Jump to content

More Accolades for Nashville


Guest 5th & Main Urbanite

Recommended Posts

On 3/25/2022 at 1:57 PM, jmtunafish said:

I had no idea that Nashville was known for its pizza.

The 15 Best Pizza Cities in the US:

  1. Detroit
  2. Cleveland
  3. Columbus OH
  4. Boston
  5. Pittsburgh
  6. Indianapolis
  7. Providence
  8. Saint Louis
  9. Philadelphia
  10. Norfolk
  11. Baltimore
  12. Tampa
  13. Minneapolis
  14. Chicago
  15. Nashville

Absolutely shocking for me too. I aint even know Norfolk was known for our pizza......That Dominos on Granby is really doing us good lol.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 3/27/2022 at 2:15 PM, ruraljuror said:

The nature of the buildings themselves?

All of what you said above is true, but you're missing my earlier point about adding to the housing stock.  During the pandemic AirBNB dried up and the operators switched from STR to LTR.  That proves my point:  The housing stock can fluctuate in mode of utilization depending on the economic situation, but to the extent that construction was encouraged by AirBNB-type investors, then Nashville's housing stock was increased.  How that stock is deployed in the market can vary from year to year, with the corresponding price impacts that you accurately noted in your post.  What you left out was the ease with which houses currently dedicated to AirBNB can switch into the LTR or for-sale market.

As to your comments about NIMBY's... well, I have no sympathy for them.  The NIMBY's and the zoning they support is the main reason housing is so expensive and the supply of housing is so low.  I'm a firm believer in limiting a person's quality of life to what they can afford.  If someone wants peace and quiet and solitude, living in the center city is a poor choice and they need to buy some land in the country.   In short, I believe sustainable, vibrant, growing neighborhoods should be based on respecting other people's decisions about how to use their property, not using the govt. to restrict your neighbor's activities for your benefit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Armacing said:

What you left out was the ease with which houses currently dedicated to AirBNB can switch into the LTR or for-sale market.

I understand your point about the ease of converting housing stock to STR use, but I'm just not sure that it really has any relevance here.

I have been in plenty of houses that have been converted to offices or shops or studios without changing anything but the furniture. Hell, I could convert my house into a home invasion SWAT team training site or an urban warfare Airsoft course without even having to take the pictures off the walls - in fact they'd add to the realism! 

The ease of conversion between uses for a structure has no bearing on whether or not that structure should be permitted in a given location. Just because my house could easily serve as a non-owner occupied office, doesn't mean that the city must permit me to do so anymore than the city must permit me to run a strip club with a suburban theme there (don't worry, the poles aren't permanently installed).

All I'm doing is applying the same logic and rules to hotels. If Embassy Suites isn't allowed to operate a satellite campus at the house next door, then why should any other entity be permitted to do so? Seems like you're argument really just boils down to your opposition to zoning laws in general. 

1 hour ago, Armacing said:

In short, I believe sustainable, vibrant, growing neighborhoods should be based on respecting other people's decisions about how to use their property, not using the govt. to restrict your neighbor's activities for your benefit.

I think this is the crux of our different perspectives. I certainly understand the appeal of the idealized individualism and freedom-maximizing binary outlook, although I do think examples like the SWAT and/or Airsoft facility (or worse) next door should at the very least give you pause. 

As I've repeatedly said, however, laws can be changed, and zoning lines/rules often do - not to mention special purpose exceptions. If you and others who share your beliefs can amass enough support, it is entirely within your power to make the kinds of changes you wish to see (with regard to zoning, at least). And don't get me wrong, there are plenty of zoning rules that I don't always agree with (height limitations in certain areas come immediately to mind, which I'm confident we at Urban Planet have influenced to some degree through our relentless collective advocacy on the matter), but the rules as they currently stand are the best efforts of those that came before us to compromise and fairly arbitrate the complex issues that arise when a bunch of different people with different agendas and 'beliefs' try to coexist in close proximity in a functioning society.

Could the system be improved? Of course, it's never been perfect and has always been a work in progress, so if you've got a compelling argument about any specific, actionable change you'd like to promote, I'm all ears. But if you're just trying to advocate against zoning in general, you're going to have to explain with some pretty compelling evidence how the potential benefits outweigh the risk that a honky tonk, or pig farm, or a commercial helipad sprout up next door without just adding a bunch of other new rules to address all the pitfalls we can dream up a la carte.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

I understand your point about the ease of converting housing stock to STR use, but I'm just not sure that it really has any relevance here.  I have been in plenty of houses that have been converted to offices or shops or studios

Your argument about converting houses to retail operations is a complete straw-man argument in this case.  It doesn't matter if a group of people are sleeping in a house for one night or 365 nights, the concept is the same.  They are *living there* and they will come and go throughout the day just like any resident.  I don't have to prove why its a good idea to allow retail in a residential area if all I'm advocating for is short term rental.

The NIMBY's will say "Oh, but they are partying over there!"  Well, there's no guarantee that a long-term renter or home-owner will not be partying every night either.

"Oh, they're parking on the street"  Well, no guarantee that a long-term renter or home owner will not park on the street or have guests over all the time who park on the street.

"Oh, they are playing loud music"  Well then do whatever people do when any kind of neighbor is violating whatever noise ordinance exists in Nashville.

None of those complaints are valid reasons to not allow STR, and it's not the same as a hotel because there are no maids or concierge or bellhops or whatever.  Just residents coming and going and sleeping at night... Same thing that any resident will do regardless of how long they stay in that house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Armacing said:

Your argument about converting houses to retail operations is a complete straw-man argument in this case.  It doesn't matter if a group of people are sleeping in a house for one night or 365 nights, the concept is the same.  They are *living there* and they will come and go throughout the day just like any resident.  I don't have to prove why its a good idea to allow retail in a residential area if all I'm advocating for is short term rental.

The NIMBY's will say "Oh, but they are partying over there!"  Well, there's no guarantee that a long-term renter or home-owner will not be partying every night either.

"Oh, they're parking on the street"  Well, no guarantee that a long-term renter or home owner will not park on the street or have guests over all the time who park on the street.

"Oh, they are playing loud music"  Well then do whatever people do when any kind of neighbor is violating whatever noise ordinance exists in Nashville.

None of those complaints are valid reasons to not allow STR, and it's not the same as a hotel because there are no maids or concierge or bellhops or whatever.  Just residents coming and going and sleeping at night... Same thing that any resident will do regardless of how long they stay in that house.

A strawman argument is when you weakly state some aspect of your opponents position in order to bat it down. Maybe the term you're looking for is red herring? Or maybe I'm missing the point - you tell me.

In either case, even if I accept everything you've said here as true, I still don't think you're making a very compelling argument. 

For one, it seems like you're now limiting the distinction between hotel and STR to the presence of maids, concierges, and bell hops. Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and/or you rethink for a second whether or not maids are involved in STRs, I have personally been to more than a couple hotels over the last decade that had neither concierges nor bellhops, so your ability to split that hair is moot right out of the gate. 

Further, you say that "It doesn't matter" how long the stay is, 'a group of people sleeping and coming and going' in a place is what unifies the rental properties category, whether it's for 1 night or 1 year.  Ignoring for a moment that hotels also meet the definition for this category, I think you could benefit from reflecting on how you opened that sentence and ask yourself 'It doesn't matter to whom'? Clearly the answer is that it doesn't matter to you, but it's equally clear that there are a lot of people who disagree with your assessment, and those peoples' opinions on these matters are just as valid as yours, right? Same goes for the opening to your closing paragraph in the quoted post - "None of those complaints are a valid reason to not allow STR." Once again, according to whom?

As I see it, the obvious reasons to distinguish owner occupied STRs from non-owner occupied STRs are that having owners on site who have to also deal with the parking and noise issues their property is creating - not to mention having to interact with their unhappy neighbors who are being affected - can very directly help to keep those issues in check. At the very least, the neighbors can find some comfort in knowing the owners are suffering even worse than they are when terrible guests come around. That seems like a much more valid reason to draw the line based on whether or not the property is owner occupied than whether or not 'they have bellhops' but maybe that's just me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, markhollin said:

they are here to party.  Period. 

So what is the actual problem?  Noise?  Isn't there already a framework of laws to deal with that?  I don't see noise from a neighbor as a reason to ban STR, perhaps a reason to punish noise ordinance violations, but not a reason to ban STR.  Especially since LTR or home owner residents can be just as noisy.

It's true that I have not lived near an STR, but I currently live near someone who has 3 dogs that bark constantly at all hours.  What do I do?  Just deal with it because it was my choice to live in a neighborhood.  People need to take responsibility for their own situations in life and stop trying to force other people cater to their needs.  That's just lazy and selfish, and I find that approach to social interaction especially egregious when it involves using the government to infringe upon people's property rights and small business plans.

13 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

A strawman argument is when you weakly state some aspect of your opponents position in order to bat it down. Maybe the term you're looking for is red herring?

Good call.  I meant to say red herring.  Now, back to your red herring...  Let's keep the comparison between STR and hotel, because I think that's the only realistic comparison in this scenario.

13 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

it seems like you're now limiting the distinction between hotel and STR to the presence of maids, concierges, and bell hops...you say that "It doesn't matter" how long the stay is, 'a group of people sleeping and coming and going' in a place is what unifies the rental properties category, whether it's for 1 night or 1 year.  ... 'It doesn't matter to whom'? ... "None of those complaints are a valid reason to not allow STR." Once again, according to whom?

I was pointing out all those things to show that the pattern of coming and going is similar to what "normal" residents would do.  There are not a bunch of employees running around like you have at most hotels.  It only matters if part of the argument against STR is "there is too much commotion going on next door".  My point was that regular residents cause commotion... some more than others.  In some ways STR guests are superior to actual home-owner neighbors because they are *indifferent* to you.  If you get the wrong neighbor by bad luck, they will take an active role in making your life hell because now they want to control what you are doing on your property because it annoys them and they have to look at it/live with it every day.  No STR guest is going to complain about leaves from your tree blowing onto their yard or a dog barking at 4:00AM.  They just don't care.  Blessing or curse?  Probably depends on the situation.

 

 

Edited by Armacing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

My Wife and I owned cabins and STR’s in the Smoky Mountains for many years. We ended up selling them all because the upkeep on them was crazy, Mark is right, they come to party and don’t care about anyone or anything else. 

How did you re-deploy your capital after selling the cabins?  Just curious....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try calling ever who they book through. You may get some results there. Also complain to the Council person in that district and keep on calling the cops. Every time they get a complaint, I know there is a record of it and the more neighbors that call the more the owner gets in hot water with the city and the booking agent.

 

Film it too.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Armacing said:

Let's keep the comparison between STR and hotel, because I think that's the only realistic comparison in this scenario...There are not a bunch of employees running around like you have at most hotels. 

Fair enough, but I think you've got it backwards in your thinking that no on-site employees is a feature when in reality it's a bug. Whatever benefits are gained by not having employees onsite from minimizing the extra commotion and not adding to the parking needs are completely eclipsed by the lack of accountability on the property. 

In a normal hotel, if there are guests causing significant disturbances, you can call the front desk and have the matter addressed by a representative of the hotel in a relatively short amount of time. Should the problem persist, the hotel can eject the guest, and if law enforcement intervention is required at that point, the police have a lot more latitude to act when they're dealing with a trespassing infraction called in by an agent of the property itself instead of a noise complaint from a neighbor as in Nash_12Souths's example above. In this way, AirBnB and STR owners benefit directly by offloading their onsite accountability requirements to the city payroll instead of their own.

Of course you're right that noise and bad neighbors are facts of life when you live in a city. In fact, we're all probably bad neighbors to somebody else - in my case I'm the bad neighbor for regularly letting my grass grow too long, but to me the bad neighbor is the lady who can't help herself from making passive aggressive comments about it. This is the nature of living in a society with people who have different and often conflicting goals and priorities. 

But it's one thing to have differences or even disputes with neighbors, with whom we have a mutual benefit in finding some kind of way to peacefully coexist, and its a very different thing to have disputes with a revolving door of strangers who have absolutely no skin in the game whatsoever and can blow through town like a tornado with no repercussions for anything just as long as their behavior stays on the right side of jail. This is one of the main justifications for treating short term and long term rentals differently as long term renters can't run away from anti-social behavior in the way that rowdy weekenders can. 

Still, as you noted, some property owners very likely would and/or do prefer living adjacent to an STR instead of another homeowner or long term renter explicitly to avoid the possibility of having neighbors with any vested interest in what you're doing on your property - in my case, whether or not the grass is regularly mowed. But in most of the neighborhoods that have gotten to experience the rise of the AirBnB wave first hand, the vast majority of those residents have come to the conclusion that placing some limits on STRs is in their and/or the neighborhood's best interest, which is why these rules and limitations started getting enacted in the fist place. Seems reasonable to me. 

Edited by ruraljuror
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Armacing said:

How did you re-deploy your capital after selling the cabins?  Just curious....

Without getting to personal, we are investors in a partnership that renovate and construct small businesses and some real estate. We have worked in a lot of counties here in Middle Tennessee, but mostly Davidson. And of course Uncle Sam , gets his share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

Without getting to personal, we are investors in a partnership that renovate and construct small businesses and some real estate. We have worked in a lot of counties here in Middle Tennessee, but mostly Davidson. And of course Uncle Sam , gets his share.

Awesome, thanks for sharing that with the group!  As investors in renovation and construction you are providing a vital service to the Mid-Tenn economy, and I commend you for your continued efforts in the face of unprecedented risks and uncertainty. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nashville continues to be the hottest residential real estate market in the country according to Re/Max.  

The median home price in the Middle Tennessee region reached $430,000 in March, a 23% increase over the last year – nearly the same percentage increase as the company’s December report, which showed 23.5% growth year-over-year. This is the third time in less than a year that the region has broken records — hitting $405,000 in October and $410,000 in December.

However, actual sales are down 4.2% from last year because there simply isn't enough new home inventory. 

More at NBJ here:

https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2022/04/18/march-market-record-high.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_34&cx_artPos=0#cxrecs_s

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
6 minutes ago, bnacincy said:

Nashville is not "Deep South" is it? Or has something changed since I moved away?

:tw_lol: These lists are more often (than not) silly.  I nearly always get the feeling the writer has never even visited the place(s) they write about.  I mean... Bonnaroo is "a short shuttle ride" from the core?!  Mmmmm.... not unless you're passed out on the shuttle (and I'm sure many have). 
 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.