Jump to content

Inner Loop - CBD, Downtown, East Bank, Germantown, Gulch, Rutledge

smeagolsfree

By smeagolsfree
in Nashville

 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 20.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

chc3
chc3

Walking home from a stunning Mozart’s Requiem at the Schermerhorn last night. Had a pre-dawn Uber to BNA for a flight to SEA this morning!

markhollin
markhollin

More images released of Hill Center Germantown  slated for mid-2022 groundbreaking at 416 Jefferson St. https://www.nashvillepost.com/business/development/notes-additional-images-released-for-ger

markhollin
markhollin

H.G. Hill Realty will finally be developing the full 3.58 acre block at 416 Jefferson St. with $93.5 million 5th & Jefferson mixed-use project. It will include a 4 story structure with 110,000 sq.

Posted Images

bwithers1 Burg

bwithers1

Posted
Posted

ha, Beaman is a great guy... and a great Nashvillian. Different strokes and all that...

I don't know Mr. Beaman, either.  I primarily meant that I would be in favor of incentivizing him to relocate his car lots off Broadway to a more suburban area, perhaps one that is actually represented by Glenn Casada.  Without the use of eminent domain, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ruraljuror Hamlet

ruraljuror

Posted
Posted (edited)

"I also think it to be a good thing that Beaman has publicly declared his support against a project that he believes to be a negative for the community. I have no problem with him providing money to create an independent organization that helps stop the AMP and the drawbacks he believes it will bring."

 

--Agreed.  Nothing wrong here.  As I said, Beaman's problem isn't the wooden yard signs (whew) or the or the Stop Amp newsletters.  These are not quite the same thing as paying an irrelevant representative (as far as the project is concerned) to bring up clearly overreaching (and probably illegal) legislation.  Do you not see a distinction? 

 

"Okay so are you denouncing all those organizations listed on the pro-AMP list I gave you? The ones that not only have contributed to the 'independent' AMP YES organization but have ALSO directly contributed to local, state, and federal candidates? if yes, can you kindly call them out by name? It kind of sounded like you critiqued the principal but then lauded their actions..."

 

--For what do you want me to denounce these pro-AMP organizations?  As I said, I have no problem with either the AMP supporters or opposition spending money to promote their causes.  If any of the pro-AMP groups are using their money to unduly and or illegally influence the political process, I would certainly like to know about it and would promptly go about denouncing them for it.  This would be a great time to give me a few examples for reference.  If it is discovered that some of these organizations provide targeted political contributions that result in a new bill that forbids the owners of car dealerships from monetarily supporting a side in a public transit debate, then you would certainly have a point.  Also, I'd be happy to denounce these organizations just the same if it can be shown that the money they have provided has been used to influence the route, design, bus distributors, station contractors, etc.  The system should be optimized based on an objective analysis of the best data we can get, not based on who pays the most to those with the most power--regardless of the side you're on.

 

 

"Personally, I savor the opportunity to utilize my first amendment right and contributed my 'speech' (money) in favor of candidates with whose positions I agree.  The charge that persons/organizations are doing something wrong if they contribute to a candidate out of your district is not reasonable or if reasonable by you not by many. Should I not contribute to a politician that shares my values? Of course, I should ... common sense really (I am pretty sure that is the point of all elections) and it is not dependent on ones political stripes. Even Mr. Mass Transportation himself, Mayor Karl Dean contributes to political campaigns and the (D) party when again contributes to many politicians outside of Nashville. To characterize a legal exercise in such colored terms is demagoguery."

 

--You can 'savor' it all you want, but your free speech rights as far as political contributions go are all but worthless.  When individuals/organizations are allowed to provide so much money to a given candidate (whether directly or by means of PACS) that those individuals can then expect direct, specific actions to be taken as a result, the money that you and I send to causes and candidates outside of our districts is meaningless.  This is, in fact, the reason that I believe removing the undue influence of money in politics is one of the most important causes we can support. 

 

--It's only fair to make an argument like 'both sides do it!' if at the same time you're willing to denounce the behavior even when it's done in your favor, and more importantly, if you're willing to vote for those politicians who seek to remove the undue influence of money in politics, as well.  As I said, I will denounce any of the organizations who support AMP if you give me an example of something you think they've done wrong.  Seems kind of like you're just shrugging off Beaman's actions here.  I have a feeling you wouldn't like the way that medicine tasted so much if it was being fed to you. 

 

"Everyone in the state is free to 'vote the bums out' come the next election cycle. BTW the irrelevant state rep proves to be not so irrelevant if the bill passes..."

 

--Well, no.  That's kind of my point.  Beaman didn't buy a Nashville rep to introduce the bill in question, did he?  We have no means of holding that rep accountable for meddling in a project that was irrelevant to the concerns of his constituents, therefore irrelevant to him.  You're correct that he's made himself relevant.  Are his actions legal--probably not (it's a balance of powers thing: ask Haslam)--but hey, it might slow down the AMP so how could it be a bad?

 

 

"And there we have it... AMP on the ballot! Yes! and Yes again!! Why has Dean not proposed putting the AMP on the ballot? In fact he should place both the AMP and the dedicated funding source on the ballot and let the voters decide... winner takes all... IMO AMP goes down in flames.

You make assertions that the majority support the AMP but a Tennessean poll or a push poll from the PR firm representing the AMP Yes coalition is less than convincing. If the mayor thought he would win a vote it would already be on the ballot."

 

--You might be right.  The AMP could lose on a ballot.  That would be a completely acceptable conclusion to the AMP debate.  Of course, it won't be the end of a public transit debate, but we'll be set back another 5 years at a minimum in dealing with the issue, by which time West End may very well be a parking lot.  Then again, maybe The AMP will fail on the ballot and the traffic problems on West End will suddenly start to lighten up, and Lyft and Uber cab can make a ton of money toting our tourists around.  Either way, I could accept that conclusion.

 

--I would note, however, that Dean can really only lay the groundwork for this project.  The next mayoral election will already largely center around how s/he plans to handle the AMP/transit issues, so it's not like the opportunity to have a vote on the subject is not going to present itself regardless of whether it's a specific item on the ballot.  It would seem to me like Beaman's actions could only serve to prevent Nashvillains from having a meaningful voice on the subject.  If he pays to have the project killed now, we will never see the vote that you seem to support.  Also, let's not forget that, unlike Beaman, we already elected Dean and his administration.  What's the point of voting the bums into or out of office if wealthy citizens have the final say about what those bums are allowed or are not allowed to do?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with some of your positions....

I also think it to be a good thing that Beaman has publicly declared his support against a project that he believes to be a negative for the community. I have no problem with him providing money to create an independent organization that helps stop the AMP and the drawbacks he believes it will bring.

 

Okay so are you denouncing all those organizations listed on the pro-AMP list I gave you? The ones that not only have contributed to the 'independent' AMP YES organization but have ALSO directly contributed to local, state, and federal candidates? if yes, can you kindly call them out by name? It kind of sounded like you critiqued the principal but then lauded their actions...

Personally, I savor the opportunity to utilize my first amendment right and contributed my 'speech' (money) in favor of candidates with whose positions I agree. 
 

 

The charge that persons/organizations are doing something wrong if they contribute to a candidate out of your district is not reasonable or if reasonable by you not by many. Should I not contribute to a politician that shares my values? Of course, I should ... common sense really (I am pretty sure that is the point of all elections) and it is not dependent on ones political stripes. Even Mr. Mass Transportation himself, Mayor Karl Dean contributes to political campaigns and the (D) party when again contributes to many politicians outside of Nashville. To characterize a legal exercise in such colored terms is demagoguery.

I am glad that you are okay with Beaman paying for wooden signs (whew) lucky for free speech your is not the deciding vote. Is it overreach? Maybe, but politicians overreach all the time (hello Obamacare) it is a process and I do not believe anything is yet settled law only bills. Everyone in the state is free to 'vote the bums out' come the next election cycle. 

BTW the irrelevant state rep proves to be not so irrelevant if the bill passes...

 

And there we have it... AMP on the ballot! Yes! and Yes again!! Why has Dean not proposed putting the AMP on the ballot? In fact he should place both the AMP and the dedicated funding source on the ballot and let the voters decide... winner takes all... IMO AMP goes down in flames.

 

You make assertions that the majority support the AMP but a Tennessean poll or a push poll from the PR firm representing the AMP Yes coalition is less than convincing. If the mayor thought he would win a vote it would already be on the ballot.

Edited by ruraljuror
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreenHillsBoy Whistle-Stop

GreenHillsBoy

Posted
Posted

I'm new to the forum, but prefer hearing real news about development  and facts, not overly concerned with those that post who share their political views.  I will say that Lee Beaman is a spoiled rich kid who has always gotten his way and any view of his will likely be opposite of mine.  I live in the Green Hills area and rest assured those that have the Stop Amp signs in their yards are older and wealthier and have only their personal interests at heart, not what is best for the city as a whole.  With the massive amount of apartments and condos being built in such close proximity to the West End corridor, adding lanes is not an option, mass transit is the only long range solution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NikOnder Whistle-Stop

NikOnder

Posted
Posted

I'm new to the forum, but prefer hearing real news about development  and facts, not overly concerned with those that post who share their political views.  I will say that Lee Beaman is a spoiled rich kid who has always gotten his way and any view of his will likely be opposite of mine.  I live in the Green Hills area and rest assured those that have the Stop Amp signs in their yards are older and wealthier and have only their personal interests at heart, not what is best for the city as a whole.  With the massive amount of apartments and condos being built in such close proximity to the West End corridor, adding lanes is not an option, mass transit is the only long range solution. 

 

I'm new here myself and can safely say this is one of the most active and informative urban development forums on the web. Certainly the best concerning Nashville. If you are anything like me, checking this site will quickly become  part of your daily routine!

 

To bring things back on topic, it has been awhile since we have heard anything regarding Sheet Music. Does anyone in the know have any new info at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

... so much for dealing in 'facts' and not 'political views'....

 

welcome to the forum. ha

 

 

I will say that Lee Beaman is a spoiled rich kid who has always gotten his way and any view of his will likely be opposite of mine.  I live in the Green Hills area and rest assured those that have the Stop Amp signs in their yards are older and wealthier and have only their personal interests at heart, not what is best for the city as a whole.  With the massive amount of apartments and condos being built in such close proximity to the West End corridor, adding lanes is not an option, mass transit is the only long range solution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RandomHero Unincorporated Area

RandomHero

Posted
Posted (edited)

There has been intense utility marking at the intersection of Vantage Way and French Landing Dr. in the last few days. This has coincided with lots of work trucks coming and going from the empty space next to the Nissan dealership on Vantage. There is still a for sale or lease sign on that property though. 

 

I believe this is the site Residential Group out of ATL had pegged for a mixed use residential? Any update on that?

Edited by RandomHero
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nashmoney Hamlet

nashmoney

Posted
Posted

I had seen this on the news and then I saw the work being done last week and alerted WW> Rescue Mission to do outside renovation.

 

http://nashvillepost.com/blogs/postbusiness/2014/3/19/nashville_rescue_mission_targets_april_completion_date_for_project

 

Well it looks like they are there to stay for the long run. I have nothing against them, just think they are in an awkward place now with all the development going on around them. Glad they are sprucing up the parking lot....currently looks like a sea of concrete.

 

On a side note, I wonder how long that property across the street from the mission, next to enterprise will stay vacant? I think it use to be a generals club or something.

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • 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.