Nashville Bits and Pieces

[smeagolsfree]

For those of you that cant read the article there is no news here. The best quote is this "Giarratana has advice for local government: Stop spending money on studies, and start actually building affordable housing using public-private partnerships." That is true for most everything Metro does. They spend way too much money on studies on never do anything.

 

He added that he “may or may not” build something in the area, which is planned to house Oracle Corp.’s newest business campus, along with a handful of other high-profile developments. The PSC Metals scrapyard, which many consider an eyesore, also sits on the East Bank. Giarratana called the site a “jewel in the rough ready for development” if Mayor John Cooper can strike a deal with its owner.

 

[Bos2Nash]

Thanks @smeagolsfreeas I am one that does not have access. Studies are vital to the process because that is the easiest way to include the public in a public process. The trick is just how you go from the study to the real thing. A P3 project is quite complicated because the "private" portion of those partnerships is always trying to squeeze every ounce of free money from the "public" portions of the projects. The private groups also would then need to work within the parameters of the study and what the public wants versus want they want to do (which is to purely benefit their ROI). Finding the P3 projects where the studies are completed and the development immediately follows is the trick. 

Glad Tony could point out the lowest hanging fruit in the city with calling the PSC Scrapyard a jewel in the rough haha. Hopefully any said deal between Cooper and PSC has zero public money involved - unless it is a true P3 project and the city is not on the hook for clean up of the site.

[smeagolsfree]

The problem is they do 3 or 4 studies and then don’t do anything and then 10 years down the road, guess what a whole new bunch of council people are doing the exact same studies wasting time and money. Look at all the money wasted on the Fairgrounds studies and proposals. The same goes for all of the SoBro Studies,, thermal plant studies. A lot of this before you got here. Studies of crap that never happened. 

 

[nashvylle]

The main objective from the city's standpoint should be increasing supply of affordable housing units. We could have 100 meetings/studies and people will still complain. But if we still have zero supply after all these studies, the complaining will be quite louder. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by nashvylle

[MLBrumby]

27 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

The problem is they do 3 or 4 studies and then don’t do anything and then 10 years down the road, guess what a whole new bunch of council people are doing the exact same studies wasting time and money. Look at all the money wasted on the Fairgrounds studies and proposals. The same goes for all of the SoBro Studies,, thermal plant studies. A lot of this before you got here. Studies of crap that never happened. 

 

That happens when there's too much money and/or no leadership with no vision. Either way, it's just kicking the can/problem down the road.   Mayor Dean had a vision and was a great leader. So we have the Music City Center.  Bredesen was too. So we have two professional teams and the venues they call home. 

[downtownresident]

16 minutes ago, MLBrumby said:

That happens when there's too much money and/or no leadership with no vision. Either way, it's just kicking the can/problem down the road.   Mayor Dean had a vision and was a great leader. So we have the Music City Center.  Bredesen was too. So we have two professional teams and the venues they call home. 

Megan Berry had vision, and I think could’ve really pushed the transit plan past the finish line, but we all know what happened there. The tumultuous years that followed didn’t help.
 

The current transit plan isn’t really much of anything, but it is something. Hopefully we can expand service quickly and build the dedicated BRT lines it calls for soon, so someone with a grander vision can build off of it.  

[Bos2Nash]

2 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:

The problem is they do 3 or 4 studies and then don’t do anything and then 10 years down the road, guess what a whole new bunch of council people are doing the exact same studies wasting time and money. Look at all the money wasted on the Fairgrounds studies and proposals. The same goes for all of the SoBro Studies,, thermal plant studies. A lot of this before you got here. Studies of crap that never happened. 

I agree on what the problem is, but the solution is just not as clear as we would hope. This is ultimately because the studies are not done as part of a P3 (Private-Public-Partnership) project. It is legislative Fluff that makes the legislature feel good as if they are achieving something, but they don't have the means to make them a reality. While Dean and Bredesen did wonderful things for the downtown core that has made Nashville the modern day Nashville, clearly the Barnes Fund is not able to support all the demands of the city. The city needs to find a private partner willing to put on the big boy (or girl) pants and work in conjunction with a publicly led study on what the city truly needs. The successful P3 partnerships when it comes to housing are a result of entities willing to work together and I find that to be more of the exception than the rule so far. The affordable housing crisis is a public/private issue and I specifically put the "public" first because they need to lead the solution while the "private" needs to be willing to be a team member and follow the lead.

A specific example is the Envision Cayce project that started it's planning process in 2013 and is only now in full construction swing (for the last couple years) – almost a full decade later and we are only getting a 1-to-1 replacement guarantee while adding more housing units.. The city saw the affordable housing crisis coming and has been working to remedy it, but cannot do it alone. They have to walk a fine line of providing housing stock, maintaining a certain comfort level for existing residents (ie Gentrification) and deal with a state legislature that cut the city's legs off before they could walk. 

Like @nashvyllesaid, people are always going to complain, but that doesn't mean that public input is wrong. When you have a group like Perkins Eastman (with the East Bank) leading the study under parameters set by the public we could see something really cool. Unfortunately, I feel like the city is going to hold up the the study at the end of the day as this shiny carrot for developers and no developer is going to want to bite because they did not have a hand in the study so making it meld with their pro-forma is harder for them. This again is what makes these things so hard because the city wants to do these things, but it is privately owned land so their hands are really tied beyond doing a study and zoning (I know people's favorite term) unless they get a private partner involved on the front end. I truly hope the East Bank study brings in a private entity to help put real figures on what the study will do. Otherwise it will have the same fate as all the others.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Bos2Nash

[smeagolsfree]

It’s just, we on the board have seen 25 years of the same studies over and over. I think that is where Tony is coming from. Metro has wasted a mint on studies since some on the board were still in diapers.

[titanhog]

Anyone else not crazy about the new “notifications” thing that pops up when you enter the site?  It used to only pop up when someone quoted one of your posts…but now it lets you know each and every “like” you get on a post.  To me….it’s a little much and sometimes just sends me to an old post that someone liked.

Ok…rant over. 

[MLBrumby]

Yes... actually makes me reluctant to ‘like’ or comment as much as I used to... I guess that’s a good thing for some. But I find myself bypassing the like button a lot more now.

[BnaBreaker]

1 hour ago, MLBrumby said:

Yes... actually makes me reluctant to ‘like’ or comment as much as I used to... I guess that’s a good thing for some. But I find myself bypassing the like button a lot more now.

Just for that, I'm liking AND quoting your post... that'll show ya! 

Seriously though, I agree, it is a bit much.  

[titanhog]

1 hour ago, BnaBreaker said:

Just for that, I'm liking AND quoting your post... that'll show ya! 

Seriously though, I agree, it is a bit much.  

I would “like” yours twice if I could. 

[MLBrumby]

OK... I give up. Was only a matter of time. 

[L'burgnative]

Twice in the last two days I've had to verify that I'm "not a bot," I've never had to do that here before.  anyone else have to do that?  That's more annoying to me than the "notifications."

[smeagolsfree]

It happens to me every now and again, but only once since the update.

[nashvylle]

16 hours ago, MLBrumby said:

So we have two professional teams and the venues they call home. 

Three* professional teams and will be three professional venues in a few short months! 

[jmtunafish]

1 hour ago, nashvylle said:

Three* professional teams and will be three professional venues in a few short months! 

Three MAJOR LEAGUE professional teams.  Let's not forget that the Sounds are still a professional sports team, just not major league.

[titanhog]

16 minutes ago, jmtunafish said:

Three MAJOR LEAGUE professional teams.  Let's not forget that the Sounds are still a professional sports team, just not major league.

Four MAJOR LEAGUE…when you consider NASCAR Cup level racing is back in Nashville (Superspeedway for now…Fairgrounds possibly soon).

[Jarno]

18 hours ago, nashvylle said:

The main objective from the city's standpoint should be increasing supply of affordable housing units. We could have 100 meetings/studies and people will still complain. But if we still have zero supply after all these studies, the complaining will be quite louder. 

I'm not sure the main objective of government should be getting low affordable pricing on housing.  I'm old fashion, but I still believe if all the houses are being bought they are affordable.  If they are not being bought the price will come down and become more affordable for more people.  The main objective of the government should be providing police, firemen, schools and so on for the citizens which they are failing at pretty badly from most of what I see. 

[nashvylle]

30 minutes ago, Jarno said:

I'm not sure the main objective of government should be getting low affordable pricing on housing.  I'm old fashion, but I still believe if all the houses are being bought they are affordable.  If they are not being bought the price will come down and become more affordable for more people.  The main objective of the government should be providing police, firemen, schools and so on for the citizens which they are failing at pretty badly from most of what I see. 

to clarify, I meant the main objective of a government agency specifically created for affordable housing... 

[Nashvillain]

At the risk of being too reductive, but also with the hope of clarification so that there is a common starting point for people to argue from, here's what the Metro Charter says about what Metro Nashville government does (the literal list is in blue italics which I provided): 

Sec. 1.05. - Functions within general services district and urban services district.

 

 

 

The metropolitan government may exercise within its general services district those powers and functions which have heretofore been exercised by the County of Davidson or the City of Nashville, or both, and shall supply the residents of said general services district with those governmental services which are now, or hereafter may be, customarily furnished by a county government in a metropolitan area.

The metropolitan government may exercise within its urban services district those powers and functions which have heretofore been exercised by the City of Nashville or the County of Davidson, and shall supply the residents of said urban services district with those kinds of governmental services which are now, or hereafter may be, customarily furnished by a city government in a metropolitan area.

The functions of the metropolitan government to be performed, and the governmental services to be rendered throughout the entire general services district shall include: general administration, police; courts, jails; assessment; health; welfare; hospitals; housing for the aged; streets and roads; traffic; schools; parks and recreation; library; auditorium, fairgrounds; airport; public housing; urban redevelopment; urban renewal; planning; electrical code; building code; plumbing code; housing code; electricity; transit; refuse disposal; beer supervision; and taxicab regulation.

The additional functions of the metropolitan government to be performed and the additional governmental services to be rendered within the urban services district shall include: additional police protection; fire protection; water; sanitary sewers; storm sewers; street lighting; street cleaning; refuse collections and wine and whiskey supervision.

Nothing in the foregoing enumeration and assignment of functions shall be construed to require the continued maintenance or furnishing of any governmental service which the council by ordinance has determined to be obsolete and unnecessary.

Nothing in this section shall be deemed to limit the power of the metropolitan government to exercise other governmental functions in either the urban services district or the general services district, or to provide new and additional governmental services in either the urban services district or the general services district.

[markhollin]

Metro area home values up $32,000 from last spring according to Zillow.

More at TheTennessean here:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/real-estate/2021/05/27/report-metro-nashville-home-values-up-32-k-last-spring/5183027001/

[nashville born]

I typically stay away from such topics.  I'm here for development info.  I feel compelled to add this.  I'm thinking of the spirit of the phrase, "affordable housing."  Maybe we should call it, "housing that's affordable to all."  To say if all available housing is purchased, then it was affordable, misses this spirit of the phrase, IMO.

I offer this. scenario.  In a market of 300,000 people, there is only one house available.  It's price tag is $60,000,000.  There  are three people who can afford it.  One buys it.  The rhetorical question: did that community have affordable housing?  If yours is a literal and/or pragmatic view, you'd likely say, yes.  If yours is a more theoretical and intuitive view, the answer is likely, no.

[rookzie]

3 hours ago, nashville born said:

I typically stay away from such topics.  I'm here for development info.  I feel compelled to add this.  I'm thinking of the spirit of the phrase, "affordable housing."  Maybe we should call it, "housing that's affordable to all."  To say if all available housing is purchased, then it was affordable, misses this spirit of the phrase, IMO.

I offer this. scenario.  In a market of 300,000 people, there is only one house available.  It's price tag is $60,000,000.  There  are three people who can afford it.  One buys it.  The rhetorical question: did that community have affordable housing?  If yours is a literal and/or pragmatic view, you'd likely say, yes.  If yours is a more theoretical and intuitive view, the answer is likely, no.

IMO, "housing that's affordable to all" likely is the implied meaning of "affordable housing".

In the hypothetical scenario presented, yes the $60M home indeed would be "affordable" by the semantic literal.  But also yes is the fact that it's "affordability"is very little,  based on the scenario parameters ─ affordability being only 1/1000 of 1 percent (0.001).  Those who would split hairs, as would a robot that responds only superficially to verbal commands and not contextually, would take the literal.  That's how those annoying, frustrating-a$$ call-center IVR (Interactive Voice Response) systems operate.

Although not EXplicitly elicited, "affordable housing"usually is understood to mean "Equitable Housing Development", the development/redevelopment of neighborhood housing that improves the quality of life for residents of all incomes and without displacement of low-income dwellers, in part as a result of increased housing values.  Just as you say, this would be the more intuitive view of "affordable housing" ─ housing with a high-rate of affordability".

I understand intuitively that's what you were intending to illustrate.

[markhollin]

Top realtors weigh-in on how the pandemic will effect Nashville area real estate over the next decade in NBJ feature:

https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2021/06/02/cre-leadership-award-winners-covid-impact.html