smeagolsfree

East Nashville/Inglewood/Madison/Donelson/Hermitage/Old Hickory

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, grilled_cheese said:

Why has the growth the rest of the city has seen the last 10+ years seemingly skipped over Madison?

You mean in terms of population or retail/commercial?

My speculation on both counts is that there hasn't been much room to build because there's seemingly very little open land in Madison. Although I've noticed an uptick in development in Madison the past couple of years, and there are a few big projects that should be starting soon, so it's just a matter of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Thought there was a plan for a massive development at Briley Pky & I-65.  Every time I go to/through Madison, the traffic is just awful. OHB and Gallatin is the worst.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jamie Hall said:

You mean in terms of population or retail/commercial?

My speculation on both counts is that there hasn't been much room to build because there's seemingly very little open land in Madison. Although I've noticed an uptick in development in Madison the past couple of years, and there are a few big projects that should be starting soon, so it's just a matter of time.

I respectfully disagree. I think when you count in the half-derelict strip malls, the big box stores of varying popularity, the car dealerships, and the underutilized land around auto garages and similar businesses, that there is an enormous amount of developable land in Madison. There will be plenty of opportunity for large mixed use projects in Madison when the demand comes, especially after (if) the Madison Town Center project is done. 

22 minutes ago, MLBrumby said:

Thought there was a plan for a massive development at Briley Pky & I-65.  Every time I go to/through Madison, the traffic is just awful. OHB and Gallatin is the worst.

I live near that intersection, it’s so random if there’s bad traffic or not. Some days it flows like a river, some days for no discernible reason the traffic is insane. I think the school zones at Madison Middle and Taylor Stratton Elementary don’t help matters. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pdt2f said:

...

I live near that intersection, it’s so random if there’s bad traffic or not. Some days it flows like a river, some days for no discernible reason the traffic is insane. I think the school zones at Madison Middle and Taylor Stratton Elementary don’t help matters. 

Then we're neighbors.  I've had mornings when it took me 10 minutes to get 4 blocks from my house, I could literally walk faster and I'm old.  There must be something that could be done timing wise or something with the intersection at OHB and Gallatin Pike, coming from the East on SR45 it can take a number of cycles to get through the light, and then over the hill and you're in a school zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Pdt2f said:

I would also add that Madison’s street grid is not nearly as convenient and walkable as other parts of the city they have grown more. It’s damn dangerous to be a pedestrian in Madison. 

This is so fascinating to me. The neighborhoods that have seen the most increased attention (and prices) over the last 20 years are almost without exception the neighborhoods with street layouts from pre-WW2, i.e. the trusty old walkable grid. The Nations is further from downtown than many of the neighborhoods south of 440, but it's still blowing up, because walkable grids with mixed uses are an awesome, easy to understand, practical design. If you ask people for examples of the best neighborhoods in the city, country, or the world, they always talk about walkable grid-style neighborhoods. And yet despite all that,  we never develop new neighborhoods in this style. Why is that?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, whoever came up with this crap is dumb af.  Look ,there is literally no way to get to Rivergate without taking Dickerson/65/Gallatin from Inglewood.  Everything else dead ends somewhere along the way.  So.incredibly.stupid.

qIvSdkk.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys have put your finger on one solution (a big one) to the gridlock in town... Connecting streets. Problem for decades is that no one wants to live on a "busy" street. So cul-de-sacs proliferated in the 70s-80s-90s... and still in many areas. 

Of course, I'm not talking about connecting cul-de-sac streets. Just calling for some very critical connections around the county. An elaborate example was the Division Street connector that (as far as I know) was never connected all the way through until that was completed.  There are lots of streets all around Nashville that would cost a fraction of the price to connect. I'm aware of several around White Bridge Rd/Charlotte Avenue. You have shown a great example above. Likewise, Antioch has a horrible mish-mash of disconnected streets. And someone needs to anticipate all the growth underway just west of Antioch. It's really absurd how no entity has even mentioned a need for something like a Tri-County Parkway (a boulevard, with divided media) connecting that portion of Davidson... Rutherford and Williamson.  In conjunction with connected streets would need to be proper timing of traffic signals. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely correct. 

 

I just got back from Indy and the street grid system seems to be fully connected for the most part. As any city with a grid, its very simple to get around, however once you get on the west side of the river, thing become a lot more hap hazard there.

I think Metro over did things with urban renewal, the interstates cutting off neighborhoods. We already had a lot of obstacles such as the river, RR Tracks, and hilly topography.

I don't know what the hell the did on the east side of Music Row with all the Cul-de-sacs there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, looking at a street map of suburban Nashville, or really any relatively new suburban area, tends to stress me out if I concentrate on it for too long.  I think the main thing is connectivity, and not necessarily following a strict north-south-east-west grid, although that does make the most sense.  One just really has to wonder why anyone would think the layout on the right is superior.  It's madness.  

Picture-13.png?w&crop=0,0px,100,px&ssl=1

Edited by BnaBreaker
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

 

I think Metro over did things with urban renewal, the interstates cutting off neighborhoods. We already had a lot of obstacles such as the river, RR Tracks, and hilly topography.

I don't know what the hell the did on the east side of Music Row with all the Cul-de-sacs there.

Agree.     There are lots of examples like that where the former street grid was broken up in favor of dead ends and cul de sacs, reflecting the 1960's mentality that certain "undesirable" streets needed to be physically cut off from neighborhoods.     Those would be relatively easy to reconnect if the current property owners were in favor.     

The much harder ones are the severed grids due to the interstates.     Three interstates and a downtown loop just brutalized Nashville's grid, irreparably in most cases.     Just zoom out on Google maps and look at how much real estate (ie, former neighborhoods and street grids) each one of the giant interstate clover leaf exchanges consumes.    It's absolutely criminal how much damage these things did to East Nashville and Madison (Ellington Parkway / I-65 / I-24 / Briley Pkwy).    

 

Ellington.png

Briley.png

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^Criminal indeed... you could fit entire towns inside the footprint of those interchanges.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are parts of Inglewood where you can clearly tell that were supposed to be connected they just never finished it.

Brushhill and Lakewood

RjuDK7o.jpg

Curdwood and Matthews

PPmNLbO.jpg

Porsha and Malquin

n7qMhLO.jpg

 

These are not the best examples but ones off the top of my head. 

Edited by grilled_cheese
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MLBrumby said:

You guys have put your finger on one solution (a big one) to the gridlock in town... Connecting streets. Problem for decades is that no one wants to live on a "busy" street. So cul-de-sacs proliferated in the 70s-80s-90s... and still in many areas. 

Of course, I'm not talking about connecting cul-de-sac streets. Just calling for some very critical connections around the county. An elaborate example was the Division Street connector that (as far as I know) was never connected all the way through until that was completed.  There are lots of streets all around Nashville that would cost a fraction of the price to connect. I'm aware of several around White Bridge Rd/Charlotte Avenue. You have shown a great example above. Likewise, Antioch has a horrible mish-mash of disconnected streets. And someone needs to anticipate all the growth underway just west of Antioch. It's really absurd how no entity has even mentioned a need for something like a Tri-County Parkway (a boulevard, with divided media) connecting that portion of Davidson... Rutherford and Williamson.  In conjunction with connected streets would need to be proper timing of traffic signals. 

Would you like to start a new Topic Thread to start listing the best 2 dozen streets in Metro Davidson that would have the biggest impact on reducing traffic congestion if connected?  I'm not one to start topics without some support. A couple of other folks on this board are much better at starting them. But if there's support for one, then let's go!! 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BnaBreaker said:

Yeah, looking at a street map of suburban Nashville, or really any relatively new suburban area, tends to stress me out if I concentrate on it for too long.  I think the main thing is connectivity, and not necessarily following a strict north-south-east-west grid, although that does make the most sense.  One just really has to wonder why anyone would think the layout on the right is superior.  It's madness.  

Picture-13.png?w&crop=0,0px,100,px&ssl=1

It is superior for the objective, which is to prevent vehicles from rat-running neighborhood streets.

That's the consideration in a neighborhood like Cougar Hills (the area of Bellevue that map shows). Its population density is something like 3,700 people per square mile. By comparison, the population density in Phinney Ridge is over 6,100 people per square mile.

Can you reach more people by walking a mile in Phinney Ridge than in Cougar Hills? Well yeah, people live closer together there, that's the point. But if you overlay the diamond-shaped boundary from Phinney Ridge onto the Cougar Hills map, though, you still aren't overlaying very many businesses. That's simply because the population density can't support as much commercial activity.

The street grid serves a different purpose in different neighborhoods. When you live in a tall skinny on a tenth of an acre in Phinney Ridge, it makes sense to have a street grid to connect pedestrians to the restaurants and retail spots that the neighborhood can support. If you live in a house on a much larger tract in Cougar Hills, it makes sense to have culs-de-sac and branching streets that funnel vehicles to arterials. Changing the street grid in Cougar Hills isn't going to make it more like Phinney Ridge unless you want to increase the population density to something like Phinney Ridge, which makes the exercise a little tautological. If only neighborhood X were more like neighborhood Y, it'd be more like neighborhood Y, etc.

One thing that can be improved (and does often show up in newer neighborhoods) is to add sidewalks or bike paths at the end of culs-de-sac and other disconnected roadways. That way you're getting the benefits of the street grid as a pedestrian or cyclist while maintaining the street hierarchy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MLBrumby said:

Would you like to start a new Topic Thread to start listing the best 2 dozen streets in Metro Davidson that would have the biggest impact on reducing traffic congestion if connected?  I'm not one to start topics without some support. A couple of other folks on this board are much better at starting them. But if there's support for one, then let's go!! 

I think that would be great. Off topic from the East Nash/Madison thread but I know of several road connections/corrections that would be great for SoBro/"Pie Town"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BnaBreaker said:

Yeah, looking at a street map of suburban Nashville, or really any relatively new suburban area, tends to stress me out if I concentrate on it for too long.  I think the main thing is connectivity, and not necessarily following a strict north-south-east-west grid, although that does make the most sense.  One just really has to wonder why anyone would think the layout on the right is superior.  It's madness.  

Picture-13.png?w&crop=0,0px,100,px&ssl=1

When I lived in St. Louis, they set up large concrete barriers to block off streets like these (in the grid) because of cars cutting through and speeding when traffic backed up on the main roads. Unfortunately, fatalities drove that decision. But it does not block pedestrian and bike access. So, believe it or not, the suburb layout on the right is safer for pedestrians. Go figure

Don't shoot the messenger

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, LA_TN said:

When I lived in St. Louis, they set up large concrete barriers to block off streets like these (in the grid) because of cars cutting through and speeding when traffic backed up on the main roads. Unfortunately, fatalities drove that decision. But it does not block pedestrian and bike access. So, believe it or not, the suburb layout on the right is safer for pedestrians. Go figure

Don't shoot the messenger

I mean, sure, but in my opinion that's kind of like saying that a car without an engine is safer for drivers.  In other words, of course streets that go nowhere and contribute nothing are going to have less cars on them, but I guarantee you the main streets that these mazes of cul-de-sacs dump into, which everyone living in an area like that are going to have to brave essentially every single time they go out, are many times worse for pedestrians AND motorists than any narrow city street.  This is not only because it takes so much longer to get from point A to point B, but also because there is usually little to no pedestrian infrastructure on these streets in most places, and even when there is, pedestrians essentially have no choice but to walk unprotected next to an eight lane highway.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A grid layout is inherently self-healing, so if autonomous vehicles are going to save us from all our traffic woes (as proponents claim; eventually) then shouldn't we be designing and re-working street layouts that function most efficiently for that transportation model? If in 30-40 years all vehicles are autonomous then the issues of "rat-running" and pedestrian safety cease to exist. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bos2Nash said:

Also, can we talk about the insanity of those interchanges! Holy crap! And people think it is wise and good practice to expand and continue planning like this?!?!?

Yeah it's pretty ludicrous. I've often wondered how much money they could make if they redesigned the enormous mess at the intersection of Spring St/Ellington/I-24 to be efficient with space instead of wasting half the east bank just to shave a few seconds off commute times. I'm pretty sure you could turn all of these into simple exit lanes with intersections at the crossing roads and recover about 20 acres of prime land. It could be sold for tens of millions, and zoned properly it would generate millions more every year in property taxes.

Ha, who am I kidding. We're probably more likely to tear down another 200 feet of houses on both sides so we can  marginally increase the turning radius even more.

image.png.3c7d6313a97a8c4b258fc571d227c96b.png

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^Not to mention how it’s virtually impossible to cross this interchange on foot/bike. It can be done, but it’s incredibly dangerous and intimidating.  All of Distric 5 is pretty well cut off from the rest of the city due to this interchange. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I added some coloring to google maps to show what the roads are like in this area for pedestrians and cyclists. This is my opinion, but I’m pretty experienced with it. Pretty sad for a dense neighborhood within a mile of the Capitol.

Red= impassable/illegal

Green= incredibly dangerous

Blue= passable, but moderately dangerous  

 

106E12BF-6EBD-4244-9478-071F1D16B622.thumb.jpeg.3eb965af811b659fd29f98d1068f6899.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.