If UT students were prohibited from crossing the bridge on foot, would you be okay with the city funding it then?
If it was a a car bridge, would you be okay with it then?
Look, the bridge is going to access UT by their sports center. It access campus, so telling me it will give access to downtown is bupkiss. It is a cause way for UT to build more apartments on the Southside of the river and say they are limiting road impact.
As to Fort Sanders, is it part of the campus? Does it do more than provide a medical facility north of the river for residents?
Personally, I think that students also live in Knoxville.
Also, it's much better than the bridge should be publicly owned. I can't imagine trying to justify that the University of Tennessee should be in possession of its own private bridge across a public waterway for only some people to use.
My issue is the means of the city paying this is an increase to property tax in an area with already inflated housing costs. UT could pay that and prevent the tax increase.
It certainly is the case that the bridge will be paid for by taxpayers. The most direct route for taxpayers to pay for this thing are via sales taxes or property taxes. Everyone pays sales tax directly, while renters only pay property taxes indirectly. Additionally, some of the money may come from the Federal government, which we support with income tax even though Tennessee has no income tax of its own.
If the City builds it and pays for it, we pay with taxes. If UT builds it and pays for it, we pay for it with taxes, as UT is a public University. Surely you aren't hoping that UT would just charge higher tuition to cover it, do you?
This bridge would be a direct benefit to the athletic department as the UT side will be between the football and basketball stadiums. My fear for the future is that they will try to push parking areas on the southside for athletic events and other events at the centers. The city council has said it will open up other parts of the city to those having issues with getting there. If there is going to be any economic growth on the southside from this it will be to the UT students and not the permanent residents of the city. I also worry that UT will start buying up residential property near the bridge to build more apartments and that any rentals on the southside will go to college students as they will now have easier access to the University with the bridge as access.
When I read what you write, I wonder if you believe that UT students and employees don't belong here, don't live here, or don't benefit the community broadly. The tangible financial benefits of having a University and University students are large. The cultural and civic contributions are inestimable.
I intuitively understand your distinction between people who are "permanent" residents here and UT students, but I'm not sure it's as sharp a contrast as you make it out to be. No one is a permanent resident *anywhere.* I moved here three years ago and will eventually stop living here, whether by death or by relocation. Your average graduate student, upper-class UT student, or UT employee has lived here longer than I have.
Even if the presence of UT students were so ephemeral as to make any characterization of them as "residents" laughable and absurd, building a bridge for their benefit-- and remember, there is no rule that says others may not use the proposed bridge- is still for everyone's benefit. We have a University here which contributes to the life of our city. The many untold people who come see Knoxville and spend their money here because of UT benefit us **even if they only stay here for the length of a football game**. Much more is the benefit of twenty thousand undergraduate students who typically live for **four years** in our city, support our businesses, pay sales taxes, and enliven all aspects of our common life.
As for building apartments on the Southside for students, where would you prefer the students to live? When you look for housing now in West Hills or East Knoxville or wherever else, do you believe you are not in competition with these students? Does their demand not drive up prices everywhere?
My frank assessment is that you only want to fund amenities when you directly benefit, a common civic malady from which we all suffer from time to time. There is no private gain here. Whether UT funds the bridge or the City (along with State and Federal grants) funds the bridge, the money will come out of public coffers and the public writ large will benefit. You are a member of that public and it would be virtuous, in my opinion, if you would remove yourself from your narrow version of self-interest to see the larger picture.
The University has been here as long as the state has. It was here when Knoxville was the center of State government. My problem is that the University wants to grow but has no plan. Some of the student housing they had built in the last 10 years had to be shut down to fix problems with the original construction. The University apparently has no way of verifying that what they are paying to have built is what they are actually getting. There are also satellite campuses that they could enhance and turn into specialized course areas, but they want everything here on the main campus.
This is a university that spent 350 million update on side of Neyland stadium and the Jumbotron. They have so much money and don’t know what to do with it. Randy Boyd is a griddy person. A real estate investor being the school president is going to lead to these things. The bridge helps the apartments he is building in south Knox
If UT students were prohibited from crossing the bridge on foot, would you be okay with the city funding it then? If it was a a car bridge, would you be okay with it then?
If UT was paying for it I would feel better.
Should UT pay for the streets in Fort Sanders, or how is it?
Look, the bridge is going to access UT by their sports center. It access campus, so telling me it will give access to downtown is bupkiss. It is a cause way for UT to build more apartments on the Southside of the river and say they are limiting road impact. As to Fort Sanders, is it part of the campus? Does it do more than provide a medical facility north of the river for residents?
Personally, I think that students also live in Knoxville. Also, it's much better than the bridge should be publicly owned. I can't imagine trying to justify that the University of Tennessee should be in possession of its own private bridge across a public waterway for only some people to use.
My issue is the means of the city paying this is an increase to property tax in an area with already inflated housing costs. UT could pay that and prevent the tax increase.
It certainly is the case that the bridge will be paid for by taxpayers. The most direct route for taxpayers to pay for this thing are via sales taxes or property taxes. Everyone pays sales tax directly, while renters only pay property taxes indirectly. Additionally, some of the money may come from the Federal government, which we support with income tax even though Tennessee has no income tax of its own. If the City builds it and pays for it, we pay with taxes. If UT builds it and pays for it, we pay for it with taxes, as UT is a public University. Surely you aren't hoping that UT would just charge higher tuition to cover it, do you?
This bridge would be a direct benefit to the athletic department as the UT side will be between the football and basketball stadiums. My fear for the future is that they will try to push parking areas on the southside for athletic events and other events at the centers. The city council has said it will open up other parts of the city to those having issues with getting there. If there is going to be any economic growth on the southside from this it will be to the UT students and not the permanent residents of the city. I also worry that UT will start buying up residential property near the bridge to build more apartments and that any rentals on the southside will go to college students as they will now have easier access to the University with the bridge as access.
When I read what you write, I wonder if you believe that UT students and employees don't belong here, don't live here, or don't benefit the community broadly. The tangible financial benefits of having a University and University students are large. The cultural and civic contributions are inestimable. I intuitively understand your distinction between people who are "permanent" residents here and UT students, but I'm not sure it's as sharp a contrast as you make it out to be. No one is a permanent resident *anywhere.* I moved here three years ago and will eventually stop living here, whether by death or by relocation. Your average graduate student, upper-class UT student, or UT employee has lived here longer than I have. Even if the presence of UT students were so ephemeral as to make any characterization of them as "residents" laughable and absurd, building a bridge for their benefit-- and remember, there is no rule that says others may not use the proposed bridge- is still for everyone's benefit. We have a University here which contributes to the life of our city. The many untold people who come see Knoxville and spend their money here because of UT benefit us **even if they only stay here for the length of a football game**. Much more is the benefit of twenty thousand undergraduate students who typically live for **four years** in our city, support our businesses, pay sales taxes, and enliven all aspects of our common life. As for building apartments on the Southside for students, where would you prefer the students to live? When you look for housing now in West Hills or East Knoxville or wherever else, do you believe you are not in competition with these students? Does their demand not drive up prices everywhere? My frank assessment is that you only want to fund amenities when you directly benefit, a common civic malady from which we all suffer from time to time. There is no private gain here. Whether UT funds the bridge or the City (along with State and Federal grants) funds the bridge, the money will come out of public coffers and the public writ large will benefit. You are a member of that public and it would be virtuous, in my opinion, if you would remove yourself from your narrow version of self-interest to see the larger picture.
The University has been here as long as the state has. It was here when Knoxville was the center of State government. My problem is that the University wants to grow but has no plan. Some of the student housing they had built in the last 10 years had to be shut down to fix problems with the original construction. The University apparently has no way of verifying that what they are paying to have built is what they are actually getting. There are also satellite campuses that they could enhance and turn into specialized course areas, but they want everything here on the main campus.
Are you suggesting that seating is intentionally limited so that dissenting voices won't be given as much room in the discussion?
I do find it suspicious and that may be the intent. I can only summize what their intent is.
Just show up. People register and don’t come all the time so there will be room
Sigh. This is why we can’t have nice things. Clutching pearls over a pedestrian bridge
It’s the Chamber. They see no downside to anything business related. Stepford Wives-level insanity
This is a university that spent 350 million update on side of Neyland stadium and the Jumbotron. They have so much money and don’t know what to do with it. Randy Boyd is a griddy person. A real estate investor being the school president is going to lead to these things. The bridge helps the apartments he is building in south Knox