If you proposed reducing McCabe by 9 holes and turning those into a big splash pad, playground, and picnic pavilions, you might have a winning issue.

But turning our limited recreational space—even underutilized recreational space—into housing is DOA politically.

There is so much underutilized land in Nashville that we should upzone and redevelop before we mess with any golf courses.

I love y’all, but the whole “replace golf courses with affordable housing” is such a political loser IMO. A rhetorical gift to the NIMBYs.

I suppose the question is: Do height restrictions encourage developers to build less expensive homes? Or do the height restricted two-story homes end up roughly as expensive as the unrestricted three-story homes, just at a higher price per square foot?

I don’t have data either way.

What do you mean? Doesn’t a three story 3,000 ft² single family home enable more density than a two story 3,000 ft² single family home?

Feels weird to say that’s great news, but that’s great news.

Seems like a reductionist take, don’t you think? Hating an entire genre because songwriters use AI to flesh out some demos?

Country music can be bad and it can be great.

Why did they remove them?

Easily the story of the year IMO.

The pattern here is personalism. Trump views the federal treasury as a discretionary fund for dispensing patronage and largesse; he regards the White House as his private property; he regards DOJ as (literally) his personal lawyers, & the military & law enforcement as his personal security team.

Framing this as a “preferential funding” offer deeply misrepresents the actual contents of the proposal.

It would effectively allow Trump to revoke *all* Vandy’s federal funding on a whim. It would destroy the university’s independence and credibility. Only a fool would sign.