Nashville Bits and Pieces

[BnaBreaker]

1 hour ago, e-dub said:

I wish they would have asked a follow-up question "please explain your answer".

I'd be willing to bet that a good 75% of thr people who answered 'yes' probably had the traffic snarls caused by construction sites on their minds, and pretty much nothing else.   It's amazing to me how many people there are who's exclusive concern when it comes to the development of their city is, essentially, 'will it make driving easier for me or not?'

[CenterHill]

1 hour ago, BnaBreaker said:

I'd be willing to bet that a good 75% of thr people who answered 'yes' probably had the traffic snarls caused by construction sites on their minds, and pretty much nothing else.   It's amazing to me how many people there are who's exclusive concern when it comes to the development of their city is, essentially, 'will it make driving easier for me or not?'

Who knows who clicks on these polls, but beyond the four walls of this forum are a lot of very thoughtful citizens who have been watching Nashville change over the 10 years since the great recession into a city in which many people can no longer afford to buy or live here, where city government values development over preservation, where the city has announced large funding cuts for public education and the city's hospital while spending tax dollars on soccer stadiums and proposing billions for light rail, where handouts for private business and developers continues, where giant short term rental companies can dictate unrestricted growth for themselves and effectively transform formerly residential neighborhoods, and on and on.    And, yes there are the construction snarls.     

Don't lose the perspective that Nashville is growing at a pace that is an outlier and highly unusual for most cities and would be challenging for any government and citizen base to deal with.      Many of the mayoral candidates are pointing out, perhaps correctly, that Nashville has not been doing a particularly effective job of dealing with our growth in a manner that benefits all.     I don't think those poll results are surprising at all. 

[e-dub]

I'm not at all surprised. I'm also more of a big picture thinker and what's been happening for the past ten years excites me immensely. Growing pains? Sure, but that's how growth goes far more often than not.

 

In my 40 years on this earth (half of which have been in Nashville), I've learned that inability to make change work for you - or at least learning how to roll with with it - makes for a miserable existence. It's been/most practical lessons I've learned thus far. *This isn't a magic bullet to make all change earlier to deal with, but hot damn does it ever work well.

Edited May 23, 2018 by e-dub

[samsonh]

20 minutes ago, CenterHill said:

Who knows who clicks on these polls, but beyond the four walls of this forum are a lot of very thoughtful citizens who have been watching Nashville change over the 10 years since the great recession into a city in which many people can no longer afford to buy or live here, where city government values development over preservation, where the city has announced large funding cuts for public education and the city's hospital while spending tax dollars on soccer stadiums and proposing billions for light rail, where handouts for private business and developers continues, where giant short term rental companies can dictate unrestricted growth for themselves and effectively transform formerly residential neighborhoods, and on and on.    And, yes there are the construction snarls.     

Don't lose the perspective that Nashville is growing at a pace that is an outlier and highly unusual for most cities and would be challenging for any government and citizen base to deal with.      Many of the mayoral candidates are pointing out, perhaps correctly, that Nashville has not been doing a particularly effective job of dealing with our growth in a manner that benefits all.     I don't think those poll results are surprising at all. 

Many of the complaints you are mentioning go back to the state, not Metro(education funding, Airbnb).  This is a city brimming with economic opportunity, and I would encourage those who feel like they are falling behind to take advantage of it.  We are very lucky to be in the position we are in. 

 

Also if you shut down the hospital you could increase your education dollars. Which I think we should do.

[smeagolsfree]

10 hours ago, PaulChinetti said:

They really should have never let people pay into the fun except in rare cases. Where does that money even go?? That street is a prime example. 

I'd like to see that list/map too!

I just walked from One City around a huge loop and for the most part Park Plaza Dr. on the northern end of Centennial Park has 0 sidewalks and there are a lot of folks walking across the street to the park with 0 sidewalks around the park with the exception of West End on the South.

The Nations has very little sidewalk connectivity and even in East Nashville there are huge areas with out sidewalks. Metro leaders all the way back to the start are neglecting this issue. Purcell did a little bit, but it seems that Metro will dig up perfectly good sidewalk and replace it instead of putting sidewalks where they are needed. You go in and take the right of way needed and build the freaking sidewalk. The homeowners should not have a say in this and should not get compensated as this adds value to the homes in the neighborhood. 

Metro can't do anything right. Sidewalks, bike lanes, mass transit, or the roads. Bad leadership in Planning is a huge issue. Just like the plan they had in place on Music Row, another failure. Metro Historic is a joke with in a joke. 

Allowing multi forms of transportation to get the tourist around is another huge failure. Pedal Taverns, Bike taxis, tractor pulls, horse drawn carriage, scoters, golf carts, swimming pools on wheels, OMG the list goes on and on . What's next, jet packs? Metro has not gotten in front of the problem.

I forgot Metro does seem to be able to throw a good party, thus the NFL draft but that is more less the CVB doing the heavy lifting. When Butch retires, Metro will have a hard time replacing him

 

There, that is my rant against the idiots that run Metro.

[CenterHill]

6 hours ago, samsonh said:

Many of the complaints you are mentioning go back to the state, not Metro(education funding, Airbnb). 

 

The problems I listed are all primarily Metro issues - affordable housing, funding our schools, health care for lower income citizens, zoning and development, property tax incentives.        As for Airbnb,  Metro council opened the door to Airbnb in 2015 by passing an ordinance allowing the platforms to operate in residential neighborhoods.     Since then the number of short term rentals has exploded as have the complaints against them.      By the time council was able to pass a residential zoning phase out earlier this year, the industry was firmly entrenched and Nashville had become a leading market for Airbnb.      Airbnb was not about to lose it and hired an army of lobbyists to persuade Council not to limit them, and when that failed, were able to persuade the legislature to preempt Nashville.      So, no, we have the Council (circa 2015) to thank for our current STR problems.    

My point was in response to a theme I keep hearing that anyone who takes issue with Nashville's growth and where and to whom we allocate our resources is either "anti-growth" or "uninformed" or "old".      I've talked to many people I consider to be very smart and knowledgeable about growth and urban planning, who like growth, and are in favor of growth, but who see the city losing its focus on the fundamentals that have always made Nashville a livable city.     Affordability is the biggest issue.       Let's be honest, for a lot of people, Nashville either no longer is, or soon won't be, a place they can afford to live.     The 1000 new Alliance Bernstein employees can afford it, but all the waiters, line cooks, bus drivers, landscapers, police officers, teachers, housekeepers, nannies, Uber drivers and countless other workers needed to feed and sustain this growth cannot.      This is a big problem and we don't have a solution for it yet (and no, I don't either).     I think this is why a lot of people click "Yes" we're growing too fast.      

Edited May 24, 2018 by CenterHill

[Ingram]

6 hours ago, CenterHill said:

Who knows who clicks on these polls, but beyond the four walls of this forum are a lot of very thoughtful citizens who have been watching Nashville change over the 10 years since the great recession into a city in which many people can no longer afford to buy or live here, where city government values development over preservation, where the city has announced large funding cuts for public education and the city's hospital while spending tax dollars on soccer stadiums and proposing billions for light rail, where handouts for private business and developers continues, where giant short term rental companies can dictate unrestricted growth for themselves and effectively transform formerly residential neighborhoods, and on and on.    And, yes there are the construction snarls.     

Don't lose the perspective that Nashville is growing at a pace that is an outlier and highly unusual for most cities and would be challenging for any government and citizen base to deal with.      Many of the mayoral candidates are pointing out, perhaps correctly, that Nashville has not been doing a particularly effective job of dealing with our growth in a manner that benefits all.     I don't think those poll results are surprising at all. 

 

Those people have the correct insight and intellect associated with living in the real world. Who cares if the elderly and others can't afford to live in Nashville and are becoming homeless. There are developments that must be cheered on. Ironically those same developments are caterwauled and bewailed about when rendered and\or built.

Interesting how billionaires are to be catered to as long as they are developers.

[PaulChinetti]

21 hours ago, GregH said:

I agree with the sentiment about the sidewalk requirements but I don't think those streets are really great examples. They're both only a few blocks long and dead-end at the interstate. Way down the list of streets where sidewalks are needed.

I don't know, I think these are perfect examples, they sit on a hill and 33rd goes right down to Charolette. It would have been super easy for developers to put these in. The houses sidewalks just end right into the road. And in 37th case, there is even a sidewalk to connect to! In a recent BZA meeting, that was a lot of people's biggest gripe that they were going to have to build a sidewalk to nowhere. Well if everyone gets a variance then it will always be a sidewalk to nowhere because everyone gets a varience (head explode). 

Now everything will have to be ripped up and started over. And where did the fund money go for that street? That's my biggest gripe, a short little street like that isn't going to be high on the cities list to get done, so it'll never get done. 

Not picking on your GregH, more so the logic of the BZA, I'd love to see how much sidewalk has been built versus how many variances they have granted. 

[volsfanwill]

Morning electrician prediction. 

Either a runoff between Swain and Briley, with swain having a slight lead. In this scenario, I see Briley supporters showing up better in the runoff election. 

Or

Swain wins outright. 

 

Those are the only 2 names I see consistently. And I see much more from Swain. And swain supporters on Facebook. 

Briley is running many ads on local TV, but as we learned last month. People don't watch local TV. 

[grilled_cheese]

How do you "make" affordable housing?

[GregH]

1 hour ago, PaulChinetti said:

I'd love to see how much sidewalk has been built versus how many variances they have granted. 

There's a three-house project going up on my street that's not doing sidewalks because they got their permit in the day before the sidewalk regs went into effect, I wonder how many similar permits were rushed through (they didn't start construction for another 6 months). 

[AronG]

14 hours ago, CenterHill said:

The problems I listed are all primarily Metro issues - affordable housing, funding our schools, health care for lower income citizens, zoning and development, property tax incentives.        As for Airbnb,  Metro council opened the door to Airbnb in 2015 by passing an ordinance allowing the platforms to operate in residential neighborhoods.     Since then the number of short term rentals has exploded as have the complaints against them.      By the time council was able to pass a residential zoning phase out earlier this year, the industry was firmly entrenched and Nashville had become a leading market for Airbnb.      Airbnb was not about to lose it and hired an army of lobbyists to persuade Council not to limit them, and when that failed, were able to persuade the legislature to preempt Nashville.      So, no, we have the Council (circa 2015) to thank for our current STR problems.    

My point was in response to a theme I keep hearing that anyone who takes issue with Nashville's growth and where and to whom we allocate our resources is either "anti-growth" or "uninformed" or "old".      I've talked to many people I consider to be very smart and knowledgeable about growth and urban planning, who like growth, and are in favor of growth, but who see the city losing its focus on the fundamentals that have always made Nashville a livable city.     Affordability is the biggest issue.       Let's be honest, for a lot of people, Nashville either no longer is, or soon won't be, a place they can afford to live.     The 1000 new Alliance Bernstein employees can afford it, but all the waiters, line cooks, bus drivers, landscapers, police officers, teachers, housekeepers, nannies, Uber drivers and countless other workers needed to feed and sustain this growth cannot.      This is a big problem and we don't have a solution for it yet (and no, I don't either).     I think this is why a lot of people click "Yes" we're growing too fast.      

It is a huge stretch to blame the metro council for Airbnb. Airbnb was already growing like crazy in 2015, both in Nashville and worldwide. They were (and still are in most places) operating in a legal gray area, but if the council hadn't taken the steps they did to require permits, etc. they would have grown even faster, and with fewer restrictions. You can make the case that the council didn't go far enough with their first effort, but pretending that they opened the door to this is just scapegoating. And if you're looking for someone to blame it's *incredibly* charitable to let the state legislature off the hook just because they were lobbied by Airbnb. In the end metro tried to fix this and the state (partially) blocked them.

It's also amazing that people want to lay the blame for housing prices on metro government. This isn't something that's legislated; it's simple supply and demand. Our population is growing and lots of people want to live near the city. But lots of them also want a nice single-family home with a yard. The suburbs handle this by gradually converting green space into more subdivisions. This is obviously not an option for Nashville. So here's a hard truth that has nothing to do with the metro council: Unless you're advocating a Detroit-style death spiral, single-family houses with big yards are never going to be affordable near downtown again. We can demagogue the issue, froth people up into a pitchfork mob, descend into a full-on anti-growth backlash and replace the entire metro government - none of that is going to stop the laws of supply and demand. What metro *could* do is take steps to make other forms of medium-density housing more easy to develop (townhouses, multiplex, etc.). But of course, that seems to piss off most of the same people that are complaining.

The bigger picture to me is that people are frustrated with several aspects of our growth and they're understandably looking for someone to blame. But if we give in to the urge to ignore the tectonic forces that are driving those changes and instead choose the emotionally satisfying path of blaming the few people and organizations that are working to channel things in a positive direction, the whole backlash is going to be counter-productive and we'll end up experience *more* negative consequences, not less.

[grilled_cheese]

^^^^^ Correct

The transit plan was one way that 'could' have helped with affordable housing because it would have rezoned areas near the planned LTR to allow higher density housing which would have added stock and lowered demand and thus prices.  But, nah, we don't want transit because we want AFFORDABLE HOUSING.  And if the gov't were to step in and somehow try to legislate some solution then the MUH RAHTS crowd loses their minds.

It's one giant circle jerk of not knowing how to actually identify problems and fix them.

Welcome to The South.

[samsonh]

17 hours ago, CenterHill said:

The problems I listed are all primarily Metro issues - affordable housing, funding our schools, health care for lower income citizens, zoning and development, property tax incentives.        As for Airbnb,  Metro council opened the door to Airbnb in 2015 by passing an ordinance allowing the platforms to operate in residential neighborhoods.     Since then the number of short term rentals has exploded as have the complaints against them.      By the time council was able to pass a residential zoning phase out earlier this year, the industry was firmly entrenched and Nashville had become a leading market for Airbnb.      Airbnb was not about to lose it and hired an army of lobbyists to persuade Council not to limit them, and when that failed, were able to persuade the legislature to preempt Nashville.      So, no, we have the Council (circa 2015) to thank for our current STR problems.    

My point was in response to a theme I keep hearing that anyone who takes issue with Nashville's growth and where and to whom we allocate our resources is either "anti-growth" or "uninformed" or "old".      I've talked to many people I consider to be very smart and knowledgeable about growth and urban planning, who like growth, and are in favor of growth, but who see the city losing its focus on the fundamentals that have always made Nashville a livable city.     Affordability is the biggest issue.       Let's be honest, for a lot of people, Nashville either no longer is, or soon won't be, a place they can afford to live.     The 1000 new Alliance Bernstein employees can afford it, but all the waiters, line cooks, bus drivers, landscapers, police officers, teachers, housekeepers, nannies, Uber drivers and countless other workers needed to feed and sustain this growth cannot.      This is a big problem and we don't have a solution for it yet (and no, I don't either).     I think this is why a lot of people click "Yes" we're growing too fast.      

What should Metro do to make housing affordable? Where do the funds come from for that? They are already subsidizing Metro General to the tune of north of 46 million this fiscal year, is that not enough? Metro tried to crack down on Airbnb and the state said no.  How is the state not to blame for that? Metro can't overcome state law in this regard.  

All growing cities deal with these issues, and all things considered Nashville is still quite affordable.  

[Rockatansky]

20 hours ago, CenterHill said:

city has announced large funding cuts for public education

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the MNPS budget has increased or remained the same every year for a decade or more.

[AronG]

1 hour ago, grilled_cheese said:

^^^^^ Correct

The transit plan was one way that 'could' have helped with affordable housing because it would have rezoned areas near the planned LTR to allow higher density housing which would have added stock and lowered demand and thus prices.  But, nah, we don't want transit because we want AFFORDABLE HOUSING.  And if the gov't were to step in and somehow try to legislate some solution then the MUH RAHTS crowd loses their minds.

It's one giant circle jerk of not knowing how to actually identify problems and fix them.

Welcome to The South.

Only thing I would add is that this one isn't just the south. Almost every top-50 American city is artificially driving up prices of the only mathematically viable middle class urban housing (townhouse/multiplex) by strict single-family zoning on 90% of their land, left over from the first round of development. There's a YIMBY movement growing to counter vociferous resistance from baby boomer homeowners, but it's only nibbling at the edges. See SB 827 in California, or the efforts of Neighbors for More Neighbors in Minneapolis (http://www.startribune.com/the-pro-density-movement-in-minneapolis-seeks-to-find-its-voice/476884973/).

[Rockatansky]

17 hours ago, CenterHill said:

Metro issues - affordable housing

The State has actively blocked Metro's affordable housing policies. This year they blocked Metro's inclusionary housing ordinance.

2 hours ago, grilled_cheese said:

How do you "make" affordable housing?

In TN you increase the supply of housing available.

[samsonh]

15 minutes ago, Rockatansky said:

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the MNPS budget has increased or remained the same every year for a decade or more.

Well this year will still see a $5 million dollar increase. So I am not sure where CenterHill is seeing a cut. Hopefully he can point it out. All the budgets are at this site if he wants to do so:

 

https://www.mnps.org/budgets/

 

And this doesn't even tell the whole story. Enrollment dropped last year despite our increasing population. So talking about cuts when funding is increasing for fewer students is disingenuous at best. 

Edited May 24, 2018 by samsonh

[12Mouth]

3 hours ago, volsfanwill said:

Morning electrician prediction. 

Either a runoff between Swain and Briley, with swain having a slight lead. In this scenario, I see Briley supporters showing up better in the runoff election. 

Or

Swain wins outright. 

 

Those are the only 2 names I see consistently. And I see much more from Swain. And swain supporters on Facebook. 

Briley is running many ads on local TV, but as we learned last month. People don't watch local TV. 

I think you may be correct. The left has not coalesced around Briley and her people are motivated and turning out. This is crazy.

[smeagolsfree]

Who knows what will happen. Very low voter turnout. 

[e-dub]

I've been packing all my stuff up to move and missed early voting, but I made it this morning.

[e-dub]

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/05/24/nashville-special-mayoral-election-election-results-david-briley-carol-swain/634643002/

[BnaBreaker]

Wow, I didn't realize just how extreme some of Swain's views were until I did a little research on her just now. 

[markhollin]

Briley wins with about 55%, Swain 23%, Bristol 5%, Love 5%, Gilmore 5%, and Carr 4%.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/05/24/nashville-special-mayoral-election-election-results-david-briley-carol-swain/634643002/

[Neigeville2]

Well that's a relief, anyway.