Showing posts with label Agriculture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Agriculture. Show all posts

Saturday, February 07, 2015

The urban market for local produce must support more and better agriculture than CSAs

Wendell Berry's daughter, Mary Berry, suggests that urban consumers can help leverage a new agrarian revolution:

Urban people’s interest in where their food comes from, and the quality of it—their worry about poisoned food, soil loss, toxicity, etc.—is a good thing. Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs), farmers markets, urban gardens, community gardens and school gardens are also all good. The worry, to me, is that all of this is entrepreneurial. Too many CSAs in any given area can make it hard for a farmer to sell enough CSA shares to get by. Our work is to try to get farmers out of a faddish economy.

The other day, I was talking to a friend of mine who had the first CSA in Kentucky. He was saying that the CSA is a great model for a young farmer. He paid off his farm with a CSA. (He had borrowed the money in the 1980s, at 13 percent interest.) But he said, “You know what? It’s a young person’s game.” And that’s true, simply because it’s really hard work. He’s 55 now, sustainably logging on his own land and doing fine, but do we want farmers to quit at 55? No. We need a place for farmers, an economy for them to function in.


Those of us who live in the urban core need to do more than visit the Farmers Market and buy CSA produce; we need to hold major distributors and big chains accountable, especially as they spout advertising about buying local. We're a vital link in this growing sustainable food chain of produce raised in Davidson County. We have to be informed and ready to spend sustainably and smart. It is a youthful market we can help age well.

Friday, January 23, 2015

Is the Farmers' Market growing more exclusive by jettisoning the flea market?

The Piraeus, home of ancient Greek schlock
In Plato's Republic, Socrates goes from Athens to the Piraeus, a port side passage where the masses thronged. He went down from high society to the places of parades and cheap entertainment. More importantly, it was the place of commoners, outsiders and those considered barbarians. From Plato:

I went down yesterday to the Piraeus with Glaucon the son of Ariston, that I might offer up my prayers to the goddess; and also because I wanted to see in what manner they would celebrate the festival, which was a new thing. I was delighted with the procession of the inhabitants; but that of the Thracians was equally, if not more, beautiful.

The Piraeus was a liminal space for a free philosopher of Athens: a threshold out of high society to the mundane world of people of much lower status. If Athens was the one, then the Piraeus was the many.

The Piraeus leaped to mind when I read the news that the North Capitol area Farmers' Market is now terminating its flea market in favor of what sound like bigger ticket vendors more stringently selected:

After spending more than a year visiting and collaborating with other successful markets across the country, the staff has developed a new system of standards that will ensure that shoppers will know the source of all items sold in the market and that the vendors will have been involved in the creation of their products.

“There are other places to go if you want a flea market experience,” says NFM Executive Director Tasha Kennard. "We recognized that in order to be the best market we can be we have to do things differently. The actions of the staff and the board show our commitment to and appreciation of the value of local farmers and products.”

What other flea markets exist within walking distance of North Capitol neighborhoods that allow the experience of the Farmers' Market adjoined by a great public park like Bicentennial Mall? I do not know of any. The article goes on to say that Farmers' Market flea market vendors are to be exiled to the Fairgrounds in south Nashville. Is a gated-community consciousness growing in North Nashville?

I'm not a buyer of kitsch, but I recognize that there is a reason it exists. It is a form of cheap art or expression that those middle-class-and-below can afford without a line of credit. Will those same commoners still be able to enter the Farmers' Market and browse with the idea of buying? It does not sound like it. A member of Urban Planet criticizes the move:

I agree that the produce and flowers should be local, but I disagree with kicking Flea Market vendors out. Growing up in the area - before it was hip and cool - the flea market has always been a part of the Nashville Farmers Market, even when it was on the other end of Bicentennial in open air tents. If the vendors pay their rent and don't sell knock off items, why should they have to move. I love going to the Asian couple tha has the $1 bins of little household items and wudknots. Many of these people make their livelihood at the Flea Market and displacing them because of a "few" that do not like cheaply made items is a shame. That's what a Flea Market is - I would rather have these vendors at a facility where they pay montly rent/taxes, than to have them posted up on the side of a road or in vacant lot selling their items, because that is what's going to happen.

So the Market will be displacing 50+ vendors in the flea market for a handful of "artisan" vendors that will sell $10 handmade soap, $20 soy made candles, and $30 hand-made scarfs. I'm all for supporting local-made products, but not everyone likes those type of things. Being that the market is located in a historically and predominantly black zip code, I would think they would want to cater to all residents - not just the folks in the new apartments, condos, and million dollar shotgun houses.

Their is plenty of space at the facility for everyone to coexist. They have already gone up on their rents three-fold now I guess this the last straw to kick them out [SIC].


I understand why many gentrifiers look down their noses at cheap tacky stuff that has been sold in the same place for decades, but I have no problem with flea markets because there are common goods that are higher than stuffy taste or stiff-necked wealth. Inclusiveness and respect are two such common goods.

What stands out to me is that First Tennessee Park, the Nashville Sounds' new ballpark, is specifically mentioned as a catalyst changes at the Farmers' Market. Some of us have warned that the new ballpark may not have the desired effect of growth in existing Jefferson Street businesses. Instead, it may leverage relocation of larger businesses that drive out the smaller ones. Is that good? It depends on what your expectations are. The Farmers' Market is like canary in a coal mine on that score.

Make no mistake: the Farmers' Market is a Metro owned public space. Make no mistake: if the Farmers' Market discourages buyers who cannot afford handmade artisan crafts, they will not visit the Farmers' Market, which will make it a less diverse place. Make no mistake: a space that no longer welcomes diversity, including class diversity, is no longer legitimately public.

I've been a neighbor of and a regular customer at the Farmers' Market for a decade since moving to Salemtown. I did not patronize the flea market, but I also never saw the need for it to go away. I do not understand why later arrivals (and apparently a neighborhood association) do.

By the way, I would be deliriously pleased if the Farmers' Market could certify that all of its produce comes from local, organic, family farms (like those in Scottsboro/Bells Bend) and not from Tennessee's powerful agribusiness plantations. I'm not deluded enough to believe that the schlock-haters are clamoring for a bridge that far. They seem satisfied enough with elbowing out the riff raff.


Disclaimer and full disclosure: This blog has been a donor to past efforts to preserve and to develop the Farmers' Market.

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Previously unpublished photos of the May 2010 Nashville flood indicate urbanizing Bells Bend was and is an idea fraught with peril

Recently, Bells Bend advocate Sumter Camp sent me 2010 flood photos that he has had stored away for almost 5 years. With the 5th anniversary of the Great Nashville Flood a few months away, it is worth reconsidering the impact of the flood on various communities.

Parts of the May properties, which were originally proposed to become a "second downtown" sprawling across the Bend would have been underwater if the Planning Commission had approved the build. Given that buildings and other impervious surfaces displace flood waters, the 2010 flood waters would have likely pushed further into the Bend if May Town Center had been allowed. As Nashville Next sets new goals for infill that have the potential to drive lower income people out of city neighborhoods, we should expect increasing pressures to urbanize our vanishing agricultural villages like Scottsboro/Bells Bend. The flood is a cautionary tale instructing us to organize and to push back against such pressure.

Advocates for protecting our agricultural areas like Bells Bend share complimentary interests with urban activists who demand affordable housing and rent controls in city neighborhoods. They should be building bridges to one another for the sake of common cause.

The caption descriptions are paraphrases of Sumter's own descriptions. I am grateful to him for giving us yet another look back at the 2010 catastrophe.

Cumberland River at the bottom with the right-hand bank
just outside of the last curving row of trees.
The power lines cross the southern-most corner of the May property.

Looking the opposite direction of the preceding photo.
John Tune Airport is at upper right. Charles Bass Prison is just below it
and to the right (water in between all of the pods).

Southern end of the Bend looking west. Old Hickory Blvd runs from right to left
just above the centerline of the photo. Partially flooded I-40 lies beyond.

Sunday, November 09, 2014

Bells Bend photos: Nashville's vanishing back country

Last week I attended a meeting in Bells Bend and was rewarded with breathtaking views from the home of one of the Bend's protective residents. While I have made many visits to Bells Bend over the years (the agricultural community is less than a 20 minute drive from Salemtown), this was the first time I had ever seen it from this vantage point.








Places like Bells Bend are always targeted by developers and planners for urbanization. Not too long ago developers wanted to put a second downtown on Bells Bend. A Democratic Party insider who currently runs the communication office of a declared candidate for the Mayor's Office supported that plan and impugned the community's culture as "sleepy" and referred to the nonmonetized value of the Bend as "dirt". Thank goodness such foolishness was turned back by a community that organized other neighborhoods to oppose the plan, built a network of farmers and entrepreneurs to provide proactive influence and encouraged Metro planners to consider a different vision.

As I surveyed the view of the undeveloped land between me and the Cumberland River, so close to downtown, I thought it would be a matter of time before the next developer lusted to pave over the natural beauty or some politico foolishly argued that there was nothing in the Bend. We need to be ready to defend the Bend again when they do.

Saturday, March 01, 2014

Friday, February 28, 2014

Whites Creek lost a battle but not yet the war

You can bet that these 43 lots are only Phase I.

Community opponents of Ole South development's plan to sprawl 43 suburban-style homes across previously tree-canopied rural properties held a brave stand at yesterday's Planning Commission public hearing, but they had the weight of law and zoning against them. As an outsider-looking-in with a little experience with planning process, it struck me as a long shot to stop Ole South from building a cluster subdivision approved by the Planning Department without any requirement to rezone.

And Ole South did not even bother to have one of their owners speak at the public hearing. Tom White, real estate lawyer and lobbyist, took care of the developers presentation and rebuttal (and Mr. White reserved his right vocally to end the public hearing with a rebuttal several times during his presentation). For their part, dozens and dozens of community opponents rose to speak against the subdivision to a commission that has been described to me as "the most developer-friendly commission in Nashville history".

Commission Chairman James McLean dished a not-so-veiled warning to opponents that he would stop the public hearing if speakers started repeating themselves because the commissioners wanted to get home at a reasonable hour. As if regular folks out in the gallery had not taken time out of their busy schedules, away from their families to sit for hours through other planning business that did not involve them in order to have their 2 minutes to speak their minds at what was ultimately the end of the meeting. As if commissioners have more important things to do than to hear the expressed interests of a Whites Creek community that is watching their character change without much control--beyond the hearing--over it. Given that most commission business involves relatively uncontroversial, unemotional work on planning, I thought Mr. McLean (who is himself a developer) showed little patience, humility or humor with that warning. Who isn't busy in their own personal lives nowadays, Mr. Chairman?

But the opponents stood out by emphasizing plural concerns, admitting and shortening their comments when they sensed that they were repeating what had already been said. The difference in the public presentations for and against could not be more stark. The emphasis from supporters of Ole South was strictly on the legal side of the argument: the company had complied with what zoning requires and they had toed the line Metro planners and CM Walter Hunt set for them, so at bare minimum they deserved to build their cluster lots. Their basic message was that they achieved the lowest common denominators developers have to, and they saw no need to strive for anything higher than their bottom line.

For their part, the opponents of Ole South appealed to a wide range of arguments to make the basic case that they expect development (no one whom I heard expressed NIMBYism), but they wanted something higher than what developers were offering. They appealed to their history, to consistency with the village-like character of Whites Creek, to the idea of quality in building materials, to the common sense notion of fairness that they ought to have the same planning opportunities as other communities, to environmental protection, to a unique and attractive culture comparable with few other places (Bells Bend, Leipers Fork were mentioned), to tourism, to the culture of land and green space and to their diverse community. Their appeals were thick and rich compared to the rather cold, calculated and cynical statements by an attorney who seemed to me ready to pull a trigger on a lawsuit if Ole South did not get commission approval.

Keep in mind that Tom White is the same lawyer who told the Tennessean that the suburban sprawl plan had plenty of community support for passage. The turnout of opponents at the public hearing proved that false. Tom White is also same lawyer who argued at last week's Whites Creek community meeting that he believed commission support for the plan was "highly likely".

This particular statement from the Old South side proved to be true, but not before questions were raised, mostly by commissioner Stewart Clifton, who acknowledged CM Hunt's interest in approving the plan while also asserting his interest in making sure that Ole South was consistent with the properties on the same side of the streets it would sit on. CM Hunt seemed to want to refer the commission to a completely different development rather than consider the streetside consistency. Mr. Clifton wanted to defer until he could get some answers from planning on whether creating 43 plots was consistent with the adjacent properties. Chairman McLean denied Mr. Clifton a vote on a deferral, called for a vote on CM Hunt's motion to approve the Ole South plan (amended to prohibit duplexes) and the commission voted 4-2 to approve.

It is worth noting that Mr. Clifton pointed out that 3 commissioners who "should be" voting on the Ole South bid were not present. One of those was Andree LeQuire, who had sent a request announced to the commission for a deferral of Old South's plan because she wanted more information about the water and sewer infrastructure Ole South was planning. Chairman McLean waved all of that off before holding the vote to approve.

But there is another significant, but understated fallout from this hearing. During Mr. Clifton's questions, Planning Director Rick Bernhardt noted that the commission had asked for urban character infill regulations but had not requested rural character infill regulations from planners. It was acknowledged that Ole South's approval hinged on old, outdated zoning regs and that there was a lack of infill regs for agricultural communities. After the vote, Mr. Bernhardt asked the commission whether they wanted Planning to pursue those regulations and I did not hear much of a response. Might this be where a concerned Whites Creek community can wage their next battle for growth consistent their community character? They lost this battle, but there still seems to me a war to wage in defense of their way of life. Ole South's holdings in Whites Creek are much larger and perhaps Metro Planning needs more prompting for infill regulations before the developers completely suburbanize backcountry.

In the end, this proposal was CM Walter Hunt's to lose. As ugly as the Whites Creek community meeting was, as impressive as the turnout to the public hearing was, CM Hunt seemed to have Metro planners (in fairness, Planning's hands seemed tied) and commission votes on his side. He did not need to do much compromising with constituents to get approval. Having a land holdings lawyer pounding away on what was legal from the podium is also effective leverage, given that Metro is likely not looking to get caught up in one more lawsuit. While CM Hunt promised to have a historical survey of the properties conducted (no traffic study has been done), I was disappointed myself that he did not at least extend an offer to opponents to start working to revise their outdated community plan, which is a reasonable request regardless of Ole South.

Moreover, take a look at how CM Hunt's campaign for office has been the beneficiary of donors with direct interests in land development, construction, new housing starts and housing market. Follow the money form some of the donors I culled from his campaign finance records since 2011:


  • Robert Colson, real estate broker and property auctioneer ($100)
  • Tom Cone, Sr., owner of Cone Oil convenience stores ($1,000)
  • Roy Dale, engineer to developers ($250)
  • Howard Eley, Jr., highways and ramps contractor ($250)
  • Joe Hall, lobbyist for cable telecommunications assc. ($200)
  • Ronald Ligon, Realtor ($500) and Susan Ligon ($500)
  • Alexander Marks, developer ($250)
  • William Massey, Jr., electrical contractor ($100)
  • Jim McLean, developer and Planning Commission Chair ($100)
  • Gregory Richardson, developer ($500)
  • John Ring, developer ($500)
  • Glen Wallis, Realtor ($100)
  • L.H. Hardaway, Jr. construction company owner ($100)
  • William Freeman, real estate investment company owner ($100)
  • James Smith, developer ($250)
  • Bernard Werthan, developer ($100)
  • Feller Brown, realty and auction company owner ($100)
  • Odell Binkley, waste management ($100)
  • H.G. Hill Realty, PAC ($100)
  • Tennessee Realtors, PAC ($250)
  • Precision Plumbing, Whites Creek ($1,000)


That kind of money is more incentive to shepherd subdivision plans through rather than incorporate community concerns if one is not required to. This list is something for the rest of us to keep in mind should CM Hunt run for at-Large council in the future. He may be our council member someday.

But there is also something else to keep in mind as far as I am concerned. One of the supporters of Ole South said during last night's public hearing, "Whatever Walter Hunt wants, Walter Hunt should get." That prospect itself is troubling given campaign finance, because it won't be just what Walter Hunt wants. It will also be what his most influential campaign donors want.

And those of us without the money (or the community organization) to keep up with his donors will likely be left behind.

Monday, February 24, 2014

Why I support the Whites Creek community against Ole South developers

What: Public Hearing at Metro Planning Commission - MPC will vote to allow or disallow subdivision. There will be an opportunity for public comment.
Where:  Sonny West Conference Building (1st Floor)
700 2nd Ave S.
When:  Wed Thu Feb 27th  4:00PM

After attending the Whites Creek community meeting last week I decided to support rural opponents of a suburban sprawl development of over 40 homes across 11 acres just outside of northern Briley Parkway.

It is unfortunate enough that their council representative, Walter Hunt, has not made efforts to support Whites Creek residents in formulating a community plan consistent with their priorities and the community's character. It is also unfortunate that the planning staff is going to recommend that the Planning Commission (which I am told has a developer-bias unlike any previous commission) approve this sprawl plan.

Oddly enough, the big thing in planning at the moment is "New Urbanism," which emphasizes reducing car trips, creating walkable neighborhoods, maintaining safer streets. Metro Planning Director Rick Bernhardt not only serves in the Congress of New Urbanism, but he was a signatory of the original charter. This proposal does not seem to fit with New Urbanism at all. Expanding relatively unwalkable suburbia will only increase car trips and traffic on the roads what will lead to unsafer streets.

But Metro Planning supports this because it fits with the designated "use" and with the zoning, both of which could have been informed by a community plan, which has been refused to Whites Creek. Instead, Whites Creek was folded in with Bordeaux for a plan that was last updated in 2003. Lumping rural and suburban areas into one outdated plan is an invitation to encourage the growth of suburbia, not the preservation and smart growth of rural communities.

Those of you who have returned to this blog over the years know that I was an energetic supporter of preserving rural Bells Bend against developers' plans to build "a second downtown" with a corporate campus across its remote, rolling pasturelands. I am told by community leaders there that Metro Planning does not always grasp the priorities of "preservation and limited development" in rural areas.

That may be the case in Whites Creek, too. Maybe Metro Planning just cannot see anything but the inevitable march of suburbia northward. Or maybe they do see it and prefer to bow to the clout of developers and lawyers instead. Either way, the community does not seem to be sitting back and taking it. They are organizing and writing council members and the Planning Commission with these goals in mind:


  1. Do not allow Ole South to develop this land into a subdivision on the grounds that is out of Whites Creek’s rural character. Seeing a subdivision as soon as you get off Briley Parkway onto White Creek pike will irreversibly change the value and character of our neighborhood. We want to remain a rural residential and agricultural area north of Briley Parkway, not suburbia.
  1. No more subdivision developments or re-zonings until we have a revision of our Community Design Plan.  Our community plan is 10 years old and our community deserves the opportunity to plan for growth the way other neighborhoods have.
  2. Nashville has made a commitment to open space preservation and environmental sustainability. The Whites Creek watershed is the cleanest watershed in Davidson County and subdivisions such as the one proposed increase soil erosion and contributes to flooding due to clear cutting of trees....
  3. Local food and farming is of increasing importance and Whites Creek can be a critical food hub for the city. We have an emerging agrarian economy here in Whites Creek with 15 farmer and friends of farmers that make up the Whites Creek Farmers Alliance.
  4. The proposed subdivision is of low quality. The selling price will be 40% lower than the average new home price in Nashville and 32% lower than the average new home price in the Whites Creek area. Parmley Cove, the most recent development, has only 3 homes built so far due to lack of market demand and the clear cutting of trees has caused run off and flooding of neighboring homes. The sidewalk is already broken. It is a blight and an eye sore. These subpar developments will only lower our property values.


The last three points are also relevant to me as one of their urban neighbors. When it comes to the environment, all of us live within a web of interdependence. Whites Creek eventually flows to the Cumberland River. If Whites Creek is polluted, it adds to the pollution of the Cumberland. Also, we need more, not less, green space to enjoy the benefits thereof. How much more expensive is it to remediate brown fields for new green space rather than leaving that which is already open untouched?

Bells Bend has become a hub for produce, particularly for hops grown for use by the local brewers at Yazoo. Why would Nashvillians want to cut themselves off from more sources of fresh produce in Whites Creek? We should be promoting local farmers and CSAs over suburban sprawl.

The new broken Parmley Cove sidewalk
Any time developers are allowed to build low quality anywhere, it brings down quality everywhere, and it only encourages them to continue elsewhere. Next time they might be in your neighborhood, and in mine, too.

There are two other reasons why an urban resident like me supports Whites Creek opponents of Ole South developers (who own 100 more Whites Creek acres beyond the proposed development). One is that a new suburban development will be a greater source of competition for Metro services and infrastructure in an era of shrinking Metro budget returns to communities. Do you notice how Nashville is said to be growing and expanding with the justification that the tax base also increases? Yet, we are unable to fund more after all of this growth. The Mayor seems to demand budget cuts to services every year. So, why should we believe that yet one more suburban development is going make a difference? How will it be anything else but more competition with other neighborhoods for transit lines, schools, parks and libraries?

Finally, supporters of suburban sprawl should not enjoy the opportunity to disqualify Whites Creeks residents as "just being NIMBY." That is a tired old slander that usually does not represent what people really think. The preservation of Bells Bend was made more legitimate by support from neighbors from all over Nashville. I listened to the people of Whites Creek make their case against Ole South firsthand. I was persuaded that their cause is anything but NIMBY. They can use other voices, even voices from the urban core neighborhoods, supporting their cause to keep the developers from at the very least impugning their motives. At most, neighbors should have more influence over the future growth of their community.

On Wednesday Thursday we will see whether the Planning Commission acknowledges their influence.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Contentious community meeting held in Whites Creek

"I've lived here a long time. I get it. Anything Nashville does not want gets dumped on us in northern Davidson County."
-- Whites Creek resident to Ole South developers


Tonight at the KIPP school building in the Whites Creek area, Metro Council member Walter Hunt held a community meeting between concerned residents and developers of a proposed vinyl-clad suburban development on Green Lane and Whites Creek Pike. I counted over 50 people in attendance for the hour I was there. And the meeting was still chugging along when I had to leave.

Walter Hunt
CM Hunt opened the meeting by saying that Ole South developers and land owners approached him about 2 weeks ago about building on 11.8 acres of rural, tree-covered property. He told the group that he stipulated that homes should not be marketed for more than $200,000 because $300,000 homes would not sell when built next to cheaper properties. Walter Hunt is chair of the council's Planning and Zoning Committee, which gives him an influential seat on the Planning Commission, which is set to consider this proposal on February 27. Suffice to say he wields some influence in that position, and developers likely show him deference.

Tom White, well-known local land use lawyer and registered lobbyist for the Home Builders Association of Middle TN, followed CM Hunt. He mainly emphasized that since this is not a rezoning request no councilmanic action was needed. He said that Planning Commission approval of the "cluster-lot development" is "a high likelihood". In fact, he insisted at least 3 times by my count, and it eventually drew the ire of at least one resident, who said that it seemed to him that the deal was done and that the neighbors attended for nothing. He also wondered aloud (rhetorically?) whether the public should bother attending the February 27 public meeting where it was on the agenda.

Someone--I can't remember whether is was the land-use lawyer or CM Hunt--responded that residents can still attend the planning meeting and "say whether they like or don't like" the plan. But again, Mr. White reiterated that in his opinion, approval was "highly likely", because Metro planners see that the proposal fits the land use.

At one point Mr. White told the group that 90% of each home's exterior would be "masonry products" (like brick or cement fiberboard) and less than 10% vinyl. Later when a builder was discussing the exterior materials he said that the lawyer had misunderstood him. In fact, only the front of the homes would have masonry materials (and only 80%). The other three sides would be constructed of vinyl siding, a disclosure that drew visible expressions of shock and groans in the crowd. One resident responded that the 3 vinyl sides took away any excitement he might have had initially for the plan. "We don't need that," he told the builders.

Other questions launched from the floor at the development team included how the design was going to handle stormwater and what would happen if the homeowners association planned by the team did not take care of the open spaces (Metro would take them over). People were talking over one another to the point where CM Hunt stepped in and told the group to wait until Q&A to ask the team questions that could also be written down and presented at the Planning Commission meeting. Someone in the audience replied to CM Hunt, "We're not stupid, you know."

Community leader Alicia Batson told the development team that the group is concerned about protecting their "absolutely beautiful" pastureland and their watershed, which is the cleanest in Davidson County. She told the group that she had done her own research and found out that the average selling price of new construction homes in the county is $336,000 (2013) and that the average for the Whites Creek area is $296,000 (2013). To CM Hunt's earlier point she said, "The homes you say aren't worth much are going to increase in value if more expensive real estate is built around them." She said she would like to see Whites Creek develop more like Leipers Fork has.

When Alicia ended by saying of the proposal, "We don't need this here," applause broke out. I looked around the room. Nearly every person I saw was either applauding or nodding their heads. They all looked to me like they were on the same page in opposition to this plan for sprawl.

Another neighbor picked up where Alicia left off and told the developers and council member that the design needed to be an attractor to families and needed to be a positive force in improving Whites Creek schools. And she did not miss a beat. "We have got to get a community plan done," a point no doubt meant for Walter Hunt, who has failed to help them produce a community plan. Again, applause ensued.

A young couple who had lived in East Nashville said that they relocated to Whites Creek especially for the more rural setting with less dense space for their family and pets. One of them pointed at the developers' plans and said, "I don't want that anywhere near our house."

The builders seemed uncompromising in spite of all of the pleas the neighbors were making. Whites Creek residents seemed to be acknowledging, in some cases welcoming, development as long as it is suited to the character and priorities of their community. I did not detect NIMBY by any measure. They seemed to find this product unsuitable, and they wanted something consistent with Whites Creek. I am not very hopeful about compromise in the Planning Commission process because of developers' inflexibility.

In one case they came off as arrogant. Many in the group seemed particularly resistant to the Ole South builder's claim that he plans $200,000 houses because he believes in gradual price gradations between neighborhoods.

"You've got to have a transition. $150,000, then $175,000, $200,000 and so on. You've got to have a transition," he claimed in response to a room of shaking heads and audible disagreement.

"No. That's not how it works," a woman in the crowd insisted.

Before she could get her next words out he exclaimed, "Oh my gosh, woman, I've built 9,000 houses in Tennessee. I should know."

That the builder seemed to be putting the "Ole" in "Ole South" by his dismissive, sexist pillory did not seem to sit well with the gathering. All around me I heard expressions of "Woman?!" and "How rude" and "He didn't need to insult her."

While he offered up a raggedy apology, I thought, "This guy is not concerned at all about his chances of winning this fight." He went after her even after CM Hunt had already lectured the group about being diplomatic. I did notice that Mr. Hunt failed to encourage the builder himself toward a show of respect and tact. If I were Mr. Hunt's constituent I might be insulted by that failure as well.



UPDATE: In his comment below Mike Peden says that previously Ole South dumped similar $200,000 vinyl-sided [see "editorial note" below] homes in an Antioch subdivision "full of $300,000" homes. That would contradict Ole South's claim last night that it builds incrementally up from the lowest priced homes in the area. Why didn't the builder start with building $350,000 homes in Antioch if they honestly "have transition" when they build new homes?
  • Editorial note--Mike P. sent me the following clarification on the Antioch homes after I posted this update.
  • The homes Ole South built in the Apple Valley subdivision are all brick (we bought one of them), but they are much lower quality than the homes that were already there. One of our neighbors asked Old South if they would modify the house they built next door to them so it would better match the other homes in their cul-de-sac, and Ole South refused. They have 4 homes under construction now on our street – the homes are built from kits – everything is delivered to the site and then assembled.
  • Additionally, an anonymous commenter challenges Mike's claims that the homes in Antioch were listed at $300,000.


UPDATE: Tennessean business/real estate reporter Getahn Ward wrote a promotional piece on Ole South's planned development last month and he quoted Tom White as saying that he was not expecting any community opposition. It does not seem to me that the lawyer had a factual read on the pulse of the community. And did the reporter merely take Tom White's word for it without actually checking and verifying the question of opposition for himself?


UPDATE: Embarrassing. Last summer Ole South only cleaned up their blighted properties in Whites Creek after neighbors called a local news station for more leverage. They were apparently running down the Whites Creek community months before they ever hatched their plan to sprawl on it. You know who is conspicuously absent from this video tape on deteriorating conditions in his district? CM Walter Hunt.





I have said it over and over on this blog. If developers want to build credibility with a neighborhood (granted, maybe they don't care to), then they should not run afoul of those neighbors during times they are not developing. Like when they are just maintaining properties they own. If Ole South is an irresponsible neighbor in maintaining empty lots, can you expect them to suddenly become responsible in clearing lots and building houses?

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Whites Creek leaders mobilize to slow suburban sprawl across their rural community

I received emails from concerned leaders in the farming community around White's Creek Pike above Briley Parkway in far North Nashville. They are alarmed about a high density suburban-style development slated for consideration at Metro Planning. They tell me that CM Walter Hunt is sponsoring a community meeting Wednesday (Feb. 19) at 6:00p at KIPP Academy Nashville (3420 Knight Drive) to discuss the plans with the developer.

I took a closer look at the area above Briley Pkwy, bounded by Whites Creek and I-24 on the sides. I was immediately struck by the contrast in a satellite view between the backcountry appearance north of Briley relative to the suburban sprawl that lies below Briley and to the east and to the west.


Nashville's shrinking metropolitan farmlands

Remarkably, this relatively unspoiled green space is not very far from our home in urban core Salemtown, but the contrast could not be more stark.

Nonetheless, the leaders deserve our support because if the community planning process is compromised for any neighbors it is compromised for all neighbors.

An excerpt from an alert sent today from leaders to the community:

A new subdivision is coming to Whites Creek - 43 houses on 11.8 acres (1 house per ¼ acre) on the northeast corner of Green Lane and Whites Creek Pike (the entrance to Whites Creek from Briley Pkwy).

Cornerstone Land Company, the owner of the property, has been buying land throughout Whites Creek, now owning 128.5 acres. They are seeking a subdivision permit from the Planning Commission for 11.8 of these acres and have contracted with Murfreesboro developer, Ole South Development. Since this pristine, tree covered land is zoned R10 (1 house per ¼ acre), they could develop the remaining 116 acres into 464 more homes. We must act now!

Whites Creek, north of Briley Parkway, is a beautiful, rural area. If this development is approved, high density, suburban housing will be your first impression upon exiting Briley Parkway onto WCP....

Our council representative, Walter Hunt, has the power to stop this development and put a moratorium on future developments until our community has the opportunity to update our community design plan the way other neighborhoods in Nashville have. Councilman Hunt has allowed ours to go unrevised for over 10 years. We have the oldest plan in Davidson County!

Please keep this on your radars. If Metro muscle tramples over the interests of Nashville's rural residents (who simply want the same community planning opportunities most of us enjoy), they may need our support.

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Bells Bend farms live, May Town development is dead

I have steadfastly followed the prospects of the residents of Bells Bend for several years now. Including news last year that Nashville Yazoo micro-brewery had developed a partnership with local organic farmers to bring hops to local beer production.

Of course, what spurred my interest in Bells Bend long before that was the cause to save the farmland from May Town developers who wanted to flip it into a second downtown without regard for community planning or the wishes of Scottsboro-Bell Bend who would have been displaced by developers's sprawl. The developers put a full court press on North Nashville to try and convince us that the trickle-down jobs that would result would benefit us. Many of us here did not buy the pitch. West Nashvillians who would have been inundated by extra traffic resulting from three new state-built bridges across the Cumberland River also had something to say about the matter. And many, many other Nashvillians were sympathetic because they knew it could have just as easily been them facing bulldozers and unsmart growth. Opponents of May Town grew and galvanized to support the cause.

Now a whole lot of people beyond concerned neighborhood leaders are celebrating the partnership between Yazoo and Bells Bend. Check out Nashville Scene on the bandwagon:


In this autumn's batch of Yazoo Brewing Co.'s pale ale, one flavorful adjective will trump the rest: local. Because the bright-citrus-and-cilantro-scented hints of fresh-cut grass on the head of the limited edition Bells Bend Preservation Ale come courtesy of hops grown in the fertile fields of Davidson County ....

In recent years, the rural area, minutes from downtown, has been the target of development efforts, such as the proposed May Town project. Residents objected to the mixed-use development, fearing it would flood their quiet country roads with traffic and end life as they knew it in the bucolic acres near Scottsboro. They organized, branding their cause with the lyrical logo of whooping cranes, in honor of two endangered birds that took up residence in a Bells Bend field.

The May Town controversy subsided when city officials denied approval for the project, but the whooping crane remains a symbol of the community's commitment to preserving its open spaces and agriculture. This fall, the bird is also the symbol of Yazoo's dry-hopped beer.


The May Town drama did not just subside because of city officials who did not go along. It also ground to a halt because of the hard work and organizing of neighborhoods across Nashville who wrote letters, cajoled council members and commissioners, showed up for every public meeting, and held their own meetings to strategize against the public relations campaign conducted by wealthy developers, pitch men, and lawyers. I tried to document as much of the story as possible here on Enclave because I do not believe it should be forgotten.

I'll continue to watch the annual celebrations of Bells Bend--which now has a sustainable, self-perpetuating relationship with a successful local entrepreneur--content in the knowledge that I joined something larger than myself, a throng of other leaders whose conviction to save rural Bells Bend from urban sprawl made these days possible. I am thankful for that.


UPDATE: Upon further reflection, I remembered how proponents of protecting Bells Bend (agri)culture were labelled "NIMBY" ("Not In My Back Yard") and cast as negative for opposing May Town. It was always clear to me that the neighborhood leaders taking on the developers were positive, progressive actors in the story and that they were "QIMBY" ("Quality In My Back Yard"). Quality is exactly what they got in the organic production of hops for Yazoo to craft a new line of ale.

Saturday, December 24, 2011

May Town team breaking down and confirming suspicions of some

Partners in the development team Jack May put together around two years ago to urbanize Bells Bend, build a "second downtown" on farmland, and suffuse the small community with automobile traffic with 1-3 bridges, allege now that Mr. May was committing fraud and exercising irresponsible conduct. Here is part of the account:

According to [plaintiff Jeffrey] Zeitlin, when he and William Kantz entered into a partnership agreement with the Mays, they were led to believe that Jack May was retired in Mexico and “would help fund the project.”

Zeitlin contends, however, several misrepresentations by the Mays ultimately led to the crumbling of the partnership and the development plan.

According to the lawsuit, the Mays made an “unconditional promise” to gift certain land in Bells Bend to Tennessee State University — land that the partnership didn’t own.

“The Defendants did not make the gift as promised to TSU and did not intend to make the gift when the Defendants extended the promise,” the lawsuit reads. “As a result, the Partnership’s good will and Zeitlin’s interest therein was damaged.”

Zeitlin makes a similar claim involving a bridge that Jack May told the city of Nashville he would “write a check” for, to help boost the proposed development.

The lawsuit also claims that the Mays added partners in breach of the partnership agreement and failed to account for Zeitlin’s capital contributions to the partnership.


This is not the first time questions have been raised about the business dealings of Jack May or the advantages he enjoyed with the help from others. In 2008, we learned that long-time office holder Democrat Gary Odom was able to obstruct the Governor's Office from closing a tax loophole that allowed business partners who were related to each other to escape taxes in the billions on property and in the hundreds of millions on profits. Odom helped the May brothers make a killing on their business. A reporter observed, "May and the rest of the Bells Bend development crowd gave campaign cash to Odom, who then gave it to Democratic lawmakers running for reelection, who then voted to make Odom their new leader in the House."

When the Bells Landing team did not get the vote they wanted from the Metro Planning Commission after Jim Gotto (a GOP advocate for the Mays) called to end debate after a long public hearing in order to vote, they requested special consideration from Planning for another vote. May Town Center opponents squeaked by with a single-vote win, but if they had so lost, the chances were slim that they would have garnered the same reconsideration. Luckily, according to one witness present at the meeting to vote on a re-vote, the developers backed down when they saw they did not have the votes present:

Observers said Jack May stood in the audience talking on his cell the phone before the meeting and seemed to be scanning the commissioners present. There did not appear to be sufficient votes present in favor MTC. Immediately before the meeting started, he walked over to the staff table and asked that his proposal to reconsider be withdrawn. Shortly afterwards, some two dozen opponents from Bells Bend adjourned to the parking lot for strategy discussions.


After the 2009 Planning Commission vote, editorializing stories curiously appeared in a local African-American paper making claims about community support without reference to data. Likewise, some on Mays' team selectively applied polling data on the question of developing Bells Bend without reference to the whole picture. Advertisements went out indicating that Jefferson Street would be revitalized by May Town Center, but according to one neighborhood leader, Jack May seemed to distance himself from the ads during a West Nashville community meeting sponsored by Emily Evans.

These events have been characterized by bobbing and weaving by developers from the beginning. We shouldn't be surprised to see that, as the Bells Landing team fractures (we may never know the exact constitution of the team), they begin charging one another with deception. Many of us who opposed May Town Center insisted all along that we were being sold a bill of goods rather than a viable community plan.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Bells Bend farmers & Yazoo Brewing Co. giving a more progressive meaning to "development"

The Tennessean has the good news on the first locally brewed beer to be brewed with locally grown hops:

this is the first time [farmer Eric Wooldridge] has produced a substantial amount of hops for brewing .... The next growing season, Wooldridge said, he plans to plant even more hops, and Yazoo intends to continue making beer with them.

“They’ve found a varietal they can grow out there,” said Neil McCormick, Yazoo’s director of marketing. “And the thing with hops is they keep coming back stronger and stronger.”

Meanwhile, the farm and Yazoo will celebrate their first batch with the Bells Bend Hops Festival and Square Dance on Saturday. It’s an event Wooldridge also hopes to grow — maybe even incorporating home brewers — in the years to come.

For those who can’t make the party, McCormick said some of the 18 kegs of Bells Bend Preservation Ale also will be served at the brewery’s annual Family Picnic and eighth anniversary bash on Oct. 1 ....

with its hops grown just a 20-minute drive from downtown, Bells Bend Preservation Ale serves as a reminder that we’re a town both cosmopolitan and farm-country.

“It’s a good way to raise awareness,” Hall said, “of what they’re trying to do in Bells Bend.”


There is a fledgling agricultural/urban market here for growing, producing, and buying locally that does not need to be interrupted with cockeyed developers' urbanized designs for Scottsboro-Bells Bend. This is the kind of conservationist alternative consistent with the vision and the community plans of May Town Center opponents who were once hated on and charged with "holding back progress." The haters should acknowledge that local sustainability and small-scale niche growth is progress consistent with community-based principles.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Hops (as other local produce) require dirt to grow. Who knew?

Last March the Bells Bend blogger at Sulphur Creek Farm hinted at the hop project they were working on with local micro-brewer Yazoo Brewing Company:

I came home from hospital rounds to an empty bean-pot, and at least eight bean-stained bowls. Tom, Jim, Keith, Keith's friend, Sumter, and maybe Joe spent most of the day in the drizzle, laying down mulch, planting hops, and hanging string vine supports

Fast forward to last week, which seemed like happy harvest time for both Sulphur Creek and Yazoo families:

Came home yesterday to hops harvest: Keith's second year crop looks really good. Tom hoisted someone with a machete up in the tractor's front end loader to cut the strings and bring the vines down.

By the time I arrived, folks were gathered in front of the shed (ok, around the beer cooler) pulling the flowers off the vines--fragrant green thumb-sized stacks of petals. Yazoo plans to use the hops fresh for a small run of Bells Bend Ale ....

Linus and Lila Hall from Yazoo Brewery, and their two blonde daughters, were on hand ....

First hops harvest! And our thanks to the good folks at Yazoo, whose products have promoted social interaction (and some fundraising!) at the farm for many years.

Supporting local agriculture and local business is a good thing. I checked with Yazoo owner Linus Hall who says that Bells Bend Ale will be available in about three weeks.

Would this unique venture be possible if the Planning Commission and Metro Council had approved Jack May's rezoning scheme to sprawl a "second Downtown" across his and other partners' large holdings on the Bend with contempt for the community plan? Would a rural-scale partnership producing for a small batch micro-brew be possible with large bridges providing choking vehicular traffic over the Cumberland River to the Bend via the Charlotte Park neighborhood and points farther west?

While it may not fit urban Nashville, this is the kind of diverse, locally structured enterprise that the Scottsboro-Bells Bend community plan seems to promote. So, why ruin a good thing with city scale and urban density? Maybe because you believe that Bells Bend's unique lifeworld does not rise much above the level of dirt:

May, the owner of lots of dirt in the rural West Nashville community, tried in vain last year to gain approval of the Metro Council to have a four billion dollar privately funded mixed-use development to be named May Town.
Guess the dirty hippies didn't get their invitations.
While the developer of that project decided it wasn't worth the hassle, May is stubbornly sticking to the plan of turning the sleepy Bells Bend community into a thriving mini-metropolis [instead of a venue for "dirty hippies"].

Maybe this particular commentator won't be purchasing Bells Bend Ale since it does not produce as many jobs as a corporate savior would, but I intend to buy some and not just because Yazoo makes great beer. This is an enterprise that I would like to see deepen and grow. Watch for Bells Bend Ale and support our local agriculture by buying some in a few weeks.

And do a little rain dance for our friends in the Bells Bend Neighborhood Farms project. I understand their crops could use some rain.

Sunday, July 03, 2011

Vanderbilt University accused of bankrolling African land grab and exploitation of farmers

When I was a university student, one of the prominent movements of our time was the one to pressure universities to divest from South Africa over apartheid. Now there appears to be a new form of exploitation of Africans and once again universities are invested and show no indication of divesting themselves without organized pressure from within their community. One of those institutions is Vanderbilt:

Monday, February 14, 2011

Fairgrounds Fixed to Fail

Enclave commenter fleamarketmom has been reading the Fairgrounds e-mails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, posted at Google Docs. She discovers more indications of how the Fairgrounds was set up for failure:

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Let's hope it is the final nail to keep the zombie in the coffin

Nashville Urban Organizer Sarah Bellos interviewed with other food activists this week in the Tennessean:
"In 2010, with the nail in the coffin of May Town Center, citizens from Bells Bend to Bordeaux exercised their right to speak out and protect the foundation of our food system — land. Nashvillians joined a national and global effort to protect what may be some of our most productive and crucial growing space: the land right at the urban fringe. Add to that cohesive local school food and community gardening efforts across the city and we have begun a foundation for increasing our food sustainability and security in Nashville.

Tuesday, May 04, 2010

2010 Nashville flood: Bells Bend farmers take their lumps

A tale of natural disaster and woe from the rural side of Nashville:
It rained. And rained. Something like 9 inches in less than 36 hours. Sulphur Creek was raging, crashing over our bridges and creating rivers running through our pastures. Land on both sides flooded, with a heavy three foot-deep current gnawing away at our compost mountains.

Our tiny side creek, usually a meandering two feet across, roared over its little bridge and made its own river about 70 feet wide, running both into the creek and down into the driveway.

We spent much of the morning drenched, as we slogged around moving things to higher ground: buckets, tools, beehives.

Fletcher called, worried about his chickens. The creek was cascading over the guard rails by the train trestle, intermittently blocking the road into the Bend. The chicks were ok, but the neighbors living in their basement were not, and the boys helped them move their furniture upstairs.

The Cumberland at Clees Ferry was up nearly to the top of the boat ramp, and later, I'm told, flooded far up the road, including the sod farm. This morning I passed semi-trailers completely under water at the Gun Club, and our side of Briley is closed, along with White Bridge Road.

We are counting our losses: substantial for us, but small compared to others in the area. Mainly, all 240 shitake logs, representing a massive amount of work by Eric the Farmer and his buddies, are on their way to the Gulf of Mexico. Think cutting trees, hauling them out of the woods, cutting them up into 240 4-foot sections, and drilling and packing with mushroom spawn, then stacking and re-stacking. That work has all just floated away.

Our raging pasture river pulled down about a hundred feet of 8-foot fencing, and, of course, the farm road is pitted and scarred and scattered with twenty-pound rocks carried here from somewhere upstream.
Jump over to read the rest. It isn't all bad.

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

The $400,000 Question, Still Unanswered

Will Jack May and his family keep their promise to donate part of their Bells Bend holdings (worth a cool $400K) to Tennessee State University for an agricultural research facility even though they have withdrawn their proposal for May Town Center?


UPDATE: MTC point man Tony Giarratana tells the Nashville Business Journal:
May Town Center is an important issue for Nashville-Davidson County, but particularly critical for North Nashville and Tennessee State University ....
Is he suggesting that the TSU donation depends upon building MTC? Why else would MTC be critical for TSU if the donation is going to be made as promised whether MTC is built or not?

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Development Components vs.Democratic Qualities

In The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture, Wendell Berry gets real about coercion of assimilating family farms into an industrial agribusiness market. He also addresses how the fiction of development models assign a regimented division of activities to peoples lives under the guise of liberty. His realism applies to Metro Planning's new beatific vision of an urbanized Bells Bend with the May Town Center development:
It is clear, at least, that official policies ... have come to be routinely justified in this country on grounds that they will uphold freedom, dignity, and equality of opportunity .... But these assurances are always incidental, outside the boundary of whatever allegedly benign (and profitable) innovation is at hand. People are not going to be free or dignified or even well fed just because some specialist says that they will be .... People will be allowed to be free to do certain things in certain places prescribed by other people. They will be free to work in the places set aside for work, free to play or relax in places set aside for recreation, free to live (whatever that may mean) in places set aside for living.

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

TSU Being Paid to Promote May Town Center Sprawl to Alumni in District of Proposed Development

Tennessee State students are being paid to lobby Metro voters to support MTC, and the university is not anywhere close to taking control of flood plain donated by Bells Landing Partners, LLC:
TSU confirms it can't accept the land until it first forms a nonprofit research corporation, nor can it build the agricultural research center it wants unless City Council rezones the land.

A contract between TSU and the developers of the controversial May Town project shows that TSU students have been hired for an outreach project. They're contacting "strategic TSU alumni" living within the district where the May Town project is to be built.

Developer Tony Giarratana doesn't like to use the word "lobbying."

"Students and the faculty that are involved with us ... are focused on awareness, making sure that the TSU alumni know of this good news," said Giarratana.
TSU is being paid nearly $50,000 under this contract.

Barry Sulkin, who opposes the May Town development, said people have a right to promote the project.

"If someone is being paid to promote something, that should at least be disclosed as part of their promotion," Sulkin said.
TSU is handing its list of 10,000 alumni to the developers. Has that list also been turned over to outside push polling corporations, given recent reports of pro-MTC push polling across Nashville?


HT: Brenda Butka