Nashville Bits and Pieces

[Andrew_3289]

17 hours ago, Nashtitans said:

The Nation’s 10 Busiest Submarkets For Apartment Construction... Nashville at #3.

 

http://www.realpage.com/mpf-research/mpf-research-examines-nations-10-busiest-submarkets-for-apartment-construction/

http://www.realpage.com/mpf-research/the-nations-10-busiest-submarkets-for-construction-central-nashville-tennessee/

very in depth look at the Nashville apartment market 

[Nashtitans]

23 minutes ago, Andrew_3289 said:

very in depth look at the Nashville apartment market 

Yeah it's amazing how much Nashville has grown.  You see our peer cities on the list too. We beat Austin but Charlotte is killin it at #1. Nashville in 5 years is gonna look totally different. Developers need to build a second skyhouse here...and MLS needs to come too. Hope all those professionals persuade the MLS administration.

[bigeasy]

Downtown Nashville’s population has almost quadrupled since 2000, to 7,840 people in 2014, according to the Nashville Downtown Partnership.

It really blows my mind reading something like that. I can't wrap my mind around how Metro Nashville has like 1.6 million, but the core has 7,840. Not even 0.01% live downtown.

[Nashtitans]

20 minutes ago, bigeasy said:

 

 

It really blows my mind reading something like that. I can't wrap my mind around how Metro Nashville has like 1.6 million, but the core has 7,840. Not even 0.01% live downtown.

Well thats 2 years ago. Nashville core population is gonna hit 10,000 next year. And the Nashville metro doesnt have 1.6 million anymore, its was like 1.8 last time I checked. Gonna have 2 million+ before the end of this decade. And you gotta understand nashville metro covers a really large area.... keep that in mind

[donNdonelson2]

You have to also keep in mind the fact that Metro zoning prohibited downtown residential development for several decades! We have lots of catching up to do.

[Pyramid Scheme]

47 minutes ago, donNdonelson2 said:

You have to also keep in mind the fact that Metro zoning prohibited downtown residential development for several decades! We have lots of catching up to do.

Man, why would they do that? They didn't seem shy about letting classic 19th and early 20th century architecture get replaced by parking lots and stand-alone fast food chains.

[bigeasy]

2 hours ago, donNdonelson2 said:

You have to also keep in mind the fact that Metro zoning prohibited downtown residential development for several decades! We have lots of catching up to do.

Wait seriously? So if I understand you correctly, Metro zoning just didn't even allow residential buildings downtown at all?? That seems so backwards for a city.

[L'burgnative]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

Man, why would they do that? They didn't seem shy about letting classic 19th and early 20th century architecture get replaced by parking lots and stand-alone fast food chains.

You've got to think about how things were in that time; it sounds crazy now, but back then across the country (and Nashville was no different) downtown was one of your rougher parts of the city.  Most homes were vacant and dilapidating while people were fleeing the high crime city centers (White Flight) and to the suburbs.  It may not make since to us now, but then I'm sure there reasoning made since to them.  There reasoning was probably that if you loose residents downtown than over time we can clean up downtown; the sad truth is it may have worked.

Edited August 31, 2016 by L'burgnative

[Vrtigo]

1 minute ago, L'burgnative said:

You've got to think about how things were in that time; it sounds crazy now, but back then across the country (and Nashville was no different) downtown was one of your rougher parts of the city.  Most homes were vacant and dilapidating while people were fleeing the high crime city centers (White Flight) and to the suburbs.  It may not make since to us now, but then I'm sure there reasoning made since to them.  There reasoning was probably that if you loose residents downtown than over time we can clean up downtown.

Hopefully this same thing will happen again one day, except to automobiles.

May our city continue to grow so much that it is simply impossible to deal with the traffic by building more parking! Only then will we see fewer surface lots and enormous garage pedestals.

[CenterHill]

18 minutes ago, bigeasy said:

Wait seriously? So if I understand you correctly, Metro zoning just didn't even allow residential buildings downtown at all?? That seems so backwards for a city.

 

13 minutes ago, L'burgnative said:

You've got to think about how things were in that time; it sounds crazy now, but back then across the country (and Nashville was no different) downtown was one of your rougher parts of the city.  Most homes were vacant and dilapidating while people were fleeing the high crime city centers (White Flight) and to the suburbs.  It may not make since to us now, but then I'm sure there reasoning made since to them.  There reasoning was probably that if you loose residents downtown than over time we can clean up downtown; the sad truth is it may have worked.

Nashville wasn't alone.    Like many other cities that adopted zoning codes during, and in reaction to, "urban renewal", Nashville's first zoning code, which was adopted well after almost all of the downtown residents had fled to the suburbs, regulated the uses of property within districts and neighborhoods.     If a property were zoned commercial, it could not be used for residential, and vice versa.   Parking requirements were also onerous.  The downtown central business district was zoned commercial up until the mid-90's, which meant no buildings could be built or used in the CBD for residential.   Similarly, corner markets or restaurants could not exist in residential neighborhoods like Germantown, except for a few that were grandfathered in.    

Cities started figuring out that this type of zoning turned downtown business districts into virtual ghost towns on nights and weekends, which in turn led to increased crime and gradual decay of the urban districts.   So many cities went back to the drawing board on zoning ordinances and started allowing a mix of uses in their downtowns - Nashville finally did this in the mid-90's and you saw the first new residential projects in the CBD like The Cumberland, the Bennie Dillon and some loft apartments on 2nd Ave and Printers Alley.     Around 2010, Nashville's downtown zoning code finally evolved into a form-based code that regulates what buildings look like (height, setback, sidewalk width, etc), not what they are used for.     So, that's why Nashville's downtown residential numbers are still catching up to some of its peer cities.        

 

[Pyramid Scheme]

Hate to get all political, (and I'm not saying there wasn't a problem) but government interference only makes things worse despite their intentions.

[Neigeville2]

Really?  Has the Music City Center made things worse? Bridgestone Arena?  Do you actually think we could tell suburban homeowners we're going to eliminate government interference and let anybody build a glue factory next to your house?  These aren't rhetorical questions, I'm just trying to figure out what you could possibly mean.  People are political animals, they have issues they have to work out collectively, balancing competing interests and differing views, especially in a city.  Of course it's messy.  Overall I'm quite pleased with what Nashville's government has done to influence our built environment over the last 15 years or so. If urban design suffered in the mid to late 20th century, I don't see how some kind of anarchist society would have done any better.

[smeagolsfree]

Tread softly guys....

[fieldmarshaldj]

51 minutes ago, Neigeville2 said:

Really?  Has the Music City Center made things worse? Bridgestone Arena?  Do you actually think we could tell suburban homeowners we're going to eliminate government interference and let anybody build a glue factory next to your house?  These aren't rhetorical questions, I'm just trying to figure out what you could possibly mean.  People are political animals, they have issues they have to work out collectively, balancing competing interests and differing views, especially in a city.  Of course it's messy.  Overall I'm quite pleased with what Nashville's government has done to influence our built environment over the last 15 years or so. If urban design suffered in the mid to late 20th century, I don't see how some kind of anarchist society would have done any better.

Really ? Yes. One word: Antioch. Metro's "help" turned a booming suburb of middle class residents into a toilet in 15 years.

[titanhog]

Obviously...there's "good, appropriate government help"...and "destructive government help."

[BnaBreaker]

29 minutes ago, titanhog said:

Obviously...there's "good, appropriate government help"...and "destructive government help."

Exactly...surely we can all agree without argument that "government" (which is a comically vague term, but I'll go with it) screws some things up and helps in other areas.  Anyone that says it's all one way or the other is just ignoring reality on purpose.  I'm someone that actually enjoys political discussion and debate, but good grief, not everything has to break down into a war of political tribes.

[Hey_Hey]

13 hours ago, fieldmarshaldj said:

Really ? Yes. One word: Antioch. Metro's "help" turned a booming suburb of middle class residents into a toilet in 15 years.

I've heard this a lot, but I haven't seen any actual evidence of that.  Antioch also isn't the only place that could have that complaint. Madison took a very similar path as well, and the Davidson County side of Goodlettsville is very similar as well.  All were safe, middle class neighborhoods that have seen its demographic skew lower income. As that has happened there has been an increase in crime.  

I don't think anyone questions that Antioch has seen an increase in crime an lower income housing, but I would assert that the government wasn't the cause. I would argue that all of us (society as a whole, but especially us on this website as we tend to be urbanites) are to blame.  People have clearly taken an interest in the urban core again which has led to the gentrification and price increases in neighborhoods all over the city. 12South, The Nations, Edgehill, Lockeland Springs, Edgefield, Sylvan Park, Salemtown, etc., etc., etc., have all seen tremendous influxes of affluent, highly educated people that have driven prices up.  At the same time, inner suburbs immediately outside Davidson County (Brentwood, Mt Juliet, Hendersonville) have continued to do very well because of the strong academics in their school systems. All of those displaced residents must live somewhere.

What all of that has led to is expensive real estate in the core, expensive real estate in the inner suburbs outside of Davidson County, and lower income housing in the more distant neighborhoods in Davidson County. The urban core is now much safer while the suburbs never had a crime issue and still don't have a crime issue.  Places like Antioch and Madison were left out in the cold and have seen an increase in crime.  I don't see how the city/county government caused any of that.  It was a fundamental shift in society, one in which people valued urban living  and continued to value the best education for their kids. With any societal shift there is fallout, and that fallout landed squarely on Antioch/Madison. 

[Hey_Hey]

20 hours ago, bigeasy said:

 

 

It really blows my mind reading something like that. I can't wrap my mind around how Metro Nashville has like 1.6 million, but the core has 7,840. Not even 0.01% live downtown.

I get what you're saying but it is actually ~0.43%. Total MSA population was ~1.8 million in 2014 and ~1.83 million in 2015. Since that time we've seen continued increases in the population living downtown, so that percentage is increasing.  The population downtown in 2015 was 8313 (0.45%) assuming 1.65 million total population. The downtown population in 2016 is 9619 (~0.52%), and the projected downtown population in 2017 is 12,402 (~0.65%) assuming ~1.9 million in the MSA.  Also of note is that those numbers do not include the Demonbreun Hill, Midtown, or Music Row areas which in many places would be considered "downtown living."

[titanhog]

Also...what is actually considered "downtown?"  Is that all of what is inside the "loop?"  Or just the CBD?  Does it include the Gulch?  SoBro?  Germantown?  Music Row?  Any of Midtown?

[Hey_Hey]

The Downtown Partnership defines it as being south of Jefferson St, west of the Cumberland and inside I-40. It is 1.8 square miles. They established 8 sub areas inside "downtown." Hope Gardens, North Capitol, Core, North Gulch, Gulch, Sobro, Rutledge Hill, and Rolling Mill Hill. Here's a link to their annual report form earlier this year:

http://www.nashvilledowntown.com/_files/docs/2016-residential-report---final.pdf

I understand their definition of downtown, but it misses data on the Demonbreun Hill/Roundabout area which as a substantial population that is also rapidly growing.  

Currently that area includes:

1. Rhythm - 105 units

2. 1505 Demonbreun - 209 units

3. Element - 431 units

4. Crescent on Division - 275 units

5. Cadence - 193 units

6. Skyhouse - 352 units

That's a total of 1565 units and would likely represent 2500 additional residents. 

Edited September 1, 2016 by Hey_Hey

[CenterHill]

6 minutes ago, Hey_Hey said:

The Downtown Partnership defines it as being south of Jefferson St, west of the Cumberland and inside I-40. It is 1.8 square miles. They established 8 sub areas inside "downtown." Hope Gardens, North Capitol, Core, North Gulch, Gulch, Sobro, Rutledge Hill, and Rolling Mill Hill. Here's a link to their annual report form earlier this year:

http://www.nashvilledowntown.com/_files/docs/2016-residential-report---final.pdf

 

and Pie Town   

[PruneTracy]

21 hours ago, bigeasy said:

It really blows my mind reading something like that. I can't wrap my mind around how Metro Nashville has like 1.6 million, but the core has 7,840. Not even 0.01% live downtown.

It's not that wild when you look at the proportions of land area. Downtown takes up approximately 2 square miles; the entire Nashville MPO, about 3,900 square miles. This also means that the population density downtown is about ten times that of the MPO as a whole. Add in the amount of office space, civic uses, etc. downtown and it's not an unreasonable number.

[Nashtitans]

4 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

It's not that wild when you look at the proportions of land area. Downtown takes up approximately 2 square miles; the entire Nashville MPO, about 3,900 square miles. This also means that the population density downtown is about ten times that of the MPO as a whole. Add in the amount of office space, civic uses, etc. downtown and it's not an unreasonable number.

Do you consider the downtown area big compared to other cities like Austin,Memphis, Charlotte, etc.?

[PruneTracy]

42 minutes ago, Nashtitans said:

Do you consider the downtown area big compared to other cities like Austin,Memphis, Charlotte, etc.?

I guess it depends on your definition of "downtown". What various city agencies define as downtown might differ from what people perceive as downtown. Hope Gardens, for example, is included in the Downtown Partnership's area, but the density, land use, etc. of that neighborhood isn't any different than, say, the Nations. Same thing for PIE TOWN and some industrial/warehousing areas as far south as 100 Oaks. A lot of people on here argue for easing zoning restrictions related to density in the downtown area but a high-rise on Jefferson (Capitol height limits notwithstanding) would look out of place kind of like that pie-in-the-sky proposal for the 40-story development at the south edge of SoBro did. Still, these areas are included in the Downtown Partnership's definition and count towards the "downtown" population.

Other cities have the same problem to varying degrees. Uptown Charlotte is actually pretty well-defined, thanks to their Interstate loop and the system of wards; they have about double the population in an area the same as Nashville's, but they also have a million or so more residents in their metro area. Austin's downtown is a little more nebulous, it kind of fades into (the other) UT, but they have a few more residents in a slightly smaller area than Nashville for a comparable But Memphis is even more apples-to-oranges because they apparently define their downtown as going all the way to I-240. They have a lot more "downtown" population but its overall definition is similar to Nashville including Midtown.

And speaking of, I wouldn't sweat the population or lack thereof in the downtown area. Even just going off the development currently under construction in the Gulch and Midtown, Nashville is going to end up with a very urban strip from the river all the way past Vanderbilt. It would be nice if it were all perfectly concentrated in one area, evenly distributed between residential, office, etc., but it's not necessary (as long as it's not out in Cool Springs). I think in the end we're going to end up with some nice residential densities that are still within walking distance of the CBD.

[Hey_Hey]

1 hour ago, Nashtitans said:

Do you consider the downtown area big compared to other cities like Austin,Memphis, Charlotte, etc.?

The 2016 data used by the Downtown Partnership compares between the cities like this (with MSA population for comparison):

Nashville - 9,619 --1.8 sq miles  -- 8.7 people/acre

Austin - 14,001 -- 1 sq mile -- 21.8 people/acre

Charlotte - 14,089 -- 2 sq miles -- 10.8 people/acre

Indianapolis - 8,688 -- 1 sq mile -- 13.5 people/acre

Memphis - 24,630 -- 6.5 sq miles -- 5.9 people/acre