Music Row Development

[JR Journey]

Recently, The Tennesseean posted a letter from Narvel Blackstock (husband and manager of Reba) speaking for a group that plans to redevelop parts of Music Row deemed 'blighted'. The main obstacle he says 'has been the refusal of one out-of-county resident to sell a seldom-used tiny tract of land in the middle of the blight.' He goes on to state that proceedings have begun to force the sale of the land, for the purpose of redevelopment.

The issue here is eminent domain. It has already been a hot issue across the country, and I don't have all the facts or even know the outcomes of federal cases in Cincinnati, Fort Worth, and others. Eminent domain has long been established for the purpose of building roads and other public projects. But is redevelopment of private property by private investors really constitutional when eminent domain is enforces? We all appreciate Music Row for what it is - the birthplace of country music as we know it today. Is preserving our heritage now grounds to enforce eminent domain?

Blackstock thinks so. The lady who owns the one piece of property that stands in the way refuses to speak with investors or even discuss alternatives, he says. "She says she is holding it because it was used to produce music. It is hard to understand how anyone who cares about the music industry and loves Music Row could stand in the way of badly needed improvements to the neighborhood." I am inclined to agree with Mr. Blackstock here.

Music Row is part of our musical heritage, and should be exalted thusly. Not only a part of our heritage, but forever a part of American culture. Redeveloping blighted areas of downtown Nashville is long overdue in my opinion. I am pleased to hear there are people out there who think Music Row is worth it too.

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080708/OPINION03/807080347/1008/OPINION01

[Brady]

The Supreme Court ruled on such a case a couple years ago where private land was taken by eminent domain and redeveloped by private investors. The thought was that the economic benefits of the redevelopment were for the good of the public and therefore constitutional. Ultimately, though, I think it was ruled that states have the right to determine whether eminent domain is enforceable in such a situation.

Personally, I think the notion that the government can declare eminent domain on private property only to pass it to another individual is ridiculous. The lady who owns the property may be acting irrationally, or she's waiting for a big payday, but as long as the property doesn't pose a safety hazard, I think it's hers to do whatever she wants. The issue reminds me of Montgomery Gentry's "Daddy Won't Sell The Farm."

[Matt B]

This woman will eventually get the money. MY father had a similar situation with his old house and for him he ended up getting double because the neighbor wouldn't budge for 2 years. He was willing to get out of the property (to move closer to his job) but his neighbor wasn't. As far as developing old 'problem' places on Music Row, I can see why some would want to do that and I imagine it'll be a high-rise condo/retail/office type of buildings to go into the place of the old 'houses' currently there.

[Stormy]

We don't have to yuppify every single inch of Urban space to death. We can allow some small places to remian unique to the cities they belong in. Why doesn't Navel do his developments on his land and leave this lady in peace.

[Matt B]

Stormy, it's just a way to make music row more 'modern' I suppose. But as an urbanite who happens to love loft style living (I love lofts that are in repurposed buildings the best though), I can see the appeal of such places. I also see your sentiment too.

[Stormy]

Stormy, it's just a way to make music row more 'modern' I suppose. But as an urbanite who happens to love loft style living (I love lofts that are in repurposed buildings the best though), I can see the appeal of such places. I also see your sentiment too.

But if they have to build another condo that looks exactly like the condo right next to it, can't they do that on their own property? Its not like anyone is going to notice if another condo is there. They might notice the interesting building. I love downtown living too, but if we don't check the developers here in Austin soon, there isn't going to be any downtown Austin left to do any living in. Just a bunch of identical condos so we can go to our identical Starbucks and eat at our identical Chilis.

[Brody]

Mean Eyed Cat here in Austin was ruined because of whatever that development is that went up next door. It went from a spacious, outdoor setting to an extremely cramped, enclosed area that makes you feel like you're in a chicken pen prison.

I'm with Brady on this issue, as long as you do what you're supposed to do with your land (pay taxes, ect.) no one should be able to take it from you, economic benefits be damned.

[JR Journey]

It just seems to me that this lady doesn't really care about the sentimental value of her building, only the value of her bank account. She is simply holding out for a big pay day. I can't say as I can blame her for that way of thinking. But we are talking about the run-down areas. I know exactly what they are talking about - and anyone who's ever made the trek to Music City does too. It's the places you drive where you want to lock your car doors. That little store on the corner where the door and the windows have bars on them, where the cashier is behind a cage. The country music capital should not look like that - at least not where the music is made. And I can totally see where this would help tourism and definitely be more accommodating for things like the Hall of Fame and Museum, the Ryman, RCA Studios, the CMA Music Fest - and even add more festivals of the like to Nashville if space permitted.

Eminent domain is not going away. It was always here for roads, etc. But to use it for private development ... I am all for it when that development is easily beneficial to everyone. Not only to the local residents - those who aren't bought out to build - who will see their property values go up and up, but to the nation and even the world. We will now have a clean and safe place to go when we want to seek out the heritage of our music. Plus, the charm of a lot of the old houses and building down there isn't going away. Most of these places have been kept up. We are talking about the ones allowed to become run-down and are basically a nuisance. These guys want to clean it up, tear it down, and build something better.

[Brady]

Eminent domain is not going away. It was always here for roads, etc. But to use it for private development ... I am all for it when that development is easily beneficial to everyone.

How about in the case of someone who's owned a little lot for 50 years and the city has grown up around them? Should they be forced to move because the newcomers decided that their lot was an eyesore or that it could be put to better use? There are a lot of scenarios and when you start taking private land and giving it to private developers, it'll open a whole can of worms. I'm all for individual rights and as long as someone's land isn't unsafe to the public, then the government should just keep their nose out of it.

[Jim Malec]

Progressive as I am, I agree with Brady--property rights exist for a reason. I know the piece of land they're talking about--and eyesore? Really? Man, if that's an eyesore...

Eminent domain, in my opinion, should only be exercised in cases where public safety is at stake, or where the land is interfering with current or future essential public works.

[Stormy]

It just seems to me that this lady doesn't really care about the sentimental value of her building, only the value of her bank account. She is simply holding out for a big pay day. I can't say as I can blame her for that way of thinking. But we are talking about the run-down areas. I know exactly what they are talking about - and anyone who's ever made the trek to Music City does too. It's the places you drive where you want to lock your car doors. That little store on the corner where the door and the windows have bars on them, where the cashier is behind a cage. The country music capital should not look like that - at least not where the music is made. And I can totally see where this would help tourism and definitely be more accommodating for things like the Hall of Fame and Museum, the Ryman, RCA Studios, the CMA Music Fest - and even add more festivals of the like to Nashville if space permitted.

Eminent domain is not going away. It was always here for roads, etc. But to use it for private development ... I am all for it when that development is easily beneficial to everyone. Not only to the local residents - those who aren't bought out to build - who will see their property values go up and up, but to the nation and even the world. We will now have a clean and safe place to go when we want to seek out the heritage of our music. Plus, the charm of a lot of the old houses and building down there isn't going away. Most of these places have been kept up. We are talking about the ones allowed to become run-down and are basically a nuisance. These guys want to clean it up, tear it down, and build something better.

Selling off our country to private developers to turn into the Mc US doesn't help anyone.

[pwdennis]

Eminant Domain will remain a hot issue. It is a civil liberties issue but the ACLU doesn't seem concerned with it. Fortunately, there is an organization dedicated to battling Eminant Domain abuses, the only true civil liberties group in the country ,THE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE. If you are ever the intended victim of an intended land grab, I suggest you contact them ASAP

[Joe]

It seems "JR Journey" is simply inventing arguments on behalf of "this lady" in order to justify proper upkeep of an area in Nashville that, honestly, isn't in bad condition. This collection of articles convinced me this is not about eminent domain, or what's in the best interest of the community; this is about a big private developer trying to force a smaller private owner out of her land.

Narvel's original op-ed: (I'm convinced, though, that he's honestly too smart to assume his business interest would engender widespread support from the community via an article like this)
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080708/OPINION03/807080347/1007/OPINION

Right-wing blowhard Phil Valentine hits the nail on the head with this Tennessean op-ed:
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080713/COLUMNIST0130/807130371/1008/

This article from About.com provides detail regarding Starstruck's continuing interest in music row's commercial retail-area properties, and blames the Tennessee legislature for not writing an eminent domain law that would avoid this issue:
http://nashville.about.com/od/governmentpolitics/a/mreminentdomain.htm

A collection of article links here suggesting that "this lady" -- Joy Ford -- is not simply holding out for more cash.
http://billhobbs.com/2008/07/injustice_on_music_row.html. Her business, though I've not heard of it, is apparently operational, and Ford said, "I just want to hold onto a business that has meant so much to my family and a lot of other folks in country music."

A Nashville City Paper article, with photo of so-called "blight": http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/news.php?viewStory=61588

A MapQuest shot of "23 Music Circle East." http://www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Nashville&state=TN&address=23+Music+Circle+East#a/maps/l::23+Music+Cir+E:Nashville:TN:37203-4327:US:36.151914:-86.78939:address:Davidson+County/m:hyb:13:36.151914:-86.789389:0::/io:0:::::f:EN:M:/e This plot of land is behind what used to be (most notably over the past 15 years) Shoney's restaurant and the George Jones gift shop, facing the Comfort Inn on Division Street, just east of the roundabout, divided by the fancy-schmancy new Demonbreun Street by a parking lot. Of all the places in Nashville that require a face-lift -- one of the sort that would require government to step in, anyway -- this is not it.

[PaulaW]

I'd seen most of the articles in the Tennessean, but had missed Mr Valentine's article. Thanks for pointing that out.

I dont live in Nashville, but I visit when I can, and in fact stay at that Comfort Inn around the corner from Ms Ford's building. I dont think ANY of that area is blighted at all. I mean, heck, what one of us owns property that doesnt always need a little fixing up (mine surely does), but it's far from blighted. I love staying there right next to Music Row. At least for now I do.

I think this comment (taken from the user-posted comments in Mr. Blackstock's article in the Tennessean) is right on the money:

Forcing an individual to give up their property for a private enterprise is theft, nothing more, and nothing less. It should not even be construed as eminent domain by anyone's definition. I do understand that there is a desire to build up the area for the betterment of the community, but you are talking about taking away a part of Nashville's Musical history just to build something entirely new to accommodate tourists who come to see those very things you wish to destroy.

[Funk]

Yeah, for Buddha's sake, let's not lose the George Jones Gift Shop.