Jump to content

bwithers1

Members+
  • Content Count

    1569
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

bwithers1 last won the day on October 8 2014

bwithers1 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1121 Excellent

About bwithers1

  • Rank
    Burg
  • Birthday 12/16/1974

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Nashville, TN

Recent Profile Visitors

2822 profile views
  1. @AronG The restrictions on the use, building height and floor area ratio can be changed with a base zone change or preferably an SP that restricts short term rentals from gobbling up any housing units that would conceivably be built. So this is not on "the city" restricting anything, it is the owner deciding to forego that option to explore the process to change the base zoning entitlements at least for the time being. I let an owner know that I am willing to consider a zone change that is consistent with the Conservation Overlay and the Redevelopment District Design Guidelines with community feedback about excluded uses, etc. There is no way to make this be affordable housing unless the owner of this parcel decides to deed restrict it for affordable housing.
  2. I am inclined to agree in some respects. I would love to get a Trader Joe's there since those almost always have parking in front. But we will see who the new tenants end up being. I cannot make some rezone their property, demolish it and build something new. If they choose to pursue an adaptive reuse of an existing structure within the existing base zoning, they are within their rights and I have no intervention in that other than perhaps weighing in on variance requests that are ultimately decided by the Board of Zoning Appeals. I let the owner know of my offer to entertain a base zone change to MUL-A. As to whether or not neighbors would be supportive, I will say that some neighbors have expressed a concern about mixed-use zoning there because the housing units could be used as Short Term Rentals. There truly is no way to make everyone happy.
  3. That's a great question. The MDHA Five Points Redevelopment District does supersede the base zoning; however, the Redevelopment District expires next year and everything will revert to base zoning. My work list for the upcoming term is to work with MDHA, Planning, commercial property owners and community groups to work on an orderly plan to exit the Five Points Redevelopment District. MDHA is not interested in renewing the Five Points Redevelopment District and there are no TIF loan obligations on that Redevelopment District. My general proposal would be to change the CN or CS parcels that have mixed-use and multi-story possibilities under the redevelopment district design guidelines and to MUL-A base zoning that would closely match the entitlements that the parcels currently have under the Redevelopment District Land Use Plan and design guidelines. In terms of base zoning, the "outer ring" of Five Points generally has MUL base zoning but ironically the inner core of Five Points only has CN or CS in most cases. The owner of 307 S 11th Street went ahead and requested to change his parcel's zoning to MUL-A to more-or-less match the MUL that is in place on the adjacent parcels that he owns at 11th/Fatherland. That base zone change was approved on third reading at last night's meeting. As for the parking arrangement, that would be up to the MDHA Design Review Committee and would potentially also require a Board of Zoning Appeals hearing to work out a curb-cut plan with Public Works and Planning Staff. The pull-in parking isn't going anywhere for now with this building, but there may be a possible requirement to reduce the curb cuts. But with renovation permits such as this one or the ones on Woodland Street between McFerrin and 10th, or the former Family Dollar at 1000 Woodland, requiring the installation of new sidewalks to current standard and eliminating or reducing curb cuts is often impractical or financially unfeasible. If/when the buildings are demolished and new ones are constructed, then new sidewalk requirements can be applied. But otherwise in most cases for renovation permits the existing sidewalks must be maintained in good condition but not replaced.
  4. Yes, the present base zoning limits the height and floor-area-ratio coverage on the site to being basically what is there now. I have spoken to one of the owners and they have been looking at updating and reusing the building for retail.
  5. This is an interesting reuse of that quirky parcel shape. I know that Powell will do a great design and will offer quality workmanship. My concern is that this this room layout style is more of the bachelorette-pad product like Bridal Suites opening soon just down the street. I feel that like product will not age well when the bachelorette party wave subsides someday. The ribbon cutting ceremony yesterday was pretty spectacular. The crews were still carrying in furniture and appurtenances at 4:00 PM yesterday when people arrived for the ceremony. I posted some of my personal photos on my Facebook and Instragram accounts. It's pretty spectacular, although the third-floor units are still under construction. These pictures do not quite do it justice.
  6. Yes. This is needed. I am glad that the Titans are on board for re-starting these conversations.
  7. Yes, maybe. It's an equity issue: constructing houses on corner lots would be considerably more expensive than on mid-block parcels if this approach were not taken. At least it's a consistent approach. There have been CMs who have taken approaches that are much less consistent, or that involve upzoning properties from RS to RM20 and then also asking the BZA to exempt the development from any sidewalk construction or in-lieu contribution requirements ...
  8. I am glad to see things moving along with this property. I had met with the property owner and his team a while back to discuss his plans for an adaptive reuse of this former warehouse building into a mixed-use concept. I did support a variance hearing at the BZA to allow him to keep the existing pull-in parking along the Woodland Street frontage. That's not ideal, certainly, but at the same time we are not yet at the point that expensive demolitions make sense for new-build projects even in this area of Five Points. There is also the matter of the overhead power lines along the north side of Woodland Street that limit the ability to bring structures of any height up to the sidewalk anyway, which results in fairly deep utility easement setback requirements along the north side of Woodland. And parking demand is only going to continue to increase. With both this property and the collection of three properties closer to Five Points on the same block of Woodland being renovated in the near future, the 900 blocks of Woodland Street will soon become a truly mixed-use community with contemporary or post-industrial stylings. This pocket will be like its own subdistrict amid the surrounding historic context of Five Points proper.
  9. @37206dude That notice was so screwed up that the item is being deferred so that a correct (or correct) notice can be sent. Apparently the notice referenced an office building and Council District 17, rather than a single-family home in District 6. This is almost certainly the double-lot at the corner of 12th/Russell in East End where a single-family home design has already been approved by the Metro Historic Zoning Commission https://www.nashville.gov/Portals/0/SiteContent/MHZC/docs/2018 Meetings/06-20-18/SR 124 South 12th Street.pdf. What typically happens for corner lots is that the Sidewalk Bill requirements are only applied to the front side of the parcel, not the sides. In Conservation Overlays, the Metro Historic Zoning Commission typically sends a letter supporting keeping the existing sidewalk pattern in place, which ultimately results in applicants not constructing new sidewalks or contributing to the in-lieu fee. But it all depends. There is a house on South 10th Street in East End's Conservation Overlay area that was demolished and is being replaced by a two-family dwelling. This is a different situation than an infill project between a number of contributing structures that are unlikely to be redeveloped unless there is a fire, etc. The variance that I supported there was to maintain the existing planting strip along S 10th (which does not meet Collector Street standards) but to widen the sidewalk itself to Collector Street standards. Under this scenario, if followed, if/when the other non-contributing houses on S 10th are redeveloped a similar pattern could be followed so that the existing 2' planting strip would remain but that an 8' sidewalk would be constructed along each parcel frontage until ultimately the sidewalk from Shelby to Fatherland would be widened to support additional pedestrian activity and safety.
  10. That's correct. The Sanders properties nearby including the 37206 Building at the northwest corner of 11th/Fatherland, the Shoppes on Fatherland and the southwest corner, and the restaurant building on the southeast corner all have MUL zoning; however, this parcel has CN zoning. Mark is seeking to change the zoning on that parcel to be similar to that of the parcel immediately to the north. At this stage I am not aware of any detailed plans for the property. I am in early discussions with the Metro Historic Zoning Commission and MDHA about how to handle the Five Points Redevelopment District, which is set to expire next year. The Five Points Redevelopment District Land Use Map http://www.nashville-mdha.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2015-3-16-Fivepoints.pdf sometimes includes land uses that differ from the base zoning, and so with the Redevelopment District set to expire, property owners are in some cases seeking clarity about whether they would be able to retain mixed-use zoning entitlements if the redevelopment district expires and the base zoning reverts to CS and CN, which do not permit mixed uses without BZA Special Exception hearings, etc. When looking at the existing base zoning map, one will note that many of the "outer-ring" parcels in Five Points already have MUL zoning but the "inner ring" parcels in many cases have CS or CN zoning. The Van Dyke Bed and Beverage Building appears to be have been approved within the Redevelopment District guidelines but not the base zoning, which would not support a building of that size. So you can imagine how confusing the building permitting process is for property owners, prospective buyers, and the neighborhoods having this many layers of oversight if a building that does not meet the bulk zoning regulations for the base zoning is approved in some cases but not others. The expiration of the Redevelopment District would also mean that MDHA Design Review Committee design guidance about business awnings, signage, landscape buffering, and some other details would go away since the Metro Historic Zoning Commission does not review those details in Conservation Overlays. If I am reelected to represent District 6, I would like to have community conversations about cleaning up the zoning in the Five Points Redevelopment District area to match what the design guidelines call for and perhaps creating an Urban Design Overlay for the more commercial area to retain design guidance about some of the items that I mentioned above. In the mean time, I am open to working with property owners on a case-by-case basis to change their zoning from CN or CS to MUL-A since that zoning district most closely aligns with the MDHA Five Points Redevelopment District land use map and design guidelines and both of those documents were created through extensive public input processes.
  11. A design charrette for the proposed East Library branch at the Cayce campus along South 9th/Sevier is presently scheduled for June 12th at the Martha O'Bryan Center. There will be a couple of sessions, with the times to be announced soon.
  12. The foundation permit for the LaQuinta Hotel on Interstate Drive was finally issued last week on 04/18. This will be an 11-story building when completed and it will have good visibility from the I-24 loop.
  13. There is no historic zoning in place on Main Street other than the Conservation Overlay on the block of Main Street from 10th to Forrest where Marche is located, and that block is also located within the MDHA Five Points Redevelopment District. This parcel that you are referencing is located in the MDHA East Bank Redevelopment District through which new project materials, massing, landscaping and signage are evaluated by the Design Review Committee. I did ask Metro Water Services to go check out that site. It appears that none of the clearing work requires a grading permit as mainly brush and debris were being removed. If excavation or other activities occur, then permits will be required. I would anticipate that for a large project, a lot consolidation would be needed since the former labor hall sits on one parcel and this cleared area sits on two parcels. Even though they all have the same ownership today, I would imagine that a potential developer would want all of the parcels to be consolidated into one. I would love to see another Stacks on Main-type project there. Until the retail/restaurant spaces that already exist on Main prove their footing, I am not sure that adding more ground-level retail is going to be supported by the market just yet. We need more housing units on Main to support those retail spaces with a built-in customer base and to counterbalance some of the unfortunate social and Metro service request issues related to homelessness that continue to manifest themselves in the 5th/Main area. For the moment I am still hearing that the market is not supporting the cost to demolish old cinderblock warehouses in order to construct multistory new-construction projects. That is why there are so many adaptive reuses right now. Almost everything that has been built from scratch to date on Main or Woodland Street has been on formerly vacant land or surface parking lots. The market in East is hot but isn't quite as heated as one might imagine, Trinity Lane notwithstanding. Hill Center Greenwood is also a bit of an outlier because the company has owned most or all of that land for generations. But I am working to support interest in projects on Main and Woodland to connect the streetscape between downtown and East Nashville.
  14. You are correct that in addition to the visual element, the mulch yard operation disperses airborne particles throughout the area that can be a breathing hazard for some, and the trucks that haul away the mulch often do not cover it with tarp and so there are frequently trails of mulch left at 5th/Shelby, which then make their way into the storm drains, etc. It is a mess beyond aesthetics. There are no Metro ordinances keeping any of the industrial operations on South 5th, although most of South 5th has Industrial Restrictive zoning. In this case, the mulch yard owner is asking considerably more for that property than anyone currently is willing to pay. At the present time there are no public projects proposed there for which eminent domain would be utilized. But this one has been on my radar screen for some time.
×
×
  • 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.