|
|
|
User loginNavigationAbout KnoxViewsUpcoming events
Other KnoxViews blogs
Who's onlineThere are currently 7 users and 218 guests online.
|
Where is the glass dome?
Submitted by Number9 on Mon, 2006/05/08 - 8:29pm.
In the world of television there is a phrase that describes desperation and stupidity, the point where the show tips towards oblivion. That phrase is “jumping the shark”. This comes from the long running series “Happy Days” where in the final season the script writers were so desperate for a bit for sweeps week they had Fonzie (Catch phrase “Aaaay”) water skiing over a ski jump where he jumped over a shark. In Knoxville City Government the equivalent of “jumping the shark” is, “Where is the glass dome”? This signifies the point in time when City Government (Catch phrase “If you build it they will come”) loses their ability to know when a project will work. My only question for the South Knox Riverfront project is, “Where is the glass dome”? All across America local governments are implementing impact fees so new development will pay for some of the new infrastructure costs. Not in Knoxville. Mayor Haslam has announced the first reverse impacts fees in American. The taxpayers pay for the roads, additional parking, parks, and greenways that the developer would normally pay for. So how will it be decided which developers win this taxpayer lottery and gets this special treatment? Good question. The proposal for the South Knox Riverfront project works like this; TIF’s will be used for roads, additional parking, parks, and greenways. The infrastructure needed for new development. You may ask why the Mayor would suggest TIF’s instead of bonds or more traditional financing methods. The City can’t. They already jumped the shark. All of the previous “If you build it they will come” failures make it impossible to use bonds. Even if they could be issued who in their right mind would buy them? The only avenue (suckers) left are the taxpayers. Why do the developers that never win this lottery not sue the City? It seems unfair that only a very select few receive this benefit when everyone else has to do it the old fashioned way. The Robin Hood concept is supposed to work the other way around. Hint, you are supposed to rob from the rich and give to the poor. The most obvious flaw in this plan is the needed 139 million dollars of taxpayer investment. Here is what supposedly the private developers will do in return: 2,500 new residential units The whitewater kayak course qualifies as the “glass dome”. It is self-explanatory. Is this as stupid as the Worsham Watkins glass dome for the Market Square? I don’t think so. More on the scale of Universe Knoxville but three times as expensive. Before the pack attacks and claims I am “an aginer” can we look at some of the really really stupid parts of this plan? The 135,000-square-foot cultural/civic institution is completely asinine. Less than two miles away we already have one of those and it ain’t doing so great. 1 million square feet of office space will really help the downtown office market. I am sure that every building owner and real estate firm is just jazzed about this idea. That is enough for a 400 square foot office for each of the 2500 condo residents. Jump that shark Mayor. 421,700 square feet of retail space is enough for 281 trendy boutiques. The merchants on Market Square are going to love this. 60,000 square feet of restaurant space can provide 30 new restaurants to finish off the restaurants in Market Square and the Old City. Let’s review, the City of Knoxville has spent over 280 million taxpayer dollars trying to revive and restore downtown Knoxville and NOW they suggest spending another 139 million taxpayer dollars to kill all economic activity downtown and move it across the river? May I make a suggestion; shouldn’t we have a voter referendum on this rather than allowing City Council a few votes to make the decision? Ask yourself these simple questions: Is it the TRUTH? Is it FAIR to all concerned? Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS? Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned? |
Your analogy/metaphor is bad. A city can't be cancelled. A TV show can.
Keep trying though. You actually had numbers in there to bolster your bad argument.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Your analogy/metaphor is bad. A city can't be cancelled. A TV show can.
Cities can go bankrupt, more than 500 municipalities have done exactly that.
Link...
Knoxville has a spending problem. The fact that the City cannot issue bonds SHOULD be a signal to deal with that problem. Apparently the City is in denial.
All part of our elaborate plan to default with all our debts to OUR OTHER government with the larger potential revenue pool... this should play out nicely.
#9 said "... The fact that the City cannot issue bonds SHOULD be a signal to deal with that problem. Apparently the City is in denial.. . ."
Where'd you come up with the city having an inability to issue bonds?
The bond market killed the Universe Knoxville project. The city has the ability to issue bonds, but its debt rating is so poor due to the Convention Center that it would have a hard time selling them. This is one of the valid points lurking inside the PubIX's muddle-brained fare.
Rikki said:
"The bond market killed the Universe Knoxville project. The city has the ability to issue bonds, but its debt rating is so poor due to the Convention Center that it would have a hard time selling them. This is one of the valid points lurking inside the PubIX's muddle-brained fare."
Universe Knoxville was almost exclusively a county project; on the government end, it was killed by Mike Ragsdale. UK has nothing to do with what #9 said or the city's bond rating. #9 simply said it was a "fact" that the city cannot issue bonds.
BTW, what is the city's bond rating?
Universe Knoxville was almost exclusively a county project; on the government end, it was killed by Mike Ragsdale. UK has nothing to do with what #9 said or the city's bond rating. #9 simply said it was a "fact" that the city cannot issue bonds.
It is an urban myth that Mayor Ragsdale killed Universe Knoxville. It was killed by the bond market. The bonds could not be issued.
Here is another opinion:
Link...
It's also generally believed that the city has no more "debt capacity" in terms of the usual municipal bonds form of financing because of the massive Convention Center debt burden left for the taxpayers by the previous administration. Which is a shame, because there are projects with great potential for the city, including the Worlds Fair Park site and the South Waterfront, and this makes it tougher to fund them.
Universe Knoxville was the dumbest idea ever approved by both City Council and County Commission. It would have been a dismal failure even worse than the Convention Center or the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame.
Our government is clearly not capable of making sound financial decisions. Their track record in the last ten years is pathetic. Gambling with taxpayer dollars is unacceptable. If there were two real newspapers in this town we would not have these problems.
What is needed is an intervention. But with only 14% voter turnout there can be no intervention.
Ask yourself these questions:
Will you shop at these stores?
Will you eat in these restaurants?
Will you lease office space in these buildings?
Will you buy one of these condos?
Wouldn't be simpler for the City to control its spending habits and stop funding every get rich scheme that comes down the pike?
So #9, where is it a "fact" that the city can't issue bonds?
So #9, where is it a "fact" that the city can't issue bonds?
I do not know it is a "fact". You wrote that, not I. I gave my opinion bonds can not be used. rikki said pretty much the same as did R. Neal.
The City could issue the bonds. Would you purchase them? Would anyone?
Why did Universe Knoxville fail? No bonds. Why is the City looking at using TIF's? Why did they not suggest using bonds like all other municipalities? Because they cannot. I don't know if that makes it a "fact". Sounds like it does.
A few things to look at:
Link...
Link...
If you want a more optimistic viewpoint go here:
Link...
But even there is this disclaimer:
One rub in this analysis is that much of the private development can be expected to occur subsequent to the completion of infrastructure and amenities needed to support it. So the city might have to proceed with other sources of financing during the time gap. But any such debt could be retired and replaced with TIF–backed borrowing as soon as the incremental tax revenues become available.
Mayor Bill Haslam has repeatedly stressed that south waterfront development will be “market driven,” meaning that public improvements will be made only as private development commitments warrant them. But that is easier said than done. Realignment of the James White Parkway’s interchange with Sevier Avenue is considered a prerequisite to making the waterfront area more accessible from the east, as is a new underpass beneath the Norfolk Southern tracks at the area’s western perimeter. Beyond that, creation of a riverwalk traversing the entire, three-mile expanse of waterfront has become a signature feature of the project, and erecting the segment that will jut over the water at the foot of the bluff below Baptist Hospital is on a fast track without any TIF revenue in prospect to support it.
Market driven my ass. I would love to see a real marketing study to support this project's break-even. Are we to believe the people of South Knoxville will shop in these stores? Really? Where will the customers come from?
They will not come from West Knoxville. Has anyone looked seriously at how these shops, stores, and restaurants are to survive with only 2500 condos, the downtown residents, and South Knoxville residents? Edens, you love to quote demographics, do you believe?
IF it were true the developers would be there of their own accord. They would not demand these concessions. Grow up.
Please remember the projections for the Knoxville Convention Center and the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame.
Keep in mind there are 177661 residents in Knoxville and 389327 in Knox County. Knoxville has staggering debt. How many crazy ideas must be approved to see there is a spending problem. You can wish this was not so, but it is what it is.
I have seen a lot of mixed use plans. This is not a good one for a city the size of Knoxville with the debt load that Knoxville currently has. It would be different if Knoxville had not built two colossal failures. It would be different if Universe Knoxville had not been approved. It would be different if Knoxville had not considered covering Market Square with a glass dome. Which by the way, Gemini once said was stopped by k2k. If that is true then good for k2k. Where are they now when they are really needed?
If a family member had a spending problem like the City does what would you do? Let them continue spending into bankruptcy? Or would you intervene? At this time with the current financial conditions in Knoxville the risk is too great for the taxpayers.
The idea of the project is not the problem. The plan is the problem. It is too much too soon and has too much risk.
The voters should be allowed to vote in a referendum to approve a project of this scope and term.
Here's what you (#9) wrote in the post entitled :
"The fact that the City cannot issue bonds SHOULD be a signal to deal with that problem. Apparently the City is in denial."
You were the one who said it was a "fact; " I didn't put any words in your mouth.
So, what's the "fact"?
Two hours ago: What is needed is an intervention. But with only 14% voter turnout there can be no intervention.
Twenty minutes ago: The voters should be allowed to vote in a referendum to approve a project of this scope and term.
So what exactly is the prescription here?
____________________________
Wasabi peas are people! They're people!
Please remember the projections for the Knoxville Convention Center and the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame.
I think it's fair to point out those were on Victor's watch, but I do also believe that's a fair criticism of spending tax dollars without realistic expectations
"Please remember the projections for the Knoxville Convention Center and the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame."
I think it's fair to point out those were on Victor's watch, but I do also believe that's a fair criticism of spending tax dollars without realistic expectations.
Drake: The WWI downtown stuff was on Victor's watch too. Mayor Haslam has very carefully, from day 1 on this effort, insisted that the plan not only be a good vision of what the community wants, but also feasible and realistic (in fact, there's been a few times when I've wished he hadn't put quite so much emphasis on the feasible part).
The way this project is being conducted - in terms of both meaningful public participation and emphasis on financial responsibility - is very different from the way all the other projects mentioned were approached. We can - and should - debate the details, but the City deserves high praise for its approach.
Really truly going back to work now.
Rikki said "The bond market killed the Universe Knoxville project. The city has the ability to issue bonds, but its debt rating is so poor due to the Convention Center that it would have a hard time selling them."
The city has a good bond rating by any stretch and it is perfectly capable of issuing bonds at a very competitive price. It has not done so since 2004 by choice. The city bonded indebtedness is thus decreasing every year. The ratings are Fitch (AA+), Moody's (Aa) and S&P (AA). There are not that many cities with triple A ratings. Also, FYI, finger annexations were eliminated in the growth policy act and have been illegal for a number of years.
Just so you know, I ain't gonna bite. There are many, many aspects of this effort that have been discussed at length by the consultants, the Oversight Committee, the general public, and Council. There are others, like the financial plan, that are just now starting to be discussed, and will undergo a lot of scutiny in the next few months.
I welcome reasonable discussion with reasonable people. Unfortunately, I know better than to even start discussing this with you.
Sad, because there's some good stuff in what you wrote. But like I said, I'm not gonna bite.
Ta.
anytime gemini says she won't bite, ya know she's got somethin to say.
we know about the backround in planning, and nothin says backyard like this one.
forget the 9inespout, how bout starting your own thread with a full report on where you see this now and where it might be going? (or a link if you already posted the same somewhere.)
Will this project distract focus on getting the Coster Shop redevelopment projects on track? Will the major downtown Interstate improvements be finished before tearing up more roads in s. Knoxville?
Mayor Haslam has announced the first reverse impacts fees in American. The taxpayers pay for the roads, additional parking, parks, and greenways that the developer would normally pay for.
Impact fees are an attempt to get developers to pay for roads, sewers, schools, parks the government normally pays for. This is not a "first," nor is it a "reverse" of anything.
Impact fees are an attempt to get developers to pay for roads, sewers, schools, parks the government normally pays for. This is not a "first," nor is it a "reverse" of anything.
It is a first. Everywhere else the developers pay for additional parking and greenways as part of the development. They often pay for part of the roadwork. Cities will not grant zoning approval unless the developer pays their way. Except of course in Knoxville. Does Maryville do government this way?
What the City is doing is granting favoritism to a select group of developers and it is using taxpayer money to do so. It is discrimination against all of the other developers. This is not the role of government.
If that is not bad enough the City is indirectly subsiding the businesses that will lease space in this project. By saving the developers millions of dollars by using taxpayer money via TIF's the cost of the project is reduced for the developers. Of course the developers could just take the money so it is difficult to know for sure if that would materialize in lower lease payments for the business owners. Does it matter? This is not the role of government.
How long did Market Square have to wait for a parking garage? How long did downtown have to wait for parking? But these developers get everything on the front end with taxpayer dollars? Sounds like a first to me.
Also sounds like discrimination to me. The role of government is not to play favorites with taxpayer money.
The role of government is not to play favorites with taxpayer money.
BWAH! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Whoo!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Oh, oh, oh... [giggle] [snort]
Hee.
Good one.
____________________________
Wasabi peas are people! They're people!
Cities will not grant zoning approval unless the developer pays their way. Except of course in Knoxville. Does Maryville do government this way?
Knox, Blount and most counties approve most rezonings that come before them. Most planning boards and local legislatures are dominated by developers. A developer might pay for a turn lane on the public road on the edge of their new subdivision, but they never pay for major roadway upgrades like the widening of Middlebrook Pike near Lovell Rd, nor do they pay for upgrades to sewer lines. They don't contribute toward the cost of building schools to service the kids who live in their developments, nor do they pay for flood control necessitated by all the impervious surfaces in their projects.
Subsidized infrastructure is business as usual all over this country because developers typically control majorities on councils and commissions and planning boards. It's a discriminatory process, but not in the way you claim. It discriminates against taxpayers and favors developers. Impact fees offer a way to correct that bias, but they are not an issue in this case because they don't exist in Knoxville or Knox County.
This makes too much sense. I didn't know there was anyone around here that would deflate this balloon. But, alas, not to worry. The retail , restaurants, and office buildings will be the last to be built, if ever. It's all about the CONDOS!!!!!
You ask not be called "an aginner", or basically a pessimist, about this plan but that's almost exactly what you are. Some would look at the South Knox project as the city trying to right past wrongs by looking 20 years in advance to an area that can sustain projected growth of the downtown area. I'm kind of glad the city is actually having some foresight here and has a plan for South Knoxville. This is a merely a plan at this stage, and it obviously will involve many stages throughout the 20 year process. I seriously doubt the end result will be anything close to what is on paper now, but I am glad they are even thinking about it now before unplanned development for that area takes off and undesirable or destructive uses for the property take place. I think the plan is more of a way to make sure the south waterfront across from downtown makes the most sense for the city as a whole. In 20 years it should be growing and thriving with downtown, not in spite of downtown. This is a complement to what hopefully downtown is becoming, not an alternative to it. I think you have totally misinterpretted the whole basis and reasoning behind the plan.
That said, if the area's growth can't support the infrastructure planned, it's a bad idea. But, if downtown thrives in the next 5 years, condo space there ends up being limited and prices start skyrocketing, is not the south waterfront a great place to expand to? If the growth isn't there in 5 years not even one fourth of the south waterfront plan would be implemented yet so it could easily be scaled back to fit best with the needs at that time. By spreading the project out over 20 years is the city not being more thoughtful and concise than it was in past projects? Maybe it's not, but it seems the city government is playing this pretty safe to me and not being careless, as you try to imply.
That's just how one layman sees it anyway.
"This is a merely a plan at this stage, and it obviously will involve many stages throughout the 20 year process."
NOOOOOOOO! IT IS A DONE DEAL! THE GUBMINT IS GOING TO FORCE IT DOWN THROATSSSSS!
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
You ask not be called "an aginner", or basically a pessimist, about this plan but that's almost exactly what you are. Some would look at the South Knox project as the city trying to right past wrongs by looking 20 years in advance to an area that can sustain projected growth of the downtown area. I'm kind of glad the city is actually having some foresight here and has a plan for South Knoxville.
Ever hear of private enterprise? Risk and return? Return on investment? How is it that the Turkey Creek shopping oasis was developed without TIF's, bribes, kickbacks, taxpayer investment for parking garages and greenways? There is 58 nature reserve and greenways that were created with DEVELOPER DOLLARS. What a concept.
Turkey Creek in is Knoxville City. That's right, in the City.
So why did those developers not get their fair share of graft?
Without government largess (or interference) Turkey Creek is one of the great retail success stories in the Southeast.
You charge that the City should "right past wrongs" in South Knoxville. What were those "wrongs"?
I am not an aginner nor a pessimist. I am a pragmatist. How many times will it take before the taxpayers learn "IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WILL NOT COME". How are the Knoxville Convention Center and the Women's Basketball Hall of Shame doing now?
If you want to be an optimist (sucker) they go right ahead. It takes a lot more than 2500 people in condos to support 421,700 square feet of retail space and 60,000 square feet of restaurant space.
Will you come mjcheese? Will you spend your dollars in the South Knox River Wonderland? Because if you don't, and if tens of thousands of other people don't, this is our next Convention Center. It will break Knoxville.
It is not the role of government to interfere with business. Government cannot create markets. They cannot create interest or excitement to go shopping or dinning. It is beyond the ability of government.
If this idea is sound private enterprise will want to do it without the taxpayer subsidy.
If private development will not do the project without massive taxpayer subsidies that is the canary in the coal mine. It means it is not the time for this idea.
The greenways and nature reserve at Turkey Creek were concessions by the developer given in exchange for state permits that let the developer operate outside legal limits intended to protect water quality and prevent flooding. The nature reserve was supposed to be a full-fledged educational center similar to Ijams, but the developer blew that off and stuck a few signs here and there.
Digit, your ignorance of the history of Turkey Creek shows. Any of those wonderful environmental amentities that you mention were concessions the developers had to make to get to build the place. As soon as they got the chance, they reinterpreted the terms of the agreement and foisted the results back on to the City. Essentially, this was a dare. "We dare you to say anything about what just happened."
Yes, Turkey Creek is in the City ... as part of a finger annexation. Do you support finger annexations?
That taste in your mouth is your own medicine.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Told you guys not to bite.
Yes, Turkey Creek is in the City ... as part of a finger annexation. Do you support finger annexations?
No, I do not support finger annexations. Finger annexations should be illegal. In this case the City receives millions of dollars of sales taxes the County should have.
were concessions the developers had to make to get to build the place.
Do you mean that outside Knoxville City proper that developers have to make concessions? But inside Knoxville City proper the City must make concessions? So the market must be very poor if the City has to make concessions?
This is why the City keeps failing time after time. Government cannot create markets no matter how hard they may try.
How many failures must there be until the taxpayers learn?
Why should they be illegal?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Link...
"A development company known as Turkey Creek Land Partners (TCLP) had procured for $7 million a parcel of property west of Lovell Road, bound by Kingston Pike, I-40/75 and Campbell Station Road. Their plan was to develop restaurants, stores, hotels, a hospital and more. But what they needed was a 2.5-mile extension of Parkside Drive through the property to connect with Campbell Station Road. When approached with the plan, the City of Knoxville, which in the mid-’80s had annexed Parkside Drive and the stretch of land that would be its logical continuation, approved the allocation of $4.1 million to build the road, sewers, storm drains and other necessary infrastructure.
The developers asked Knox County and the Town of Farragut to contribute an additional $1.45 million. The property’s owners were “donating” the right of way, buffer zone and design work equal to $4.5 million. In return, property taxes generated by the development—estimated at the time to be more than $8 million a year—would return to the local governments in time."
...#9, consider it a date. We'll do a little whitewater kayaking, grab lunch, shop and then hop on the light rail back up to Gay St. for a movie.
1. You took my bait away like a bluegill on redworm. I was trying to get tubesock to show even more ignorance. He doesn't even know that finger annex has long been illegal. Phhhhbt.
2. AA rated? That's great. I hope that continued strong debt service is a long-term trend for Knoxville. I love investing in muni bonds though.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Are the city's higher rated bonds for utility improvements, which are practically guaranteed a return based on rates?
The rating is for all bonded indebtedness incurred by the city government. KUB has it own AA bond rating, I believe.
11,750 linear feet of new roads
11,000 linear feet of improved roads
That's 4.3 miles of road. Not much given the areal extent.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
That's 4.3 miles of road. Not much given the areal extent.
Not much road, so why are the infrastructure costs so high?
By the way, there are so many goofy parts of this plan, why are you not suggesting that the most goofy parts be tabled?
>Why did they not suggest using bonds like all other municipalities?
Why do you continue to demostrate a profound grasp of municipal finance by insisting that using Tax Increment Financing to support public infrastructure for redevelopment is some unprecedented thing?
Link...
If anything, it is more unusual to use TIFs as a gap financing tool for private development, as Knoxville has done in downtown loft development.
Besides, I thought the plan was to acquire the whole south waterfront via eminent domain and sell it to KP for a nickel?
Why do you continue to demostrate a profound grasp of municipal finance by insisting that using Tax Increment Financing to support public infrastructure for redevelopment is some unprecedented thing?
I think what 9 is referring to is a TIF for infrastructure improvements from the city to itself, which the local paper reports is the first time Knoxville has done that.
>I think what 9 is referring to is a TIF for infrastructure improvements >from the city to itself, which the local paper reports is the first >time Knoxville has done that.
The pertinent language from 9's initial post:
"All across America local governments are implementing impact fees so new development will pay for some of the new infrastructure costs. Not in Knoxville. Mayor Haslam has announced the first reverse impacts fees in American. The taxpayers pay for the roads, additional parking, parks, and greenways that the developer would normally pay for."
Oh. OK, then.
Regarding Hayes' point that this is the first time Knoxville has used TIFs for infrastructure, doesn't it seem like a smarter play in the long run for the city to dedicate the tax revenue from a particular private development (or within a development district) to pay for things like roads and parks rather than to help cover the developer's debt load?
And isn't it interesting that the city is operating under the assumption that said private developers won't need TIFs to cover any gaps in their project financing?
Of course this'll no doubt kill downtown, just as the boom in downtown's condo market has caused 4th and Gill and Old North property values to plummet.
>Of course this'll no doubt kill downtown, just as the boom in downtown's condo market has caused 4th and Gill and Old North property values to plummet.
Bwahahahahaha.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
I think what 9 is referring to is a TIF for infrastructure improvements >from the city to itself, which the local paper reports is the first >time Knoxville has done that.
You are playing dumb, Edens. The KNS said it was a first. I pointed out how it was a first for "additional parking and greenways" which are the responsibility of the developer.
Some road improvements are also the responsibility of the developer. Parks are the responsibility of the City of Knoxville unless the developer offers to create a park as an incentive in order to get the deal.
By the way, that is how it works in the County. The developer gives the incentives not the government. You are not used to that system are you?
But you know that don't you? When you parse words so tightly you show a desperation that betrays your intent.
Why do you continue to demostrate a profound grasp of municipal finance by insisting that using Tax Increment Financing to support public infrastructure for redevelopment is some unprecedented thing?
Just because it is done up North, in California and Illinois does not make it a good idea. I can think of several reasons why the City would prefer TIF's as opposed to bonds.
First, you only have to get a rubber stamp vote in City Council.
Second, no matter how many people come to City Council and protest they can be ignored. Remember the Candy Factory, Convention Center, Women's Basketball Hall of Fame, and of course Universe Knoxville?
Third, no pesky third party review of the project like you would get in the bond market.
My grasp of municipal finance is more profound than the people that keep spending Knoxville into the ground. It is too big of a project with the current debt load. Where is the market analysis? Before Turkey Creek was even designed there was significant market research into the feasibility and break even. I notice you are a little slow in your demographic defense of this project. What's wrong?
Let me predict the future, out of state consultants will be hired, they will write a report, it will be glowing and suggest that construction should begin tomorrow. Stop me if you have heard this BEFORE.
Will you shop at these stores, shops, and boutiques? Will you dine at these restaurants?
1. Did anyone suggest that the way things are done "up North" are better? Please reference this.
2. Remember the Candy Factory, Convention Center, Women's Basketball Hall of Fame, and of course Universe Knoxville?
I do remember the last three. The first two happened under what everybody here agrees was a 16-year captivity at the hands of Victor Ashe. Was there that much fuss over them. Please cite. And UA was a joke from the beginning.
3. Candy Factory: Your greatest, er, moment?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Did anyone suggest that the way things are done "up North" are better? Please reference this.
Selective reading dysfunction, Metulj. He pulled that from the wiki. He read this sentence and then began frothing...
While some states, such as California and Illinois, have used TIF for decades, many others have only recently passed or amended state laws that allow them to use this tool.
...before he got to this line: Arizona is now the only state without a tax increment financing law.
____________________________
Wasabi peas are people! They're people!
It would be different if Knoxville had not considered covering Market Square with a glass dome. Which by the way, Gemini once said was stopped by k2k. If that is true then good for k2k.
Hmm, I don't remember saying exactly that. But it's at least partly true that citizens opposed to the more ridiculous aspects of the WWI plan (including many k2k participants) helped stop it. Please remember, however, that the opposition to that plan was founded on the fact that it was a really horrific example of bad, bad, bad urban design, not on objections to infrastructure improvements by the City.
I'm still not going to get into a back an forth on the South Waterfront plan itself with #9; that's a waste of my time. Spintrep suggests that I post on it myself, and I'll try to do so at some point, in spite of his not-so-veiled insults. The problem with that is that much of my time on this effort is being spent actually working on the project - going to working meetings, reading proposals, commenting on them, etc. It's not left me much time to write long posts about them.
Again, I'd suggest that folks who really want to familiarize themselves with this effort read the stuff on the website (including the original Calthorpe Fregonese feasibility study, the vision plan, and the draft financial plan) and visit the Drop In Center to really understand what is being proposed.
Three comments - yes, the housing will come first and the rest will follow. That's basically how it works in the private sector - "retail follows rooftops." And the City infrastructure support (which I believe is a legitimate role of govt) will be phased in as needed - we're not gonna go drop the entire gob of $$$ at one point in time. And with or without this plan, development on the waterfront is going to happen - it's already happening. The only question is whether we want decent, planned development that's friendly to exisiting neighborhoods and opens up to the waterfront to all Knoxvillians or a bunch of unconnected gated communities scattered about. I vote for the former.
I also want to say that I find it interesting that #9 seems to be in favor of impact fees. I don't think his "take back the govt." friends would like that much.
I have to go back to work now. Come see me Thursday between 4 and 8 at the Drop In Center.
Glass dome? I always look for the visitor's center as the boondoggle marker in Knoxville. There was one in the Sunsphere, one in the waterfront development near the basketball museum, and there have been plans for several others buried in other, abandoned development plans.
It is doing just fine on Gay Street at Summit Hill. WDVX and the Blue Plate Special at noon are great for downtown and the community.
What I find interesting is that #9 is such a magnet for discussion. I posted about this yesterday, in hopes of promoting some civil discussion of the financial plan presented by the city. No comments, except inviting everyone to drive over to Sevier Ave. to discuss it.
Previously I sat through the vision plan presentation, and wrote up a detailed summary for everyone who couldn't be there, again in hopes of promoting some civil discussion. There was some, but not really that much interest except arguing about #9 and condos.
I have repeatedly invited residents, participants, officials, candidates, or anyone else interested in this or any other topic to register and blog their comments, observations, opinions, news, etc., or to just join in the conversation in comments, registered or not.
Now we're told we aren't qualified to discuss it because we didn't sit through all the workshops and participate in the city's "openness" and that a forum like this which was intended to be an extension, or a complement, to all the "openness" and "civic discourse" is not part of the program and a waste of time (except people curiously have plenty of time to argue with #9).
It seems the only conversation anyone is interested in pursuing is piling on #9 to parse and nitpick his/her/its arguments.
I guess the moral is that I should just post as #9, and try to sort the wheat from the chaff to see if there is any worthwhile discussion to be had on these issues. Or, just say fuck it, this is indeed a complete waste of time.
Sorry Randy. You've asked me to post on the SW, and I said I would. Somehow I never find the time to write something up because there's just so much to say. That's my bad.
I don't intend to imply people shouldn't talk about this w/o having read every word that's out there about it. I'm just trying to let interested people to know that a lot of info is out there - and I guess to let people know that #9 doesn't always do his homework.
The digit is just too easy and infuriating a target. That's why I promised not to respond to him. However, I think some of us fear he can do damage with misinformation (e.g., the City's bond rating) and that's why we can't seem to keep from arguing with him. Sorry about that too.
Just as soon as I digest the financial plan myself, which may not be till this weekend, I PROMISE to write up a long post about my experience and impressions of this entire project. For whatever that's worth.
Lies and falsehoods certainly motivate responses. In some cases, they are violations of the site rules, especially when the liar refuses to apologize or correct himself and just changes the subject. I wonder whether candidates and officials and the like would be more willing to participate here if users showed more respect for the rules.
Lies and falsehoods certainly motivate responses. In some cases, they are violations of the site rules, especially when the liar refuses to apologize or correct himself and just changes the subject. I wonder whether candidates and officials and the like would be more willing to participate here if users showed more respect for the rules.
That's a good question, Rikki, and an excellent point. (Although a lot of the "lying" allegations seem to be between you and #9, and y'all should work it out even if there is a still pending under advisement ruling by site management, and yes, I noticed and took it seriously, although your interpretation of the rules and charges under same seem like a bit of a stretch).
But look at this. Bill Lyons chimes in on a #9 post, and has no comment on my attempt to discuss the same issue in a rational and civil manner. I guess a more colorful, inflammatory style ala SKB is the way to go to get people talking.
All I'm saying is that I hoped to have less "talk" and more serious discussion at this forum, as opposed to lesbian cheerleaders and so forth, not that there's anything wrong with that, everything in its place and a place for everything and whatnot. All I'm also saying is that dissecting #9's arguments (which, whether you like it or not sometimes makes sense -- a blind pig, a stopped clock, and all that) in minute detail isn't all that serious of a discussion.
Anyway, as I've told several others, the best way to deal with someone you vehemently disagree with is to simply ignore them. If you let them get under your skin, they win.
(Edit: Apparently Bill Lyons and I were cross posting at the same time.)
P.S. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate everyone's participation (see the list of contributors over there on the left) in trying to make this place what it was supposed to be, and for that I thank all of you. I've had a bad day, and that makes me question things from time to time. And no, this thread was not the genesis of my bad day. I do actually have an actual life and work related program activities, among other things to piss me off.
R. Neal: I do actually have an actual life and work related program activities, among other things to piss me off.
I suggest drinking, heavily. That round of scotches at Brazen Head Pub is still on the table if you make it up here some time.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
The digit is just too easy and infuriating a target. That's why I promised not to respond to him. However, I think some of us fear he can do damage with misinformation (e.g., the City's bond rating) and that's why we can't seem to keep from arguing with him. Sorry about that too.
Now play fair. What was the City's bond rating during the Universe Knoxville bond failure? You might be surprised. The City's bond rating is not the issue. The issue is why the City chose to use the TIF method to finance infrastructure. It is curious and needs to be explained.
I for one would like to have someone in the City explain that decision.
Could anyone stand up to the "pack attack" of scrutiny I am routinely confronted with? Each of you makes mistakes just like I do. Yet I do not have a dedicated team to parse every word and look for alternative context. Even Bill Lyons makes mistakes. What would the results be if a team of people parsed Bill's every word? Would they find some mistakes? Yes, they would. In fact in the old days that is exactly what happened.
You can say I am an "aginner" or "anti-government" but that is not true. I just ask better questions than most people. It is just they are considered to be the "wrong" questions.
One of the basic "rules" of conning someone is that they must want what it is that is being offered. I have yet to hear what the people of South Knoxville want. The pack has clearly been conned but that is no surprise.
Gemini referred to the "Calthorpe Fregonese feasibility study".
Link...
Should we discount everything Gemini writes because she got the name of the company wrong. It is actually Fregonese Calthorpe Associates. Just asking, to be fair and all.
Link...
Fregonese Calthorpe Associates is a full-service professional land-use planning firm with a strong track record of helping make better cities. We specialize in comprehensive planning, Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis, land-use ordinances, implementation strategies, and innovative public involvement programs and materials. Our clients run the gamut from small-town communities to large, complex metropolitan regions. We travel throughout the United States - and indeed throughout the world - working closely with our clients to help shape the community they want for future generations.
Do the people at Fregonese Calthorpe Associates know anything about what stores, shops, and boutiques will do well at a particular site? How about how much office space is needed and how it will compete with existing office space downtown. What about which restaurants will do well and how this many restaurants will affect the existing restaurants downtown? No, that is not what they do.
Gosh, shouldn't someone think about those questions?
This whole project is being done wrong, ass-backwards if you will. The Turkey Creek model is completely different. In that model, private enterprise hires retail-marketing firms to analyze if a retail project can succeed at a particular site. Private enterprise pays for the concessions to the government to do the project. Private enterprise assumes the risk. Completely opposite of the way Bill Haslam does business.
Gemini says retail follows the rooftops. Really, is that what they teach at UT? There is no need for 139 million dollars of infrastructure if that statement was true. This is a giant mixed-use project that is going forward without any retail market analysis. Gemini, where is the retail market analysis? Who are the anchor tenants? Who has signed commitment letters?
Do you people learn anything from the mistakes of the past? This is the same con that Kinsey Probasco laid down for Market Square. I hate to be so redundant but where are the national anchor tenants for Market Square? Where are the commitment letters?
Misinformation is not the problem. Disinformation is the problem. How many Mickey Mouse con jobs will it take for the people of Knoxville to learn that government projects are not the only way to do this?
I do not understand why the City did not call the Turkey Creek Land Partners to look at this project. Was that too simple a choice? No, we had to hire a bunch of New Urbanists wackos out of Portland, Oregon.
You don’t believe it?
Link...
May 20, 2003
Fregonese Calthorpe & Associates (FCA), a land-use planning firm that works for many local governments, has threatened legal action against local residents who are upset with what FCA calls "conceptual illustrative plans" for their neighborhood. The company was hired by the City of Martinez (in the east San Francisco Bay area) to help write a land-use plan for the city...
Even though it is just a proposal, the residents realized, the plan has effectively reduced the value of their homes. FCA had argued that the plan was "just a concept" and that any final decision would be made by local governments, not FCA itself. But under California law, anyone who tried to sell their homes would legally obligated to tell potential purchasers that a plan has been proposed that could greatly change the character of the neighborhood or even condemn the house under eminent domain...
Residents of one Martinez neighborhood asked an attorney to write FCA and Contra Costa County, which was sponsoring the planning process, protesting the proposal. "Deliberately choosing an established residential neighborhood as a recommended site for redevelopment is socially irresponsible," wrote the attorney, "and will not be tolerated by my clients." The attorney also questioned "the method by which this recommended plan was established," since there was only one public meeting and the consultant "obviously did not take the time to become familiar with the character of the neighborhoods."
In a reply, an attorney representing FCA agreed to remove the homes of the protesters from the redevelopment area (but not necessarily any other homes or neighborhoods). However, the letter also responded to "allegations" in the first letter that FCA had acted "in an arbitrary manner," that it "obviously did not take time to become familiar with the character of the neighborhoods," and the proposed plan is not "based on any proper study of the neighborhoods."
FCA's attorney stated that FCA "is a well known urban and regional planning consulting firm with an excellent national and even international reputation. . . . Neither my client nor I will tolerate the publication of such unfounded criticisms as are contained in your April 4 letter. . . You are admonished that we will brook no further defamatory accusations by either you or your clients against Fregonese Calthorpe."
Notice that the letter never actually claimed that FCA had taken any time to become familiar with or properly study the neighborhoods. Instead, it relied on FCA's "excellent reputation" as justification for the firm's proposals.
Just what is that reputation? The company's principals include John Fregonese and Peter Calthorpe. Prior to forming a partnership with Calthorpe, Fregonese worked for Metro, the regional planning agency for Portland, Oregon. Metro has two planning divisions, transportation planning and growth-management planning, and Fregonese was the director of the growth-management division. As such, he oversaw the preparation of Metro's 2040 plan, which required the redevelopment of dozens of Portland-area neighborhoods to much higher densities.
Okay pack, I await your scrutiny.
My business card in Slovenia has "Applegate Toby" on it. It's the custom.
Gemini's "mistake" is probably the result of using her memory to recall something instead of googling it.
Anyhow, the rest of your post reads hermetic.
As for your question as to whether or not this company knows what shops etc would do well, etc.: They are GIS consultants. I imagine they know exactly (as exactly as GIS can tell them) what does well, where. I can reassure that I know WAY more than I care to know about GIS and what companies are using it for these days is amazing (and frightening), especially in terms of located marketing schemes.
As for your slight against Gemini's education (see this is how he operates), UT had an excellent little planning program until Habitually Underfunded University had to close it. As a matter of fact, my fave (so far) Rutgers professor, Frank Popper (yeah, Mr. Buffalo Commons) told me that it was a shame that a place that so desperately needs some sort of planning would close its planning school.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Gemini's "mistake" is probably the result of using her memory to recall something instead of googling it.
No, Gemini's mistake is the same as the City's. It is incorrect on the City of Knoxville website. Did anyone other than me take any time to look at Fregonese Calthorpe Associates?
You are also mistaken (gasp) at what GIS means in regard to Fregonese Calthorpe Associates.
Could you take a moment of your time to review the material before you mistakenly comment? That is so irritating. You just comment without doing any research. These Portland New Urbanists don't know jack about retail marketing.
Fregonese Calthorpe Associates is a full-service professional land-use planning firm
with a strong track record of helping make better cities. We specialize in comprehensive
planning, Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis, land-use
ordinances, implementation strategies, and innovative public involvement programs
and materials. Our clients run the gamut from small-town communities to
large, complex metropolitan regions. We travel throughout the United States -
and indeed throughout the world - working closely with our clients to help shape
the community they want for future generations.
There isn't a Fortune 500 company in the world that locates a single building where they factor, ship or market their products without consulting a GIS system. As a matter of fact, there is a whole business analyst plugin for Arc9. Yep. Let me fire it up. Yeah, it runs.
I needn't do research on what GIS does. I have a degree in it. What are your credentials?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
There isn't a Fortune 500 company in the world that locates a single building where they factor, ship or market their products without consulting a GIS system. As a matter of fact, there is a whole business analyst plugin for Arc9. Yep. Let me fire it up. Yeah, it runs.
I needn't do research on what GIS does. I have a degree in it. What are your credentials?
Take a deep breath and calm down. I know you are very intelligent and educated. I wouldn't waste my time otherwise.
GIS can have a relationship to marketing. Check out the website. There is no mention of ANY retail marketing expertise. Check it out for yourself. They are a land use planning firm.
Where in any of the planning is the retail marketing analysis? Your over reaction makes the point for me.
Link...
Digit: I have a friend who does business analyst GIS for ... wait for it ... Fregonese Calthorpe.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Digit: I have a friend who does business analyst GIS for ... wait for it ... Fregonese Calthorpe.
Where in any of the planning is the retail marketing analysis?
Did they forget?
We all know there has been NO retail marketing analysis.
Could you call your friend and ask him to help us out? Just kidding, we both know that is not possible. So should we now be skeptical of everything you write metulj?
My business card in Slovenia has "Applegate Toby" on it. It's the custom.
Gemini's "mistake" is probably the result of using her memory to recall something instead of googling it.
Kinda embarrassing that everyone has gotten the name wrong for so long because it was wrong on the City website. So no one did ANY due diligence to check out Fregonese Calthorpe?
Gemini, Bill Lyons, this is a rather embarrassing event isn't it? Where is Will Malone when you need him?
#9, I'm surprised you haven't mentioned the projected capacity for retail/office/condos/etc. v. the planned capacity in the financial projection report summary.
#9, I'm surprised you haven't mentioned the projected capacity for retail/office/condos/etc. v. the planned capacity in the financial projection report summary.
My first thought was to go with the “Vision Plan” numbers (projected capacity) since that was what had been approved by City Council. Now I wonder what happened to so greatly inflate the numbers.
I think the “Estimated Market Study Demand” numbers (planned capacity) are overly ambitious but the “Vision Plan” numbers are just crazy.
The idea of a White Water Kayak Water Park is Universe Knoxville Act II. An aquarium would be a better idea and would be in the same cost range.
The only reason I can think of for the increase in the numbers is that Mayor Haslam made the pledge that the project must be feasible. The 139 million dollar infrastructure number is the same under either the “Vision Plan” numbers or the “Estimated Market Study Demand” numbers. So in order for the Mayor to keep his pledge the numbers had to be inflated.
Is there any other logical answer?
Link...
Knoxville South Waterfront Redevelopment Summary
Estimated Market Study Demand Numbers
Residential 2,200 Units
Retail 60,000 Square Feet
Restaurant 30,000 Square Feet
Office 400,000 Square Feet
Hotel 100 Rooms
Marina 225 Slips
Cultural / Civic 135,000 Square Feet
Vision Plan Capacity Numbers
Residential 2,500 Units
Retail 421,700 Square Feet
Restaurant 60,000 Square Feet
Office 1,000,000 Square Feet
Hotel 160 Rooms
Marina 225 Slips
Cultural / Civic 135,000 Square Feet
Whitewater Kayak Park 1 Course
Garages 700 Cars
On-Street Parking 790 Cars
Off-Street Parking Lots 450 Cars
New Roads 11,750 Linear Feet
Existing Roads - Upgrades 11,000 Linear Feet
New Parks, Greenways 51.3 Acres
Still haven't digested this entire thing, and am in any case waiting to ask questions when the Oversight Committee gets a briefing on May 24 (6 p.m., Small Assembly Room of C/C Bldg; open as always to the public).
But 9's assumption that the numbers were "inflated" assumes the vision plan #s somehow followed the market study #s. As far as I can tell from what I know now, they were arrived at by different methods - i.e., the vision plan is more what folks wanted, the market study #s are derived from, well, a market study. If either followed the other, the market study was done second, so if anything the #s were not "inflated," they were "deflated" to adjust for reality. One would assume that's a good thing.
Also, keep in mind we're looking at a 20 year time frame here. It's extraordinarily difficult to predict what will be happening 10 or 15 years from now. If the initial effort takes off, the upper #s may prove correct - just as building highways always results in more cars on the road and more congestion than any of the original models suggest. If it's not so successful, then the #s will be lower.
Also keep in mind this isn't a single project - it's a projection of how we want to steer "organic" growth. It's not like we're trying to dump this entire thing on the ground in one fell swoop.
Finally, #9 has conveniently not quoted this graph from the financial study: The Vision Plan contains greater redevelopment capacity than the Market Study Demand to allow flexibility for market competition as redevelopment occurs, and to compensate for differing densities as specific projects are built. In addition, the Vision Plan describes a coordinated series of public and private improvements, that could potentially exceed market projections if implemented successfully. The goal is to maximize market potential that will reinforce the principles of the plan, to the benefit of both the public and individual property owners.
I'm certainly not saying one shouldn't have questions about this effort - I have my own, and will have more as it moves along. Some of #9's are very good, although his tone is so aggravating it's hard to respond to him.
More this weekend; off to the Drop Inn Center.
But 9's assumption that the numbers were "inflated" assumes the vision plan #s somehow followed the market study #s. As far as I can tell from what I know now, they were arrived at by different methods - i.e., the vision plan is more what folks wanted, the market study #s are derived from, well, a market study. If either followed the other, the market study was done second, so if anything the #s were not "inflated," they were "deflated" to adjust for reality. One would assume that's a good thing.
Then why did City Council approve the Vision Plan? What you wrote is so difficult to understand. Are you saying that City Council approved the plan the people wanted without any regard to feasibility? This is in direct conflict with the pledge made by Mayor Haslam. Are any of you all on the same page?
Link...
The "Market Study" also known as the “Estimated Market Study Demand” numbers was performed by who? Hargreaves? Fregonese Calthorpe? You realize that Land Planners use handbooks to make those ROUGH estimates. Developers on the other hand hire specialized marketing firms to do a marketing analysis.
Consider this my request to a member of the Knoxville South Waterfront Oversight Committee, please hire a specialized marketing firm to do a marketing analysis. You can call the Turkey Creek Land Partners and ask them who they used. Since they have the most successful retail project in this State they are a good reference.
Also, keep in mind we're looking at a 20 year time frame here. It's extraordinarily difficult to predict what will be happening 10 or 15 years from now. If the initial effort takes off, the upper #s may prove correct - just as building highways always results in more cars on the road and more congestion than any of the original models suggest. If it's not so successful, then the #s will be lower.
Also keep in mind this isn't a single project - it's a projection of how we want to steer "organic" growth. It's not like we're trying to dump this entire thing on the ground in one fell swoop.
gemini, the infrastructure numbers are the same no matter what. This project is proceeding without adequate analysis.
Finally, #9 has conveniently not quoted this graph from the financial study: The Vision Plan contains greater redevelopment capacity than the Market Study Demand to allow flexibility for market competition as redevelopment occurs, and to compensate for differing densities as specific projects are built. In addition, the Vision Plan describes a coordinated series of public and private improvements, that could potentially exceed market projections if implemented successfully. The goal is to maximize market potential that will reinforce the principles of the plan, to the benefit of both the public and individual property owners.
I gave the link and that should suffice. Besides, that paragraph is B.S. filler. Pure consultant bullshit.
This makes a serious point that City Council approved the Vision Plan without any real understanding of the project or the consequences. One also has to question the value of the Oversight Committee. This project does not appear to be feasible as designed.
Does anyone really understand this project?
I think I said this already, but the marketing study was done by Development Strategies, one of the members of the consulting team. They specialize in this kind of analyis; that's why they're on the team. It was NOT done by "planners with handbooks."
Could it just barely be possible for you to write one email w/o insulting somebody? I have no problem with people asking questions on this effort. In fact, I just spent 4 hours answering a bunch of them. Hell, I've had - and will continue to have - plenty of questions myself. The problem with you, Mr. 9, is that you assume bad intentions, bad faith, bad motives - on the part of the City, on the part of the consultant team, on the part of planners everywhere. And the poor old citizens who are involved with this are all stupid - we're all getting "conned."
Everybody is acting in bad faith except you in your white hat.
If you would like for me to put you in contact with the Development Strategies head guy, please let me know. Or you can show up on the 24th at 6 p.m. and talk with him yourself.
You keep refering to "this project." It's NOT a project. This isn't Universe Knoxville, or the Convention Center, or even the Market Square Redevelopment. This is a vision plan (complete) and an action plan (under development) for the 20 year development direction of a the south waterfront. It will be realized by tens or hundreds of individual projects. There will be literally thousands of decision points at places along the way - before a particular private piece is approved, before a certain amount of $$ is spent on a particular public piece, etc.
Hiring a land development firm like Turkey Creek to do this kind of plan is about as backasswards as you get.
I think I said this already, but the marketing study was done by Development Strategies, one of the members of the consulting team. They specialize in this kind of analyis; that's why they're on the team. It was NOT done by "planners with handbooks."
No, that is not what you wrote. You wrote:
The demand for different kinds of housing has been carefully studied and estimated by Development Strategies, a part of the current consultant team that specializes in this kind of analysis. The analysis was based on that market and demographic analysis that you keep assuming (wrongly) wasn't done. I don't know if that report has been made public, but all the Oversight Committee has seen it.
Where in the reports is it written they also did a marketing analysis study? Your reference was to housing not retail, commercial, and restaurant space. The study has not been made public. I am putting forth a good faith effort to learn the truth about this plan and as a member of the Oversight Committee I expect you to also put forth a good faith effort to provide information to the public.
The problem with you, Mr. 9, is that you assume bad intentions, bad faith, bad motives - on the part of the City, on the part of the consultant team, on the part of planners everywhere. And the poor old citizens who are involved with this are all stupid - we're all getting "conned."
I assumed nothing until the final work product was available. For you to suggest I had preconceived prejudices is not correct. I made no comments about this plan until it was final and on paper.
City Council voted on and approved unanimously the "Vision Plan" which was a product of public meetings not the work of the various professional firms who suggested a much more conservative plan. No matter which plan was approved the 139 million dollar figure for infrastructure is the same. The question must be answered, was the much higher plan approved to justify the infrastructure expense? The impression is that City Council chose to trust the process and not independently review the material. Isn't that a rubber stamp vote?
I think there is proof of bad faith in that Council vote. Can you tell us without a doubt that there is not rubber-stamping going on? You know very well that it is impossible for 1.48 million square feet of commercial space, a space larger than West Town Mall, to succeed in that area even in twenty years or even in forty years. There is not sufficient parking in the plan for that much space. There is not sufficient high income demographics in that area. This area is one of the rockiest areas in Tennessee. All construction costs more in that area and that is why it is not built up. Have the infrastructure costs account for the rocky terrain? Were core samples drilled? Is there a comprehensive geological study of the entire area?
What is the purpose of the Oversight Committee? I would assume it is to make sure that City Council does not vote on and approve an impossible and unfeasible plan. Yet isn’t that exactly what happened? As a member of that group I feel you owe the people an explanation of how a unanimous Council vote could take place on such an impossible plan. Don't throw rocks at me because I saw the problems your group missed. If anything you should be glad to have someone take a critical look at this plan. It is clear I am one of a very few that has done so.
Hiring a land development firm like Turkey Creek to do this kind of plan is about as backasswards as you get.
That is not what I wrote. I wrote:
Consider this my request to a member of the Knoxville South Waterfront Oversight Committee, please hire a specialized marketing firm to do a marketing analysis. You can call the Turkey Creek Land Partners and ask them who they used. Since they have the most successful retail project in this State they are a good reference.
I wrote that you could use the Turkey Creek Land Partners as a source to find a good firm to do the marketing analysis.
This plan is proceeding way too quickly without proper review. Please make public the Development Strategies work product so the public may review it.
The final result of this plan is the need for 139 million dollars of taxpayer money. There has been no proof offered to the public that this will not be money thrown down a hole. The cost of the roads in this plan is 5 million dollars. That is what was done for Turkey Creek and other shopping centers. The public needs to know why another 134 million dollars of taxpayer money is required. The taxpayers have a right to know how much risk is involved in this plan.
Do you honestly think the people will not start a petition for a referendum on this plan if there is not a real effort to communicate with the taxpayers? The people of Knoxville deserve answers. If I were Mayor Haslam I would invite the public to the Convention Center and explain this plan. I would televise the meeting so every taxpayer could find out why this costs so much money and what the real risks are.
It's like the Internet is a giant toilet bowl, and you're a huge ass blocking all the light, endlessly farting just for the reverberations, but never shitting.
#9 said ". . .Could you take a moment of your time to review the material before you mistakenly comment? That is so irritating. You just comment without doing any research.. . ."
So where's the "fact" (your word) the city cannot issue bonds? Or did you not "take a moment of your time to review the material before you mistakenly comment?"
I've spent the evening taking my husband to a lovely birthday dinner with lots of wine and good friends at Sapphire (hey guys, did you know Charlie Thomas is back in town?) so I'm just now reading this delightful discussion.
The digit asks: Gemini says retail follows the rooftops. Really, is that what they teach at UT?
Yeah, there and pretty much everywhere else. Without a big enough customer base, retail won't succeed. Duh.
He also writes: Kinda embarrassing that everyone has gotten the name wrong for so long because it was wrong on the City website. So no one did ANY due diligence to check out Fregonese Calthorpe?
Gemini, Bill Lyons, this is a rather embarrassing event isn't it?
Yup, I pulled the name of the firm out of head incorrectly. It's definitely Fregonese Calthorpe rather than Calthorpe Fregonese. Sorry for the mistake. But no, in the realm of the thousands of mistakes I've made it my life, I don't find this one particularly embarrasing.
#9 continues: a bunch of New Urbanists wackos out of Portland, Oregon.
Fregonese Calthorpe is a highly respected, nationally known planning firm. And omigod don't forget to mention that Hargreaves are out of - gasp - Cambridge, Mass! Anybody "not from around here" must be wackos.
And continues further: I have yet to hear what the people of South Knoxville want. The pack has clearly been conned but that is no surprise.
To say that South Knoxvillians have been "conned" about this plan is pretty damn insulting - and untrue.
South Knoxvillians turned out by the hundreds for the public meetings. If you read the vision plan, you will see their concerns, issues, and vision for their community are very much incorporated. In fact, the consultant team continues to refine and add alternatives to the plan based on public input. There will be another round of public input about stuff in the action plan currently being developed - including form based zoning codes.
Mamaw wrote: As for the UK bonds, I understand they failed because they were NOT backed by the city or the county or any other public entity. If (when) UK failed all the bondholders would be left with was a silly pointyheaded building.
That's what I thought too. I've been wondering all day what the heck the City's bond rating had to with UK.
Finally, the digit wrote: I do not understand why the City did not call the Turkey Creek Land Partners to look at this project.
And Edens replied: Because some things are so perfect that attempting to replicate them would be a sin.
That's pretty much the funniest f'ing thing I've heard all day - and I laughed a LOT tonight. Thanks, Matt.
Let me add that if the City had hired Turkey Creek Land Partners to look at this project, the outcry from South Knoxville would have been audible clear out to westknox where you are. I don't like to speak for others, but I can promise you that one thing nobody in south Knoxville wants the waterfront to look like, be like, smell like, or be "planned" like is Turkey Creek.
>I do not understand why the City did not call the Turkey Creek Land >Partners to look at this project.
Because some things are so perfect that attempting to replicate them would be a sin.
>What I find interesting is that #9 is such a magnet for discussion.
Yeah, it's like virtual whack-a-mole, in some regards.
Although, at the moment, put me down in the procrastination column. Parsing #9's statements is more satisfying than trying to sort out the mess of a script that I'm working on.
Perhaps that's the whiff of desperation he sensed?
Well, Randy raises an interesting point so I will jump in because the question deserves a response. I guess it depends on how the topic is framed. A lot of the initial reactions on this thread have to do with specific issues that were posited. I participated here after receiving a private email asking me if the city could not issue bonds and pointing me to this discussion. I thought correcting that misimpression was important despite my belief that it not appropriate for me to use this, or any other forum, and a device to lobby for city policy positions.
I did notice the original thread and appreciate R