BnaBreaker

Oh goodness. My man did you really just use the terms "brainwashing" and "reeducation" in reference to someone suggesting we reduce parking minimums and be more thoughtful about street layouts? You don't think that might be a tad bit dramatic? Lol. Just go ahead and substitute whatever word you would feel comfortable with that also means 'people becoming accustomed to a different way of doing things.' I don't mind. I suppose I should thank you for illustrating another part of the problem that wasn't mentioned, which is that, especially in this area, anytime anyone so much as suggests we revisit the suburban development formula there is always a certain percentage of people who will react very loudly and very reflexively to that suggestion without really even taking a moment to actually reflect on what was said. They start having fever dream freakouts about 'being forced to live in a government commie block,' or something to that effect, and then the discussion just sort of stalls and goes nowhere . Ironically the current suburban sprawl model those folks supposedly want to protect involves more than it's fair share of top down bureaucracy itself, but that seems to be lost on those wanting to defend said model. Notice that not once did I suggest that people shouldn't be able to 'live how they want' or suggest that people shouldn't live in suburbia or single family homes if they so desire. Heck I even went out of my way to emphasize that one would be a fool to suggest that urban core levels of density be applied to places like Mt. Juliet. But nevertheless the implication made was that I was basically suggesting exactly that. What gives? All I'm actually saying is that in the interest of protecting our natural areas, and reducing peoples' travel times, and making infrastructure more efficient and cost effective (I could go on,) I wish that we could go from community to community and just revisit all the various suburban design guidelines and rules already in place and make an attempt to make them better and more thoughtful. Probably pie in the sky on my part though. Again, I absolutely agree that if people prefer to live in a single family home with a yard on a quiet suburban street, that they should absolutely, undoubtedly be free to do that. But does that mean that vision necessarily has to come in the form of a sprawling subdivision of nearly identical tract houses with randomly meandering streets to nowhere full of dead ends, with only one entry and exit point, with no sidewalks or curbs, where the trees are clear cut and it takes fifteen minutes just to drive the kids to their school even though its just two miles away as the crow flies? Does that mean that vision necessarily has to come in the form of giant insular big block stores each surrounded by more parking than a Six Flags built along an eight lane superhighway that accommodates nothing but car traffic? I don't think that it does. I don't think we should change the way anyone wants to live. I just think we should make our communities function better, for the sake of all of us. Anyway, sorry for the rant. I'm good for about one anti-sprawl rant per quarter. Lol... carry on!

Point taken, and I agree with your over-arching premise. But I'm not even talking "urban" development necessarily in the case of a place like Mount Juliet. Heck, at this point I'd just settle for development that wasn't egregiously inefficient. With many of the single family home developments in particular in Middle Tennessee it almost appears as though developers are going out of their way to make them as lazily and as wasteful as possible. Of course, it would be unfair for me to lay all blame at the feet of developers. Municipalities share a large piece of the responsibility as well and don't help matters with their massive parking minimums and goofy street layouts and so forth. I don't know what the answer is. There is no magic bullet of course. It's going to take a lot of time and effort and perhaps even money to reprogram the way the general public thinks about suburban development. All I know is, the effort needs to start, like yesterday. In anycase, this is more or less just an 'old man yells at cloud' moment from me, so thank you for indulging me.

I mean now that you mention it, the gripes of the City Lights folks really is akin to someone moving to the middle of the woods and complaining about all the trees.

I realize there are cost concerns and the like to consider, but I, like many of us here I am sure, are just sick of our beautiful rolling hills and woodlands being treated as an expendable renewable resource by developers time and time again. YES there are a lot of shades of grey to density, and nobody in their right mind would advocate for Gulch level density in Mount Juliet. But at the same time, we MUST get over this default setting in our collective mind that it's just somehow a given that whenever there is a need to build a grocery store or hardware store or whatever in suburbia that it necessitates paving over a piece of land the size of a small European town in order to do it, thereby continuing the needless sprawl further and further outward and rendering the existing infrastructure more and more inefficient. Our local nature is a finite resource, and if we aren't careful, we'll wind up paving over and eliminating the thing that drew most of us to the area to begin with, all in the name of cost cutting and so-called convenience. I think we are seeing the beginnings of a change of heart in some of the newer mixed use developments, but it's not enough.

I take your point and accept it, and I'll eat anywhere that has good food. I don't care either way. But "highly rated" is not the same thing as fine dining. And I'm not saying by any means that a restaurant being 'fancy' and/or high priced makes it better. BUT I can understand why a place like an upscale steakhouse that is trying to cultivate a certain image and atmosphere and reputation would want a basic dress code. If you've saved up money to take your partner to this fancy, candlelit, white table cloth place for a romantic anniversary dinner, you're probably not going to want to be seated next to a rowdy table of a bunch of dudes in football jerseys throwing back beers. Not that there is anything wrong with that in a general sense. Hell, I am usually the dude throwing back beers. Haha... I'm just making the point that certain establishments have certain standards for a reason. Besides, all they're asking is that people don't come in ball caps and sweatpants. It's not like they're demanding black ties and tuxedos or something.

'Dont look like you just came from the gym' isn't exactly a strict dress code, so I can't imagine folks will have trouble abiding by it. Haha

Man, this place sounds awesome.

I didn't say there weren't issues that needed ironing out. I just thought that describing the economy as "in shambles" was particularly dramatic.

Yeah, I'm not really sure how someone can scroll past multiple photos of our skyline with 40 tower cranes on it and proceed to make a post about how 'the economy is in shambles.'

Aw, that's so nice that grandpa got to spend some time with his two grandkids today!

I am definitely here for it, and I think it's about time, but I've got to say it is SO odd seeing highrises start to rise on the East Bank!

What "look, feel, and character?" I think Belle Meade residents VASTLY overestimate how the outside world views them. I mean, the tree canopy is nice. But outside of that it seems to be a fairly run of the mill 'wealthy exurb' vibe to me. Not even sidewalks eh? They act like the town as it stands today has not changed since 1860. The only thing that is that archaic in Belle Meade is the attitudes of the residents.

Should be renamed Goofin' Development

Right? Just imagine how far this city could go if it didn't have to be attached to all the associated baggage that comes with it? And as soon as the new Tennessee economic numbers came out the state legislature would be like 'Im sorry baby I didn't mean it!'

Valuable input as usual.

Predators legend Filip Forsberg along with NBA superstar (and all around nice guy) Giannis Antetokounmpo (yes I did have to check the spelling even though I'm a huge basketball fan lol) along with his three brothers are becoming minority owners of Nashville SC! They join folks like Derrick Henry and Reese Witherspoon. Exciting! https://www.wkrn.com/sports/nashville-sc/forsberg-giannis-join-nashville-sc-ownership-group/

Losing their minds as in 'ahhh this is so great, I can't believe these developments are coming to Spring Hill' or 'arrrg I hate that all of these new developments are coming to Spring Hill... development was supposed to stop after I moved here!'

Amazing how far we have come in regards to densifying and filling in the empty lots, but perhaps even more amazing how far we still have to go even after this unprecedented run of development.

Wow... one of the best skyline shots Ive seen in a long time!

How the hell does such a mistake even get made? How many people had to sign off on that? Oooof. Not a good look for TDOT.

Based on the reaction to the above post, my opinion will, no doubt, be unpopular. But I am excited by this news. This was a relic of 90's Nashville urban planning. It was an eye sore and a giant hole in the Elliston Place streetscape. This land now has the chance to become an important development in the future of the Elliston Place neighborhood, and it will be much better off for it. I look forward to seeing what happens here. Who knows, maybe they'll wind up putting a Krispy Kreme in the ground floor? I'm more of a Dunkin guy anyway.

Oh man I hope not... that lot is the last major piece in the Germantown puzzle.

Exactly. 'I want all the things that I want, but I don't want to have to share them with anyone else.' That's not how any of this works sweetheart.

I think the mistake you're making here is being too charitable and assuming that there is any rational and/or consistent logic behind the statements these people are making. They say things in order to lend themselves an air of legitimacy, but I think really all the collective position of the West Meade NIMBY block boils down to is, essentially, 'AHH THINGS I'M NOT USED TO ARE SCARY! MAKE THEM GO AWAY!' Quite frankly I don't know why we consistently allow these short-sighted, selfish, paranoid asshats to dictate anything having to do with city development. I mean, let them have their say, of course, but why alter the scope and scale of a development for them, as if any of the incoherent nonsense they're screaming has any legitimacy to it at all?