first place and it seems (judging from press releases and media coverage) like the impetus in putting a stadium there and partnering with TSU is to redress the imbalance of investment, care, and attention paid to North Nashville

Of course, the difference in those cities is that the urban fabric is much more robust and interconnected as opposed to fragmented and full of physical barriers like Nashville. There are real mobility options whereas we have cars and a hodgepodge of bike lanes where they can be put in with minimal effort and resources and minimal disruption to car throughput. These actual destinations--ball parks--should be destination points for transit and it's too bad that we can't incorporate transit infrastructure into their conception and build out.

Just as a point of comparison, the distance (as the crow flies) from TSU to downtown (the Capitol) is 2.29 miles. The distance from Geodis to the Capitol is 2.68 miles. I think the issue is accessibility and Geodis offers a good test case for these kinds of facilities existing outside of downtown. I think having these stadiums in different neighborhoods around the city is actually a cool thing and reminds me of how stadiums are integrated into older cities like Boston (Fenway) and Chicago (Wrigley) as well as cities in Europe, Latin America, and Asia

Not sure if this is the right place for this, but I just found this excellent primer on why and how zoning ordinances are terrible and are the drivers of skyrocketing home prices and unaffordability. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/zoning-housing-affordability-nimby-parking-houston/661289/

Being a native Nashvillian versus somebody who moved from another state? Are you serious? A citizen is a citizen

A few counter arguments: The biggest source of revenue for Metro Nashville is property taxes. More valuable properties generate more revenue. Typically, denser developments with a greater variety of uses are the most valuable and generate the most revenue for the city. Therefore, it is in Metro’s interest that properties in desirable, high-value neighborhoods like the 5-points area generate more revenue. Gas stations and surface lots don’t generate as much revenue for the city as denser, mixed-use development does. Notice, I never said anything about forcing property owners to sell or redevelop their gas station or surface lots. I said, maybe a streetscape improvement would encourage the redevelopment of those underutilized properties. I think we have a fundamental disagreement about cities. IMO, cities are engines for economic, cultural, and artistic development and progress. As economic drivers, they don’t remain the same, change is a constant factor in the lifespan of a healthy city. NIMBYs desire to keep things the way they are in order to maximize the value of their personal property. They see change, increased density, renters, etc., as elements that will lower the value of their property (with little to no evidence to support this view). Furthermore, NIMBYs, have outsize influence in shaping or outright preventing the development and redevelopment of properties that they do not own. Because you own an expensive house down the block, you get to prevent a landowner from building on a separate property within the limits of the current zoning? The role of government is not to maximize the value of assets belonging to certain constituents but to provide for the material well being of all its citizens. In my view, phrases like "preserving the character of the area", have more to do with fossilizing the city into a kind of living museum or tribute to the past as opposed to a dynamic place full of opportunities in which current residents can thrive. Possibly, those who wish to see the city stay the same are doing it out of a genuine sense of nostalgia, but more often, it's a tactic NIMBYs utilize to pull up the ladder after they've gotten theirs. I’m not sure what the current status of Woodland Studios is, but if the owners want to turn it into a museum, then so be it. I never argued that that might not be a good utilization of the building. However, if the current owners want to turn it into a hipster bowling alley and call it Woodland Pins or whatever because they think it would make a lot more money, then… so? Your last point seems to indicate that you’re for development as long as it’s development that you approve of and that Metro should only intervene in the built environment to prevent development that you don’t like. Is that correct? Last thing, being "native" doesn't confer greater rights than those of any other citizen.

Yeah, there is so much surface parking fronting that intersection plus a gas station. With those current uses, Metro would have to come up with some magical streetscaping to make it appealing. But if they did, maybe it would spur some investment in the underutilized lots. Although, I seem to remember that NIMBYs are strong in the 5-Points area and tend to fight anything more than two-stories and reductions in surface parking.

Yeah, it's three boxes

Exactly my point. Since WW2, the only option in 98% of the country has been single family housing. Multi-family and mixed-use options are illegal in most areas throughout Davidson (and throughout the U.S.). Therefore, there is no "option." It's single family or nothing. In order to provide "options," we must prioritize, or even make possible, multi-family zoning

Considering that it is fiscally unsustainable to finance sprawling development, why should Nashville rush to facilitate the development of Northwest Davidson County? I think Metro should prioritize development within the current UZO. Is there any neighborhood within the current UZO boundaries that anyone could consider overcrowded or fully developed? Is more single-family housing needed? When it represents the overwhelming vast majority of the available housing stock within the county? Wouldn't it be better to build multi-family housing so that the people who prefer to live in denser urban environments actually have that option?

I think they only have the one. Poor thing is going to be worn out quick

I know the photo doesn't show much new or exciting, but I had a gig yesterday photographing and filming a section of Luke's 32 Bridge so I thought I'd share an image I took of the Broadway entrance. BTW, it's like 5 or 6 floors of eating, drinking, wall-to-wall TV watching, live music hosting, rooftop shouting and NFL Draft Day/Preds deep playoff run viewing debauchery... you know, a standard Broadway venue. They comped me breakfast at the Sun Diner. It's pretty decent. Kind of a Memphis Sun Records-themed Waffle House.

It's the most heavily militarized border in the world! Solid Snake couldn't infiltrate that border! South Korea is amazing. I hope you get to take lots of photos in Seoul. I haven't been there in more than 10 years. I can't imagine how it's changed

East Nashville Suites has redeeming qualities? What are they? Bristol on Broadway is another candidate I forgot. Bristol has been a repeat bad taste development offender

The Haven might be singled out for its high visibility, but Nashville doesn't often get the best effort from developers since the urban building boom started back in 2005 ish. Here's a couple greatest hits that I could think of off the top of my head. ^ Oh, and the Westin!

Yes. Very weird. Must be the crime. Just like North Nashville is too crimey for a baseball stadium.

Here's a link to the study if anybody wants to dive deep... Stadium Subsidies in Tennessee (sycamoreinstitutetn.org)

We need more housing everywhere... Why not more on Rolling Mill Hill?

I was shocked to see how fast this has gotten underway. I'm excited to see how this turns out.

It is Metro at its best. Sprawling development is fiscally unsustainable. Low density development does not provide the tax base to support its own infrastructure, requiring a subsidy from more tax productive areas of town. Nashville should be trying to contain growth within areas of existing infrastructure that can support dense development. Also, there are numerous residential developments in the vicinity of Briley and Ashland City HWY currently underway...

Came across an interesting article and op-ed touching on issues pertinent to this thread that I thought I'd share. One's on reducing parking (with references to Donald Shoup--super important) and one's a deep dive into pedestrian deaths and systemic problems with car infrastructure https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-local-correspondents/when-cars-kill-pedestrians https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/02/opinion/california-parking.html?searchResultPosition=1

Protected bike lanes!

STR will fit right in