Previously unpublished photos of the May 2010 Nashville flood indicate urbanizing Bells Bend was and is an idea fraught with peril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

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.

2. 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.
3. 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....
4. 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.
5. 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.

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?

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.

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.

Hey, West Nashville, do you know what Sarah Lodge Tally meant?

Jeremy Kane did a bang-up job of live tweeting the debate between CM Jason Holleman and Bredesenista challenger Sarah Lodge Tally last night. At one point in the debate, Kane quoted Tally as saying of the West Nashville Community Plan, "Tally wants reasonableness and balance. Focused on collaboration." Does anybody know what she meant? Is there an unreasonableness or imbalance in the community plan?

The West Nashville Community Plan has been used by neighborhood leaders to resist building major bridges across the Cumberland to May Town Center sprawl slicing up and rendering communities in Sylvan Park and Charlotte Park pass-through neighborhoods. And the plan has been used to fight flipping a residential zone along 43rd Avenue North into an industrial one to expand blight a business had already created.

Sarah Lodge Tally is a product of the Bredesen mentality, a mentality which gave preferential option to industry rather than striking a balance between community and economic development. I just wonder what her notion of balance on the community plan would be. What would the implications for sprawl and industrial expansion through neighborhoods be if she had her way with the West Nashville Community Plan? Jason Holleman was specific about his planning concerns about the bridges for May Town in 2009. Is Sarah Lodge Tally going to be specific, too?

Nashville's ranking is suited to donut suburbia outside Nashville

The reason the news media keeps heaping various rankings on our brains is that they get promoted. Whether it's due to the innate human penchant for ordering and serializing or because of some ingrained competitive need we have for comparing and contrasting self to others, the demand for "best of" and "worst of" lists is real. Thus, the media keeps up the onslaught. And large segments of their audience pass it on as gospel truth, even when warned about taking rankings with a grain of salt.

Hence, the latest rankings putting Nashville high on the list of the "next big boom towns" is getting a lot of play in the local news media and with the candidates running for office:

Being the sprawliest sprawler limits Nashville's options

Keeping the theme of the previous post on sprawl, another new study of census data 2000-2009 indicates that Nashville sprawl contributes to higher reliance on automobile usage (obviously) and lower interest in non-automobile options that are consistent with pedestrian-oriented, walkable neighborhoods (needing to be underscored):

Automobile usage continues to decrease in the nation’s older, densely developed cities: The places recording the largest declines in overall car share were, in order, Washington, New York, Boston, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, and Chicago. Those with the largest declines in non-automobile share were largely sprawling cities, including ... Nashville.

The places recording the largest increases in transit modal share were Nashville, Washington, Austin, Seattle, Los Angeles, Charlotte, and Boston. All but Austin, Boston, and Nashville have spent hundreds of millions of dollars investing in expanded rail transit system ....

The minimal nature of Nashville’s Music City Star means I won’t include it as a "significant" rail investment here.

So, our sprawling town continues to depend largely on private autos for commutes, but our mass transit system, which strictly means bus use, has increased over the last decade.

But buses are not good enough to prompt large-scale non-auto reorientation. Because we lack significant a rail system, non-automobile options in Nashville have declined. This is bad news for Nashville's nascent new urbanism: biking is down nearly 25% and walking is down nearly 40% in commute mode share, according to the census data. Biking and walking to work do not seem to be growing trends in the past decade (telecommuting is included in non-automobile shares).

Sprawl hurts us, as does the lack of a rail system, because they limit rather than expand our transportation options.

Nashville tops inglorious list of sprawliest sprawlers

While putting regional sprawl and transportation in an original and important perspective, a new comparative study of sprawl, Driven Apart: How sprawl is lengthening our commutes and why misleading mobility measures are making things worse, is not good news for Nashville:

A new report from CEOs for Cities unveils the real reason Americans spend so much time in traffic and offers a dramatic critique of the 25 year old industry standard created by the Texas Transportation Institute’s Urban Mobility Report (UMR) - often used to justify billions of dollars in expenditures to build new roads and highways. The surprising analysis by Joseph Cortright, senior policy advisor for CEOs for Cities, says the solution to this problem has much more to do with how we build our cities than how we build our roads ....

Driven Apart ranks how long residents in the nation’s largest 51 metropolitan areas spend in peak hour traffic, and in some cases the rankings are almost the opposite of those listed in the 2009 Urban Mobility Report.

For instance, the UMR depicts Chicago as having some of the worst travel delays, when it actually has the shortest time spent in peak hour traffic of any major US metro area. In contrast, Nashville jumped from 31st to first on the list of those with the longest peak travel times.

Did I mention this is not good? Nashville sprawls like it was head-smacked by Cortland Finnegan. It is malaise that local devotion to untrammeled growth minus commitments to thoughtful and inclusive planning brings Nashvillians. We deserve better.

HT: Fortworthology

Final throes of ATL sprawl

AJC blogger Jay Bookman recites last rites over the final days of Atlanta's suburban boom:

Even before the recession hit, the sprawl model of growth was showing serious strains in metro Atlanta. Admittedly, it was hard to see at the time. The U.S. Census Bureau, for example, reported that from July 2000 to July 2008, six of the 15 fastest growing counties in the country could be found here in the 28-county Atlanta metro region.

By the end of that eight-year stretch, however, the Atlanta boom had cooled considerably ....

Younger people forming households of their own are more interested in urban living than in recreating their suburban upbringing, and many older Americans are also looking to downsize their living arrangements. The rising cost of commuting and energy to heat and cool large homes are having an impact as well.

Government’s declining ability to subsidize farflung suburbia has also had an effect. In Atlanta and other areas, the transportation infrastructure needed to shorten commuting times and thus extend the suburban model still farther from the core is no longer practical or affordable; it has become a struggle just to service already developed areas.

May Family Keeps Word to Give TSU Land Donation; TSU Not Committing to Build Ag Research Center without May Town

According to the Tennessean, Tennessee State University now owns the $400,000 land donation because Jack May kept his promise to make it with or without the May Town Center development. Assuming he does not come back with a scaled-back, micro-Downtown proposal to sprawl across the Bend we assume that the May family lives up to its word. No kudos for doing the right thing. Just acknowledgement.

However, TSU is non-committal on the question of building an agricultural research center without the May Town development, which gives me pause to reiterate that we should not assume that TSU will make good on promises without some oversight either. Regardless of what happens to Jack May's dreams of urbanizing Scottsboro/Bells Bend, TSU can take its donation in many different directions including financial ones that have little if anything to do with education or conservation or common good with the local community.

While I am on the subject of the May Town proposal and TSU, I should update the story of the Tennessee Tribune article published on its front page last week and entitled, "Black Community Wants May Town Center Built NOW!" I was told recently that the front pager was actually an advertisement that was paid for by Tony Giarratana. Forty-eight hours ago I e-mailed the Tribune news editor asking for confirmation or denial of that news. I have yet to hear back from anyone at editorial@thetennesseetribune.com. Perhaps I should have tried their ad sales e-mail instead. If any Enclave reader can give me any information that would corroborate or disqualify that allegation, please e-mail me and I'll update (or you can always comment below).

UPDATE: A commenter says that I have misunderstood the donation below. The $400,000 donation is for a teaching position. Land has yet to be donated. Promise yet to be kept.

While TSU may claim that it requires May Town Center to rezone, there is nothing to stop the university from applying to rezone on its own.

Local Newspaper Takes May Town Center Personally Rather than Journalistically

The Tennessee Tribune spins the rapidly receding chances of permitting urban sprawl across rural Bells Bend to near conspiratorial levels and practically impugns the well-organized, community-based opposition to the May Town Center proposal. According to writers Leslie Hart and Ronald Weathersby:

Local community and business leaders are angry about the stalemate that has resulted due to opposition of the proposed May Town Center in Bells Bend. Jack May is a native of Nashville. His family has resided here for over one-hundred years. As a result of their hard work and determination the family has truly been blessed financially. Mr. May says the family continuously seeks to give something back to their fellow Nashvillians ....

Unfortunately, it seems the multi-billion dollar development which is to be located in Bell’s Bend is suddenly being attacked by certain factions in and around the city ....

The seemingly questionable lack of support of the project by Mayor Karl Dean and his Administration along with an ad-hoc group of apparently influential interests groups has the mostly African American North Nashville community and local businesses up in arms. The financial and social opportunities represented by Jack May’s proposal would have a watershed effect on communities that have been left behind financially for decades ....

In the opinion of Tribune Publisher Rosetta Miller-Perry the abrupt stalemate that has resulted due to opposition of the proposed May Town Center in Bells Bend is not creditable ....

Miller-Perry said she sees these conflicting rationalizations as being a result of lack of respect for the African American community in Nashville.

The Tribune described May Town opponent groups as "sudden," "ad-hoc," and "abrupt" without bothering to interview them. Neighborhood leaders from across Nashville have been organizing against sprawl on Bells Bend for some time and I've been blogging on cooperative efforts to oppose the May family for a couple of years. It is a stretch to claim that they are "factions" in the sense of being clandestine and controlling. The Tribune writing seems shrill and desperate.

Could Pro Football Even Exist without Car Culture and Sprawl Growth?

A NY Times reporter is not so marveled by the architecture of the new home of the Dallas Cowboys:

Cowboys Stadium suffers from its own form of nostalgia: its enormous retractable roof, acres of parking and cavernous interiors are straight out of Eisenhower’s America, with its embrace of car culture and a grandiose, bigger-is-better mentality. The result is a somewhat crude reworking of old ideas, one that looks especially unoriginal when compared with the sophisticated and often dazzling stadiums that have been built in Europe and the Far East over the last few years. Worse for fans, its lounges and concourses are so sprawling that I suspect more than a few spectators will get lost and miss the second-half kickoff.

Diane Neighbors: Metro Council's Version of "The Hammer"

The Vice Mayor announced committee appointments last week and some unsubstantiated buzz I hear is that Diane Neighbors punished critics of the Mayor's convention center plan, like Mike Jameson and Emily Evans, by not assigning them to chair committees during the next year. Check the list of Ms. Neighbors' appointments and see if there is anyone who has dared to raise a single objection to the proposed Music City Center:

Budget & Finance Ronnie Steine
Charter Revision Darren Jernigan
Codes, Fair, & Farmers Market Rip Ryman
Convention, Tourism & Public Entertainment Facilities Erik Cole
Education Kristine LaLonde
Federal Grants Review Sandra Moore
Health, Hospitals, & Social Services Charlie Tygard
Parks, Library, & Recreation Lonnell Matthews
Personnel, Public Info-Human Relations-Housing Phil Claiborne
Public Safety-Beer & Regulated Beverages Buddy Baker
Public Works Walter Hunt
Rules-Confirmations-Public Elections Anna Page
Transportation & Aviation Bo Mitchell

In fact, one of the Mayor's biggest cheerleaders, CM Steine has the plum appointment to Budget & Finance. Mayor Karl Dean should be elated by the prospect of acquiescience to his capital designs from this years Budget & Finance bunch:

• Megan Barry
• Erik Cole
• Michael Craddock
• Jim Forkum
• Tim Garrett
• Jason Holleman
• Jerry Maynard
• Sean McGuire
• Anna Page
• Rip Ryman
• Parker Toler
• Charlie Tygard

Half of that group (bolded names) signed the letter prompting the end of any further critical questioning of the PR/MDHA fiasco that temporarily slowed the roughshod momentum of the Mayor's finance team. I can barely imagine 1 or maybe 2 others daring to take any oppositional stance toward the Mayor regardless of all of the unanswered questions that remain. They collectively look whipped.

The Vice Mayor--who is married to a developer--also appointed a planning committee that seems to lean in the same pro-developer direction that the last committee did:

• Karen Bennett
• Sam Coleman
• Eric Crafton
• Duane Dominy
• Robert Duvall
• Jim Gotto
• Jim Hodge
• Darren Jernigan
• Kristine LaLonde
• Bo Mitchell
• Pam Murray
• Carter Todd
• Vivian Wilhoite

That committee, vested with important decisions that will affect zoning and growth in our neighborhoods, seems to sway more regressive to me. I suspect it will be dominated by the conservative bloc. Maybe we will be entertained by watching Murray and Bennett continue to tear into each other at a personal level. Indeed, we may need something to laugh at to keep from crying.

Worst of all, the only member running for the Chair appointment (decided by Council) is Jim Gotto, who just completed two years in the position that included support for May Town Center sprawl in Bells Bend, for commercial LED billboards in residential neighborhoods, for developers' fee-cuts to enable unexacting changes in controversial specific plans, and for a large commercial chain development run by a law-breaking, union-harassing company to replace a church in Sylvan Park. With no progressive likely to run against him, it looks like we're stuck with at least 2 more years of fighting Metro Council and Metro Planning to protect neighborhoods against overgrowth, blight, and sprawl.

Thanks, Diane Neighbors, for nothing. A tool used to forge for a Mayor is no less a weapon for pounding those beyond his inner sanctum.

CM Emily Evans to Speak on Alternatives to LED Sign Bill on Wednesday

Local political action group, the Nashville Neighborhoods Defense Fund, has invited Emily Evans to speak at their Quarterly Membership meeting on Wednesday at 6:30 at 100 Arlington Avenue. CM Evans will be speaking on the question, "Is there a reasonable alternative to the Tygard bill?" (referring to the LED sign ordinance). Also on the agenda is a discussion of the May Town Center proposal.

May Town Developers Withdraw Request for Commission Reconsideration

According to one Nashville neighborhood leader:

Observers said Jack May stood in the audience talking on his cell ... 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.

In related news, the West Nashville Community Plan and the West Nashville Traffic Proposal, both of which are at odds with the bridge recommendations of May Town Center were approved by the Planning Commission.

The May family still a few weeks to resubmit their request for reconsideration of MTC.

Southern Utah Planners Also Attempt to Foist New Urbanist Town Center across Open Spaces

Nashville is not the only place where planners are raising the hackles of the populace by trying to force mixed-use developments across undeveloped back country. Out west in Utah, they're working on a high density "town center" concept called "Vision Dixie," which has proved to be unpopular:

some residents are concerned about the effect such large-scale development could have on the local quality of life. A larger population could equate to more traffic, more pollution and more demand for public services and puts more strain local resources, especially water - a touchy subject given the debate surrounding the proposed Lake Powell Pipeline.

"You still come down to the basic question of what do you want Washington County to look like in 20 or 30 years," said Paul Van Dam, executive director of Citizens for Dixie's Future, a local advocacy group for conservation and controlled growth.

Van Dam said he would be glad to see if the South Block developments meet Vision Dixie principles, but said he was uncomfortable with the general idea of building up the outskirts of urban areas. The South Block would be situated several miles southeast of the city center, an idea clearly unpopular among the public during the creation of Vision Dixie, he said.

"Any time you plop something down, basically in the middle of nowhere, you have urban sprawl," Van Dam said. "It doesn't really matter how nice the community is."

Are Nashville planners merely chasing national trends to pave over greenfields rather trying something authentically new and sustainable in Bells Bend with the May Town proposal?

Potential for Greenfield Loss to Sprawl Downunder, Too

Australians are struggling over greenfield developments in Canberra, too, with many of the same infrastructure and environmental issues that Nashville faces in the prospect of losing Bells Bend to developers:

However, the burgeoning urban sprawl in Canberra is becoming a significant financial burden the whole community, Flannery said.

“Establishing infrastructure for services in new suburbs is an enormous cost, subsidised by the tax payer,” Flannery said.

This includes the cost of water, gas, and electricity reticulation, stormwater and sewer services, communications networks and the expense of extending the already struggling bus network to the ever-extending outer edge of the city.

“There is also an equity issue here,” Flannery said. The greatest number of affordable housing options in ACT is on the outskirts of the city. This means that less wealthy people often end up paying the most towards extra infrastructure provision.

“Disadvantaged and less financially well-off members of our community are also directly subsidising the hidden infrastructure costs of suburban fringe development … and, over time, they then have to pay the additional cost of living in an outer area of the city,” Flannery said.

Military Mobilizes to Fight Planning Commission's Threat to Environment

The San Antonio Planning Commission and Texas developers are going up against the U.S. Army to lay claim to an environmentally sensitive buffer zone around the Army's local training installation. Commissioners and developers look to run an end around the democratic process and build high-density, gated sprawl across unspoiled habitat.

Sound familiar, Nashville? Could we enlist the Army to help us fight the Battle for Bells Bend, too?

A Cautionary Tale of Neverending Urbanization: May Town's Virginia Inspiration Risks Losing Its Green Buffers

Fairfax County, Virginia is the home of Reston Town Center, which Nashville's May Town Center developers use as the "model product for comparison." According to one former Fairfax Planning Commissioner, the low-density green belts surrounding Reston are at risk of being lost to urbanization because of the very goal that MTC developers tout as a primary reason for sprawling across the Cumberland to Bells Bend: higher tax revenues for the entire community.

In his comments we may be getting a foretaste of things to come should May Town be built:

For decades, two fundamental planning principles governed this part of the county. The comprehensive plan has long envisioned urban employment centers in Reston and Tysons Corner, with a low-density residential buffer in between. Moreover, from the time of Robert E. Simon’s original plan for Reston, there has always been a greenbelt preserved around that planned community. Reston’s highest density is in the Town Center, and development is tiered or scaled down toward its outer edge. On the north, east, south and southwest boundaries of Reston, there is low-density residential development — homes on large lots ....

Urbanization violates both principles. Such an action would change the character of Fairfax forever.

Adding higher density development - commercial or residential - would add thousands of vehicles per day to roads that cannot handle today’s demand. Rail and other forms of mass transit would offer little relief, as these low density potions of the county are miles from the existing or proposed “silver line” stations - a distances no one would walk. Moreover, 65 percent of vehicle trips are non-commuting; they are trips to the grocery store, soccer practice, church and other destinations for which rail is not an option. Bus service would be prohibitively expensive, as would the right of way and constructive costs for miles of new roads.

Schools serving these areas are already at or near capacity and cannot handle additional density. A change in the plan would not only tip the first of many land-use planning dominoes, but it would trigger expensive demands for parks, police, fire and other public services.

Reston Town Center planned and built green belts just like May Town Center plans conservation easements that they assure will be enough to guard against further urbanization of Bells Bend. Yet, the Virginia situation indicates that that the temptation to sacrifice more undeveloped and low-density land to more commercial and residential development only intensifies once urbanization starts. Increasing density increases demand for expensive services and tantalizes more developers to request new zoning with the easy promises of more tax revenues if given the same sort of exceptions that the Planning Commission might make for May Town Center.

Approving May Town both sends Nashville down a slippery slope toward total urban saturation and sets a precedent for future growth as barriers to development disintegrate. If the Planning Commission gives Tony Giarratana and the wealthy May family the opportunity to build even the most limited city on Bells Bend, every ill that goes with urbanization will follow any benefit. Once we break Bells Bend we bought it; and there will be no do-overs for the huge green swath.

UPDATE: The issues of increasing revenues and the loss of some supposedly protected open space to a proposed indoor recreation center are also causing some debate around Reston Town Center. Again, Reston is the blueprint for Nashville's May Town Center. Greenspace is prone to being nibbled to death by urbanization once the growing, denser populations decide they need these amenities and those amenities.

LATER UPDATE: Bells Bend doesn't currently have a street gang problem does it? Build those bike paths and the gangs may come.

Apparently, Reston police dedicated more resources to cutting gang-related activity almost in half so far in 2009. And when police dedicate more resources, the extra revenue has to come from somewhere. But I thought these Town Centers were supposed to generate, not consume, revenues?

So, does the Scottsboro/Bells Bend community want the gang-related activity that might follow high-dense, urbanized bike paths?