Davidson East: East Nashville, Inglewood, Madison, Donelson, Hermitage, Old Hickory

[bwithers1]

As far as the parcels for sale by NADC (or Lincoln College of Technology) it looks like one was bought by TM Investments (out of Brentwood), it looks like they now also own what was "Mac's Market" on the edge of Eastwood Neighbors at Douglas and Gallatin. "Echo Construction" owns a parcel (they tore down an older bland house). This is interesting...this must have been one of the parcels for sale as well - 1302 Gallatin Ave is now home to something called the Nashville Motorcycle Collective.

www.nashvillemc.com

That is really interesting about the Motorcycle Collective.  And very much in keeping with the "gear-head" character of that stretch of Gallatin.

 

The Echo Construction parcel was originally an historic house that had been marred beyond recognition.  Most of that stretch of Gallatin Road was lined with craftsman bungalows and other houses well into the 1950s.  I just wonder what is going to go back on that lot.  It's a shame that Auto Diesel doesn't seem to be able to pull off their campus master plan.  Plus, Echo does not enjoy a reputation of being neighborhood friendly.  Let's hope that the Gallatin UDO and the Auto Diesel College Institutional Overlay help to shape the new construction project in a pedestrian-friendly form if the college is not able to add that parcel to an assemblage for a proper instructional or dormitory building.

 

Believe it or not, the Mac's Market property is inside Eastwood's Conservation Overlay.  I'd love to see that go and be replaced by a corner commercial building that meets both the UDO and the CZO design guidelines.  I'm not holding my breath, though.  There is way, way too much money to be made with gas stations selling beer, cigarrettes, pop and lottery tickets and generating tidal waves of litter.

Edited September 2, 2014 by bwithers1

[nashvillwill]

The 30 unit development at 731 Douglas is moving forward. I've hear that they are awaiting final approval from planning, but I can tell you that site work is in full swing. The developer must be pretty confident.

[bwithers1]

The 30 unit development at 731 Douglas is moving forward. I've hear that they are awaiting final approval from planning, but I can tell you that site work is in full swing. The developer must be pretty confident.

Thanks for the update!  I'm glad to see that one moving forward.  Sometimes it takes quite a while to obtain final Planning approval even after a rezoning has passed Planning and the Council. Douglas Ave is shaping up pretty nicely.

[nashvillwill]

Thanks for the update! I'm glad to see that one moving forward. Sometimes it takes quite a while to obtain final Planning approval even after a rezoning has passed Planning and the Council. Douglas Ave is shaping up pretty nicely.

I'm really curious to see what happens with Douglas Ave. over the next decade or so. I have mixed feelings about which way I'd like to see it go. Part of me views it as a perfect corridor for high density infill and making use of some of the existing commercial space between Lischey Ave. and Dickerson Rd. The other side of me is afraid of the potentially crummy developments we could get in my neighborhood as a result of this "perfect" location.

This particular development could set the tone of what is to come. I really hope that it turns out well.

Edited September 4, 2014 by nashvillwill

[TnNative]

Just spotted a large dumpster on the Eastwood Hobson Church site near the back rectory.

[whatwhat]

My sources tell me that there is a master plan for the entire 900 block of Shelby including the old car wash building at 10th.  Edgefield/Rediscover East has been talking about this one.  I think that a lot of the Edgefield people want the car wash building to stay.  My understanding is that the little - and fairly recent - duplex building will come down.  I just hope that the master plan leaves room to preserve the mature magnolia trees on that property.

 

Interesting. I'd been wondering what would be going there since that whole side of the street on that block is practically empty. 

[Nashville Cliff]

Just spotted a large dumpster on the Eastwood Hobson Church site near the back rectory.

 

Actually, two dumpsters.  There was a crew there earlier this week cleaning out debris.

[bwithers1]

I'm really curious to see what happens with Douglas Ave. over the next decade or so. I have mixed feelings about which way I'd like to see it go. Part of me views it as a perfect corridor for high density infill and making use of some of the existing commercial space between Lischey Ave. and Dickerson Rd. The other side of me is afraid of the potentially crummy developments we could get in my neighborhood as a result of this "perfect" location.

This particular development could set the tone of what is to come. I really hope that it turns out well.

You may know that the East Nashville Community Plan - Detailed Neighborhood Design Plan for Cleveland/McFerrin/Highland Heights allows rezonings to a fair amount of density all along Douglas going maybe two or three parcels in each direction north/south of Douglas between Dickerson and the railroad tracks, I believe.  So even though most of that is currently RS zoned, the Planning Commission and the Council have Community Plan authorization for rezonings to much higher density along that street. 

 

The problem is that there are no design guidelines.  This is where the Planning Department needs to get off their duff and work with CM Scott Davis to put in an Urban Design Overlay to ensure that when density goes in along Douglas it is thoughtfully designed.  Scott is wanting to use Urban Design Overlays to provide guidelines for upzonings so that residential blocks can have DADUs ("mother-in-law apartments' are currently disallowed in RS zoning) and that he can get true townhouses built in other areas (also disallowed in RS zoning).  But under the circumstances, SPs are terribly expensive for one-lot properties and the community is rightfully afraid of upzoning due to the unlimited examples of bad duplexes going in elsewhere.  This is an example of where having Overlays with design guidelines can facilitate increased development because sometimes communities oppose all development absent the degree of assurances that Overlays provide.

 

In fact, there is a parcel at the SEC of 6th/Douglas that is up for a rezoning right now that even Roy Dale said needs an SP in order to allow community standards to be written in to the plan.  Because what if it is rezoned and an unscrupulous developer gets it?  At this moment, there is no SP, though.  But if my memory serves the plan being developed by Dale & Associates' client is for a two-story townhouse development with something like one unit on N 6th St, one on the corner and two units facing Douglas, with parking accessed from the alley.  Let's hope for the best.

Edited September 5, 2014 by bwithers1

[nashvillwill]

bwithers1, I appreciate your thorough and thoughtful response. I must admit that much of it is beyond my scope of understanding. I'm not aware of a community plan that applies to my neighborhood. Could you provide a link? It sounds like I need to buy you a cup of coffee and pick your brain a little.

Fwiw, I think Councilman Davis is a fine gentleman. Whether he is serving the needs of his community is up for debate, but i would like to hear more of your thoughts and see how my community could create a more cohesive design plan.

Until I can (finally) make a meet, I appreciate your comments.

Cheers!

[bwithers1]

Here is the link to the full East Nashville Community Plan document  http://www.nashville.gov/Portals/0/SiteContent/Planning/docs/subarea5/EastNashvilleCommunityPlan.pdf.  Keep in mind that this was from 2006.  Yes, we are still waiting in line for a full update.

 

Scroll down to page 89 for the beginning of the Cleveland/McFerrin/Greenwood Detailed Neighborhood Design Plan appendix.  A few highlights:

 

-p93 shows the Community-Plan approved Neighborhood Center commercial corners.  Commercial/mixed use is approved on those exact parcels.  Other parcels that want commercial use have to go through a Community Plan Land Use Policy Change ordinance, which is pretty involved and requires a community meeting prior to the usual Planning Commission and Council public hearings.

-p94 shows the overall vision for the neighborhood in terms of what community members told Planning Department staff they wanted to see happen where at that time.

-p106 shows the subdistrict map that governs rezonings.  Most of Douglas Ave is in Subdistrict 2, which allows for a little bit higher density than the current RS zoning.  The yellow areas are Subdistrict 1 and are supposed to remain single-family detached.

-p116 shows a Detailed Land Use Plan for the area.

 

You can contact me via the messenger function to set up a time to talk live in greater detail.  Your area is experiencing rapid change and with that there are some growing pains that are manifesting themselves in socioeconomic/ethnic lines that are not as present east of Gallatin Ave.  I know a lot of neighborhood leaders over there and recognize that they are doing a lot of balancing to keep various parts of their neighborhoods on the same page.

[37206dude]

Meeting Monday Sept 8; Woodland St Bike Lanes; East Park 6-7pm

 

Community Meeting next Monday night at East Park regarding a Protected Bike Lane for Woodland Street.

To have room for Bike Lanes, the turn lane would have to be removed.  A Protected Bike Lane has barriers to separate vehicular and bike lanes.

The meeting is sponsored by CM Peter Westerholm.

This kind of thing is very important for supporting growth along the main st/woodland st corridor.

Protected bike lanes are part of a good mix of urban transportation options.

Please come out and support if you can, there is small but very vocal (and curmudgeony) opposition to this.

[Nashville Cliff]

 

Meeting Monday Sept 8; Woodland St Bike Lanes; East Park 6-7pm

 

Community Meeting next Monday night at East Park regarding a Protected Bike Lane for Woodland Street.

To have room for Bike Lanes, the turn lane would have to be removed.  A Protected Bike Lane has barriers to separate vehicular and bike lanes.

 

See you there.

[Vrtigo]

 

Meeting Monday Sept 8; Woodland St Bike Lanes; East Park 6-7pm

 

Community Meeting next Monday night at East Park regarding a Protected Bike Lane for Woodland Street.

To have room for Bike Lanes, the turn lane would have to be removed.  A Protected Bike Lane has barriers to separate vehicular and bike lanes.

The meeting is sponsored by CM Peter Westerholm.

This kind of thing is very important for supporting growth along the main st/woodland st corridor.

Protected bike lanes are part of a good mix of urban transportation options.

Please come out and support if you can, there is small but very vocal (and curmudgeony) opposition to this.

 

 

 

See you there.

 

Interesting! How often is that turn lane even justifiably needed? I can't remember ever being anything more than mildly inconvenienced by a slight slowdown on that street, so cant imagine where the opposition is coming from.

 

Damn NIMBYs. I'll try to be present if I can get away from work in time.

 

This is a significant portion of my cycling commute to work, so I'll be thrilled if they can extend protection all the way to downtown. My blood pressure always spikes as I'm making the trek through the I-24 wilderness between LP Field & 5th and this would be huge for the safety of all who commute via this path.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Vrtigo

[RandomHero]

I assume this lane would not extend west beyond 5th street. Unfortunately I feel like this is where a bike lane is most needed. Things calm down a good bit once you get east of 5th street. A bike lane would be nice between 5th and five points although getting one on Woodland all the way across the Woodland St. bridge would be the ultimate win. 

[FatherLand]

Saw zoning sign at 322 S 16th St, in the 'gully' of Boscobel...couldnt read entire sign but looked like teardown request hearing? I assume this structure is 'non-contributing'?

Looked up permit, "requesting item d appeal to replace non-conforming residences' applicant Ken Cunningham

Edited September 8, 2014 by FatherLand

[bwithers1]

Saw zoning sign at 322 S 16th St, in the 'gully' of Boscobel...couldnt read entire sign but looked like teardown request hearing? I assume this structure is 'non-contributing'?

Looked up permit, "requesting item d appeal to replace non-conforming residences' applicant Ken Cunningham

Is this on the southeast corner of Boscobel and 16th?  That structure is non-contributing, and in fact the demo permit was pulled before the Overlay expansion to Shelby went into pending status.  Adding to that, the new property owner pulled a duplex building permit before the Overlay went into pending status so that he could construct a duplex there regardless of what happened with the Overlay.

 

Having said that, the builder lives in East Nashville and made a presentation at a Lockeland Springs Neighborhood Association meeting a while back.  He is requesting an SP to put three small houses there.  The SP passed its planning commission hearing and is now up for Council public hearing, I believe.  The SP would ensure that there will be a MHZC review of the three buildings.  But they will be small, which is actually good, and they will likely be a little bit more contemporary in design, which is also allowed under the design guidelines.

Edited September 8, 2014 by bwithers1

[bwithers1]

Is this on the southeast corner of Boscobel and 16th?  That structure is non-contributing, and in fact the demo permit was pulled before the Overlay expansion to Shelby went into pending status.  Adding to that, the new property owner pulled a duplex building permit before the Overlay went into pending status so that he could construct a duplex there regardless of what happened with the Overlay.

 

Having said that, the builder lives in East Nashville and made a presentation at a Lockeland Springs Neighborhood Association meeting a while back.  He is requesting an SP to put three small houses there.  The SP passed its planning commission hearing and is now up for Council public hearing, I believe.

Scratch that.  Wrong corner.  I looked up the permits for 322 S 16th, which is at the northwest corner of 16th/Boscobel.  The property owner is going before the Board of Zoning Appeals to seek a variance to construct two detached residential units on that parcel.  Presently, historic overlay design guidelines do not allow detached duplexes at all, and so property owners who want to do that must either subdivide the lot or go before the BZA for approval.  If the BZA grants approval on 09/18, then the applicant would have to have a hearing before the MHZC on the new construction project for the two houses and two carports that he wants to put there.  This month's MHZC hearing is on Wednesday, 09/17, the day before the BZA hearing, and so the earliest that the new construction project would be heard by the MHZC would be Wednesday, October 15th.

 

Add this to the list of things that Lockeland Springs Neighborhood Association needs to track. 

Edited September 8, 2014 by bwithers1

[nashvillwill]

Interesting! How often is that turn lane even justifiably needed? I can't remember ever being anything more than mildly inconvenienced by a slight slowdown on that street, so cant imagine where the opposition is coming from.

Damn NIMBYs. I'll try to be present if I can get away from work in time.

This is a significant portion of my cycling commute to work, so I'll be thrilled if they can extend protection all the way to downtown. My blood pressure always spikes as I'm making the trek through the I-24 wilderness between LP Field & 5th and this would be huge for the safety of all who commute via this path.

Well, I went to this meeting. For any of you other guys there, I'm the guy who got up and left early. I don't mean that as a sign of disrespect to those who put it on, or anyone else there, but I know when my time is being wasted.

Summary; "it will slow cars down", "it is dangerous for drivers", "it's a waste of time and money", "we don't want it or need it", "I've been here longer and I don't want it", etc, etc.

[Nashville Cliff]

Well, I went to this meeting. For any of you other guys there, I'm the guy who got up and left early. I don't mean that as a sign of disrespect to those who put it on, or anyone else there, but I know when my time is being wasted.

Summary; "it will slow cars down", "it is dangerous for drivers", "it's a waste of time and money", "we don't want it or need it", "I've been here longer and I don't want it", etc, etc.

 

I'm the guy who fought the urge to leave several times for the same reason.  My biggest gripe was how much time was wasted by people complaining that no one was getting community input... this at the initial meeting to ... wait for it... get community input.  That and the negative tone set by some of the attendees.  It is one thing to voice your concerns, it is another thing to flail them about as a weapon.  Still, there were some legitimate concerns raised.  Kudos to Pete Westerholm, the Walk Bike folks, and Ron and the rest of the crew from NCDC for sharing the concept.  I guess you can't successfully have this kind of community meeting in Edgefield without first kissing the rings of the Edgefield Five.

[bwithers1]

Thanks for working on this meeting, Cliff.  I appreciate your concerns, but I actually think that this went way, way better than I would have imagined compared to how the Eastwood meeting went several years ago for the Porter Road bike lanes.  I also think that CM Westerholm did a much, much better job of moderating a meeting and letting people feel heard than he has done in a long time.  Sometimes letting people talk and making them feel heard is half the battle.  Once they get it out they are ready to listen and sometimes even to help.  But future meetings will need better public notice, particularly to the business owners along Woodland.  Their absence spoke volumes. 

 

It is certainly the case that Edgefield has many chiefs.  But they do protect their neighborhood, and the rest of East Nashville for that matter.  It just so happens that their neighborhood is between downtown and the rest of East Nashville.  But many of those people have been there since long before East Nashville was a desirable place to live, long before LP Field was ever imagined, and long before Five Points was anything other than Shirley's (now Three Crow), which was one of the most dangerous bars in all of Nashville.  So when they state that all of you newcomers are only here on the backs of their hard work, they mean it.  And they are also right to complain that their neighborhood is used as a parking lot and throughway for people getting to our more interior neighborhoods. 

 

My view was also that the long-tenured residents were far more respectful of the rights of bicyclists than some of the bicyclists were of the residents.  The Edgefield residents were talking about their daily life experiences.  The bicyclists were citing studies and touting themselves as knowing better because they are "the younger generation."  I have never, ever seen an instance in which telling long-established residents - or folks who are of more advanced age than yourself - that you know better than them because you are a younger generation is effective at changing minds.  Have you told your parents that you know better than them because you are younger?  How did that work out for you?  I would get slapped in the face and told to respect my elders.

 

Once bicyclist stated that he lives in the Greenwood neighborhood and that he "chooses" to use Woodland and so the Edgefield people should let him remake their neighborhood to make his life more convenient in another neighborhood.  As much as I empathize with his situation, that conversation is never going to go well.  In fact, I'm surprised that someone didn't call him on that.

 

My biggest take-away was that yes, the numerous Edgefield and Lockeland residents were supportive of the idea of the bike lanes in general, and even of protected bike lanes in particular, but that they saw more down sides than benefits to the particular location proposed for a protected bike lane. 

 

And ultimately that is my own view.  I feel as though the real barrier for bicyclists isn't getting from 5th to 10th, it is getting from 5th to downtown and back.  I was anticipating that the bike lane proposal for Woodland would focus the protected part on the stretch from the Public Square to 5th Street, and then have a buffered bike lane that picks up from 5th to 10th or whatever.  That kind of an arrangement would help East Nashvillians get across the river safely - and possibly more people would commute to work via bike - and would help attract visitors who hop on a Bcycle visualize a safe, clear path to that place called Five Points that is somewhere vaguely past the Interstate.  So then the argument that installing a protected bike lane would increase customers and revenue potential for the Five points business owners would make sense.  But the current proposal did not address the true barrier to biking across the river, and instead placed the most restrictive portion of the route in a business district that relies on rather large vehicles for deliveries.

 

At the end of the meeting CM Westerholm agreed with me that the real push needs to address the "crossing the river/Interstate/Ellington" impasse.  Then we can talk about extending bike lanes deeper into East Nashville.  So as irritated as some of you may be, I still believe that this was the start of a productive conversation.  Change is hard.  Shake it off and keep going.  You're on the right track.

Edited September 9, 2014 by bwithers1

[RandomHero]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Great recap. Hopefully the issue of crossing the I-24/LP/Cumberland divide will get the bulk of the resources here.

 

I also hope that the young bike enthusiasts crowd remains respectful of stakeholders at these types of meetings. They could end up shooting themselves in the foot if they get up and spout off about the latest and greatest NY Times articles about bike lanes. 

[whatwhat]

I'm for it in theory but I'd want to see a detailed plan to know for sure. The center lane between 5th and 5 Points does seem under utilized so losing that to add bike lanes wouldn't be too bad.  If you lost the left turn lanes at the 5th/Woodland intersection traffic would back up really bad in the afternoon from everyone trying to turn left.  That being said, if they do build bike lanes I would use them a good bit so I hope they can come up with something that works for everyone!  That stretch can be an adventure on a bike.

[Vrtigo]

I was present as well (khaki suit, standing against the far wall), but walked out towards the end because of the sheer lack of productivity of the meeting. Thanks for the thoughtful recap and I wish I could have had an opportunity to meet the few of you that were present.

 

The comments about respect definitely make sense, but I felt less of it coming from the longtime residents than was cited above. I will definitely agree that both sides need to work on this front first and foremost. In the defense of cyclists, it can be difficult to feel respected by drivers while riding and I'm sure that sentiment carried over into this meeting. The few (many?) who have been struck by vehicles, cut off by inattentive drivers, or just generally harassed by those who feel you are an unwelcome nuisance know exactly what I'm referring to.

 

One thing I found very interesting is the significant parallels between this dialog and those that have occurred with the AMP--all generally boiling down to "I don't need/want this because it means I have to change and I don't feel like I should have to change and be inconvenienced for something I won't use" vs. the crowd that wants it and will use it and feels it's a great idea. There was plenty of feeling and not much fact being thrown around and even a blatant disregard for facts when they were presented. The only way I see out of this debate is to focus the discussion on facts and proof prior to doing anything, and only doing those things supported by those facts and proof.

 

Above all, Nashville sorely needs a much larger shift of priorities in terms of transit, walkability and means of getting around. However, I think we need to first address peoples' feelings and opinions of how this should take place. For instance, I spent a few days in Bellingham, WA several years ago and was astounded by how all traffic would legitimately STOP on a dime if you even hinted that you were about to use a crosswalk. I have never seen before or since such a pedestrian-minded community... Clearly, this type of mindset is possible, but it will take some serious effort.

[Nashville Cliff]

Brett,

 

While I agree that some of the cyclists were disrespectful (not so much rude as lacking in respect), many of the opposed residents were patronizing while others were unnecessarily aggressive. Some woman behind me kept shouting, "That's not true!" every time someone stated a fact she didn't agree with.  I'm sorry, but the venerated elders don't get a weighted vote for their tenure in the hood.  Yes, any final decision should respect their views and needs but it should also respect the needs of the broader community.  Yes, us East Enders, Eastwoodies, and Lockeland Springers pass through Edgefield, but Rosebankers and Inglewoodies pass through our hood.

 

Ultimately, I agree with you that the critical point of the Downtown-East Nashville bike corridor is between the stadium and 5th.  The new lanes connecting KVB to the Shelby lanes are an option for getting across, but they are not suitable for many casual cyclists, with the extra distance, the large hills, and the still sketchy section over the interstate.

I'm for it in theory but I'd want to see a detailed plan to know for sure. The center lane between 5th and 5 Points does seem under utilized so losing that to add bike lanes wouldn't be too bad.  If you lost the left turn lanes at the 5th/Woodland intersection traffic would back up really bad in the afternoon from everyone trying to turn left.  That being said, if they do build bike lanes I would use them a good bit so I hope they can come up with something that works for everyone!  That stretch can be an adventure on a bike.

 

The very preliminary idea sketched out last night maintained turn lanes at both 5th and 10th.

[bwithers1]

Oh, I'm definitely in agreement that some of the naysayers were in character at last night's meeting.  And I also agree that there is a need to look at bikelanes broadly as part of a transportation plan that could use some updating.  It certainly is true that public streets are public property. 

 

But at the same time, the political reality is that the burden of persuasion is on those wanting to introduce the changes, not on those who purchased adjacent or nearby property under the assumption, however erroneous, that their vehicular street access would remain unimpeded regardless of how much vehicular traffic increased. 

 

And in some cases a few of the bicyclists made poor word choices that exacerbated tensions rather than easing them.  I don't actually believe that the desire to utilize bike lanes or to bike to work is particular to one generation over another, for instance. 

 

The fact in Nashville remains that those who manage to bike to work are still few, and adding all the bike lanes in the world won't fix that as long as most professional-level jobs are in suburban office parks in outlying parts of Nashville or in fact are in Cool Springs.  That's a hard reality to keep forefront:  there are almost no non-retail/restaurant jobs in East Nashville.  So most East Nashville residents rely on cars for daily transportation and will only be able to use bikes for recreation and they view protected bike lanes through that practical lense that removing traffic lanes increases car congestion in vehicular lanes, in which they unfortunately are going to remain stuck for the rest of their lives commuting to/from work.  The pace at which that reality is changing is painfully slow. 

 

I thought that the presenters did a great job and showed openness to lots of alternative ideas.  And the renderings that showed how the bike lanes would taper to allow room for the center turn lanes at 5th/10th were helpful if not necessarily convincing due to the angle of the shots.  Perhaps the street maps, which were available but did not get used, would have shown actual street measurements and bird's-eye views of the lane arrangements?

 

Aside from perspectives on bicycle prioritization that tend to rely on wonkish studies from much larger, denser, more already transit-oriented cities with more complete and elaborate street grid networks and even sidewalks, the BPAC group is at a tremendous disadvantage in East Nashville because BPAC is closely associated with Mayor Dean, who is wildly unpopular in East Nashville.  So some of that opposition is personal not so much against BPAC members themselves, but rather against who some of those skeptical neighbors feel that the BPAC group represents. 

Edited September 9, 2014 by bwithers1