Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Nashvillain

  1. 6 hours ago, markhollin said:

    "...residents complain about housing prices, traffic...and oh yeah, the city's broke."

  2. 3 hours ago, PruneTracy said:

    People are sitting in traffic so they can get to where they do productive things, i.e., work, school, etc. That's a cost of productivity just as riding a bus or walking would be a cost, and an easily internalized one that that.

    Look, I know what the implicit argument is here: people ought to be riding transit, or living where they work, and so on. That's a nice sentiment and I'd like to see it realized as much as anyone else here but it doesn't reflect the realities of what TDOT is tasked to do, who has no control over land-use policies in the state or other measures that make said sentiments feasible.

    And frankly the whole thing smacks of a "let them eat cake" mentality. You can see what the first five returns are on a Google search on unaffordable housing. Many of the US cities who have enacted policies nudging people towards the sort of lifestyle that doesn't involve rat-racing on an Interstate also have the same shortage of affordable housing that Nashville has in the middle of an economic boom.

    It's nice to be able to say that people need to live downtown or along high-density transit corridors but the reality of the situation is that there are plenty of working- or middle-class people who have jobs downtown but can't afford to live there. Or people who get laid off from, say, the Carlex plant and need to be able to get to their new job with one of the Nissan suppliers without taking their kids out of their school. Not everyone who sits in traffic on an Interstate is driving a Suburban in from their Franklin McMansion to their V-level job.

    That's a whole lot of inferences to draw from a simple statement--increasing capacity does not reduce congestion. And the caveat that yes, you increase capacity, but now you just have more people jammed in traffic. And really that's all I'm saying. Would I prefer the amount of the budget for this project allocated to expanding traffic lanes to be spent on just about anything else? Probably. Does that mean I hold a grudge against suburban Suburban-driving V-levels? I don't even know what that is. I'm also a working class guy who drives everywhere because that's what I have to do but I would much rather NOT have to rely on my car for 99% of my trips. For my sanity. For my health. For my wallet. For the future of the planet, etc. 

    A lot of you guys like to argue with strawman fallacies, which I guess makes you sound smart but is actually just a conversation with yourself.

    Hey, how bout those new parking fines, eh? 


    • Like 4
  3. 13 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

    There is a project in the planning phase for the I-40/I-24/I-440 interchange that should add capacity and may involve a large-scale reconfiguration depending on the findings of the initial studies. It could not be done at the same time as the I-440 reconstruction for maintenance of traffic reasons. You can imagine what it would have been like coming up I-24 in the morning if they were working on this interchange at the same time I-440 could have been shut down completely.

    Again, the reconstruction of the interchange is still going to improve capacity even if congestion stays the same. You may not be traveling at free-flow speed through the interchange but there will be more vehicles able to pass through per unit of time than in the existing condition.

    Allowing more people to sit in the same crap traffic is an improvement? More people stuck in traffic rather than doing something productive? Creating more greenhouse gas emissions and burning more fossil fuels?

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  4. 23 minutes ago, Nash_12South said:

    Because I'm ornery - Not expanding, not trying to do something to make 440 better, is like telling that cancer patient that this treatment may extend your life for two years, but since its expensive, and your going to die anyway, lets not do it. 

    440 congestion had created worsening traffic on the alternate roads, backed up traffic on all the feeder roads/interstates. The expansion should help relieve some of that. It's not a cure, no one says that, but doing nothing isn't the answer either. 

    Traffic engineers and planners have known for a long time that expanding capacity does nothing to reduce congestion. It's called induced demand. When you add capacity, you get more traffic. So, it literally is a waste of time and effort. Though I suppose it's good for the construction companies and workers.  

    And money. It's a waste of money

    • Like 2
  5. 2 hours ago, Nash_12South said:

    So we should not have done anything to 440? Just continue to equally expensively patch it? Do we just not not do any road work until the city has fully implemented some still unplanned mass transit system? It’s like not treating cancer until we have a total cure.

    Not saying that. Improving the surface or redoing it is fine. Expanding capacity is a waste of money

    • Like 3
  6. 7 hours ago, markhollin said:

    The empty .5 acre lot at 1320 Rosa Parks Blvd. has sold to FFNRP LLC for $1.58 million. The group is a joint venture between Cottingham Capital Partners and FrontFour Capital.  The property last sold for $200,000 in 2006.  No specific plan has been announced, but the developers are known for mixed-use residential projects. 

    More behind the Nashville Post paywall here:


    Screen Shot 2019-09-24 at 8.12.59 AM.png

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

    Screen Shot 2019-09-24 at 8.19.19 AM.png

    I hope and presume that they'll build something of significant/appropriate density with a retail component. We need increasing density and land use on our major corridors. As much as I love the wings at Germantown Pub, that corner lot shouldn't remain a suburban strip style for much longer either. 

    • Like 2
  7. 1 hour ago, BnaBreaker said:

    Nashville and their parking requirements.  We are a city that has zero interest in being cured of our collective addiction to the automobile.  As much as Nashville has urbanized over the past decade, it is still a city that caters  heavily to the automobile as much as it ever has been, which is very disappointing. 

    Parking Reform Will Save the City


    However, it's not just stupid minimum parking requirements via zoning. Downtown Nashville has no parking requirements whatsoever, but as you can see, every new building has a garage. It would appear that private lenders/banks/investors have zero interest of helping cure us of our collective addiction to the automobile either.  

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  8. 38 minutes ago, ruraljuror said:


    Maybe you guys missed the point?  I guess we live in a world where satire is dead - and there's nobody to blame but the author when the reader doesn't pick up the message that's being put down - but damn if I didn't think that it was pretty clearly a modest proposal that I was suggesting here. Oh well.

    More importantly, where were y'all after the original comments claiming protestors wouldn't be driving cars because that would be hypocritical?  Seems like that might've been a good time to chime in with your downvotes and responses instead of going after the guy who's pointing out the how farcical that position is.  

    I got your satire but I guess you didn't get mine. As some damn dirty socialist once said, "We live in the world as it is" or something. Meaning you can't point out that someone who supports action on climate change drives a car (and is therefore a hypocrite) because of course they do, they practically must. 

    • Like 1
  9. 20 hours ago, CenterHill said:

    Add this in the mix.     A Global Climate Strike encouraging people in cities around the world to stage protests against climate change inaction.     A Nashville group is scheduling an event here for 6:30pm downtown on Friday.     TDOT closes 440 at 9pm, about the time all these people would be leaving downtown.   



    Shouldn't be a problem as none of the protesters will be driving...because automobiles generate climate warming emissions

    • Haha 1
  10. 11 hours ago, donNdonelson2 said:

    The airport is in Donelson. Try to keep the economic engine running without that, eh?


    Typically, they put airports where there isn't crap else. And they never would have built an airport if it weren't for NASHVILLE, ya'll! Sorry, that response even annoyed me

    6 hours ago, BnaBreaker said:

    I mean, obviously she is heavy on the jokes, but are you saying you don't think she ever posts a serious opinion?  I find that hard to believe.  

    I think she does, which is why I responded seriously to her comments re: the placement of NMAAM but I was also cautious to point out that she troll-y by nature. Possibly cliché, but sort of like the boy who cried wolf 

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  11. Seeing as how this museum showcases Black artists from around the nation and not Nashville specifically, I guess having it in the most-visited section of the city makes a kind of sense. If the curatorial/educational focus had been Nashvillians, or others somehow connected to the city (like Jimi Hendrix for example), I would argue that the Broadway location would be sort of an insult. While I do think that FromParkAvenue is often a delightful troll, I do think she has a point on this matter.

  • 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.