Jump to content

Inside 440 - Berry Hill, Midtown, Vanderbilt, 12S, WeHo, Fairgrounds, etc.


smeagolsfree

Recommended Posts

To some degree, I understand the concerns with STR’s . But only to a point. we have to remember, that Nashville is a big tourist area and everyone wants a piece of the pie. And as long as a property is meeting all the zoning and regulatory aspects, the owner has the right to use it under the guidelines that exist. As far as parking , with the right architectural design that could easily be incorporated, i.e in a row house or connected townhome design with individual ground floor garages with 2-3 floors of living space above. There’s always a solution, just depends on how much communication takes place. But hey , just my perspective, as a former owner of rental properties, mostly in tourist destinations .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Nash_12South said:

Part of the problem/fear with apartments is that currently most (not all) end up as STRs, especially in 12South, and most folks don't like those. Parking is also a problem with density. We shouldn't be dependent on cars, but we are, and you need 2 spaces for each dwelling, no matter how small.  If you could fit 8 condos on the site, which you could,  realistically you need also space for 16 cars. Yes, they should ride the bus or bike everywhere, but they won't.

I think we're no longer in the "need 2 cars per dwelling" phase of Nashville. Check out The Maslow in Wedgewood Houston. It's a 4-story condo building with 30+ units and ~1 parking spot/unit. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

And what’s the mentality with that? Tall Skinnies = rich, well educated, professionals and apartments = low income, transient types. Some people can’t afford or desire anything but apartment living, are you saying they aren’t welcomed? There’s some apartments that are both more lavish and expensive then many SFH . But it’s a mindset, that apartments equals trouble. 
it’s like everyone wants to see affordable housing, but not in their neighborhoods. 

Yeah I have no idea. I'm guessing yes, it's that apartments, therefore renters, are undesirables. 

It's just bad and dumb like you pointed out. 

*My original comment was sarcasm, just to be clear :)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

445 Park Commons (5 & 6 stories, 335 units, ground level retail, 500 capacity garage) update: up to 3rd floor in sections; south end rage is up.

Looking SE from Benton Ave.,  1/2 block east of Bransford Ave:

445 Park Commons, Feb 12, 2023, 1.jpeg

445 Park Commons, Feb 12, 2023, 2.jpeg


Looking NE from plaza walkway on east side of GEODIS Park, 1/2 block south of Benton Ave:

445 Park Commons, Feb 12, 2023, 3.jpeg


Looking SE from plaza walkway on east side of GEODIS Park, 1/2 block south of Benton Ave:

445 Park Commons, Feb 12, 2023, 4.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, markhollin said:

The church site at 1000-1006 that had originally been slated for a 3 & 4 story mixed-use project now is being scheduled for 5 luxury homes by Make Construction. The church structure, which had originally been a masonic lodge, was built in the 1960s and is not historic.

More behind the Nashville Post paywall here:

https://www.nashvillepost.com/business/development/high-end-homes-planned-for-12south-ex-church-site/article_4c1c4bb6-abbe-11ed-8b1d-c37c3e8cd4b4.html

 

1000-1006 Halcyon, Feb 13, 2023,  render.png

1000-1006 Halcyon, Jan 13, 2022, aerial site.png

1108109664_1000-1006HalcyonJan132022aerialsiteaerial.png


This screen shot from Smeagolsfree's excellent development map shows the site highlighted in teal at the center of the frame:

484810965_1000-1006HalcyonFeb132023sitemap.png

I would have rather seen a better use of the property but the church there was a disaster and an eyesore that should have never been built. A relic of the crap that was built from the 70's that contributed the suburban mess that was brought to the urban fabric. It was built on the cheap and it homes go there I am fine with it, but STR's no. I really think the Council person in this district needs to put their foot down and the residents need to take a stand and raise hell about STR's. This is in Colby's district, and he is termed out. Maybe someone with a better ear. 

No telling what the future will bring if the state gets their way either about the number of council seats.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Melrose said:

This should never be a justification for any venture in this town or something any resident should "have to remember."

They shouldn't have to remember that they are a piece of a whole? A city is a living growing organism.  If they want to be in a self contained bubble where no outside influences affect them, then city life isn't probably for them.

Of course I could be reading too much into what you said too :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nash_12South said:

I do think that folks can like living in Nashville but be frustrated at aspects of our growth. It's like saying that if you choose to drive your can you can't complain about the traffic or if you choose to eat in a restaurant, you can't complain about the service or the food. 

That's a fair point. 

I think my sticking point is, it's ok to complain about it, as long as you are doing something about it. Complaining about traffic, then voting against transit referendums, or voting for politicians that don't have a transit plan, is just complaining for complaining sake then. 

Blocking projects because of, not liking growth, in my mind at least is not an acceptable reason. But that's the YIMBY in me speaking, haha. Ya know what I'm saying?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think that Melrose has blurred the context of my words. I was simply stating the large tourist industry here in Nashville, and that many are trying to profit from it. In the form of STR’s ( don’t take me wrong, I’m not a fan) but if they are allowed under the zoning and regulations of a particular piece of property, then in fairness that owner has the right to use it in such manner. Not the owners fault, but zoning needs to change that. As for the original start of this conversation, the church property, if there’s a guarantee that if apartments got approved they must not allow STR’s , has to be in writing up front though zoning or planning. I fully understand the value of that.        I’m with Paul and Nash_ 12south not wanting STR’s in their neighborhood, fully understand that’s a big difference then regular apartments.  
and yes Melrose, I do believe “we have to remember “ the tourist industry. It’s definitely a factor in this city, that accounts for many jobs , and many companies justification to locate here. It’s part of the economic engine that drives this city, like it or not.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2023 at 2:44 PM, PaulChinetti said:

That's a fair point. 

I think my sticking point is, it's ok to complain about it, as long as you are doing something about it. Complaining about traffic, then voting against transit referendums, or voting for politicians that don't have a transit plan, is just complaining for complaining sake then. 

Blocking projects because of, not liking growth, in my mind at least is not an acceptable reason. But that's the YIMBY in me speaking, haha. Ya know what I'm saying?

 

No, not blocking projects or NIMBY at all.  I'm saying proposing solutions, thoughtful planning  and proper regulations shouldn't be tossed  aside because people deserve their "piece of the pie", which is how I took the original comment.  IMO,  we've been far too willing for far too long to be deferential to anything under the guise of "good for business" or good for the City's "exposure" (whatever that means), without considering any other context .   This has been done at the expense of things like transit, increasing  good housing options and density, etc.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PaulChinetti said:

Looks like this property at 492 Craighead Street is trying to get rezoned to Mul-A. This could be a great addition to the street if something with some retail/resturant space happens on the bottom.

*This stretch of street is in desperate need of some sidewalks to connect 8th to Geodis

https://nashville.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5979754&GUID=B50C63CF-42EA-4C42-93CC-862DB16C042E

2116155180_Screenshot2023-02-16at11_15_35AM.png

Is this stretch Metro or Berry Hill?  I always get confused by the boundary lines in this area. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.