Norfolk History

[ronsmytheiii]

http://www.cardcow.com/161993/aerial-view-of-down-town-norfolk-and-waterfront-norfolk-virginia-norfolk/

[varider]

I wish I could travel in time back to 20th century Norfolk..

Its a shame that most of the buildings in these postcards have been torn down decades ago.

[urbanvb]

The photo of the waterfront is to die for. What density!

[varider]

Norfolk 1984

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/1092872.jpg

Norfolk 2007/2008

That's progress in my boook

[usermel]

I humbly agree. From the 1965 picture to the 2007/2008, WOW!! Nothing else to say, I agree, great progress. Some cities lok the same as they did in 1980!!! L.G.N.M

[urbanlife]

I humbly agree. From the 1965 picture to the 2007/2008, WOW!! Nothing else to say, I agree, great progress. Some cities lok the same as they did in 1980!!! L.G.N.M

Of course, Norfolk has made great progress after running back to the stone age by removing most of what it would consider to be a downtown...which will always be the greatest mistake the city could of ever done...so much of its history and original urban fabric was erased from that...but the city is starting to learn the importance to urban development again.

[VBIllini13]

Of course, Norfolk has made great progress after running back to the stone age by removing most of what it would consider to be a downtown...which will always be the greatest mistake the city could of ever done...so much of its history and original urban fabric was erased from that...but the city is starting to learn the importance to urban development again.

Yes, the city made a mistake by completely bulldozing the city during urban renewal. But honestly, if they hadn't Norfolk would have been much worse off. Most of those "historic" structures that were demolished were deteriorating, disgusting, dangerous slums that were just falling apart or wharfs. Urban renewal was meant to attract new businesses and residents into the city and make it a safer place, and, in that sense, it did. Consider the successes of urban renewal in Norfolk: the Tides moved into Downtown, many businesses, employing thousands moved into the city, Nauticus and the USS Wisconsin were brought in, Scope, the list goes on. What was gained from demolishing those unsanitary slums and structures far surpassed what was lost.

[MissySchmidt]

what year was the historic picture taken? I recognize Waterside, so couldn't have been '65, right? what are the big flat white objects in the spot that is now Town Point Park?

[varider]

I put a caption... guess nobody saw it.

The first picture was Norfolk 1984

[urbanlife]

Yes, the city made a mistake by completely bulldozing the city during urban renewal. But honestly, if they hadn't Norfolk would have been much worse off. Most of those "historic" structures that were demolished were deteriorating, disgusting, dangerous slums that were just falling apart or wharfs. Urban renewal was meant to attract new businesses and residents into the city and make it a safer place, and, in that sense, it did. Consider the successes of urban renewal in Norfolk: the Tides moved into Downtown, many businesses, employing thousands moved into the city, Nauticus and the USS Wisconsin were brought in, Scope, the list goes on. What was gained from demolishing those unsanitary slums and structures far surpassed what was lost.

I would disagree with this, but there is little that could really be debated about this because Norfolk chose to go so far to one direction with urban renewal. Sure, things are finally starting to happen, but it also took over 50years for much of this to happen, and I dont think one could successfully argue that it was because the city tore down so much of their downtown.

I guess the closest thing that could be debated there is the urban renewal to downtown and the renovation to Ghent. If the city tore down all the old buildings of Ghent to make room for progress would that neighborhood be the same as it is today? There would be a good chance much of the area would be open land or suburban apartment complexes.

The only other hypothetical argument would be if the city spent that money toward rehabilitating its downtown through the effects of gentrification there is a possibility the downtown would of been far more successful and would have grown to a much larger size by now. Ghent wasnt always the safest place to be and I remember downtown Norfolk even after urban renewal still wasnt the safest place to be either.

Also another factor to look at is housing, it would be much easier and cheaper to renovate older buildings that it is to build new ones, thus would mean the city would of had a higher and more affordable housing stock by now that would or producing much more vibrant street life. In the sense, it could of been much more like a Philly north if the city decided to save rather than tear down.

Of course all of this is theory, and I am a strong believer in working with what is currently at hand, which means Norfolk has to push for more modern day theories in urban planning that has had true signs of working and allow for architecture to adapt to new forms of construction to help reshape the city, much like what we are going to see with the new library building. Hopefully within another 50 years, Norfolk will be so far developed that the mistakes that the city made over 50 years ago are much less noticed.

[VBIllini13]

I would disagree with this, but there is little that could really be debated about this because Norfolk chose to go so far to one direction with urban renewal. Sure, things are finally starting to happen, but it also took over 50years for much of this to happen, and I dont think one could successfully argue that it was because the city tore down so much of their downtown.

I guess the closest thing that could be debated there is the urban renewal to downtown and the renovation to Ghent. If the city tore down all the old buildings of Ghent to make room for progress would that neighborhood be the same as it is today? There would be a good chance much of the area would be open land or suburban apartment complexes.

The only other hypothetical argument would be if the city spent that money toward rehabilitating its downtown through the effects of gentrification there is a possibility the downtown would of been far more successful and would have grown to a much larger size by now. Ghent wasnt always the safest place to be and I remember downtown Norfolk even after urban renewal still wasnt the safest place to be either.

Also another factor to look at is housing, it would be much easier and cheaper to renovate older buildings that it is to build new ones, thus would mean the city would of had a higher and more affordable housing stock by now that would or producing much more vibrant street life. In the sense, it could of been much more like a Philly north if the city decided to save rather than tear down.

Of course all of this is theory, and I am a strong believer in working with what is currently at hand, which means Norfolk has to push for more modern day theories in urban planning that has had true signs of working and allow for architecture to adapt to new forms of construction to help reshape the city, much like what we are going to see with the new library building. Hopefully within another 50 years, Norfolk will be so far developed that the mistakes that the city made over 50 years ago are much less noticed.

Listen, I can't speak for everyone, but I took UP 101, so you don't have to repetitively state what we all know could have been done. But I am telling you that this is the reason why Norfolk chose to level its downtown. Slums in the central business district don't make much appeal to businesses wanting to relocate. It's what most cities did with urban renewal funds and it's what Norfolk did (hearing from the Planning and Economic Development departments). In the time of urban renewal, it was in fact much cheaper to demolish and construct new buildings and low income apartments than it was to renovate the buildings because the government was giving low interest loans to cities subsidizing two-thirds of the money needed to subsidize planning, start-up costs, property acquisition, demolition, and relocation of federally approved urban renewal projects under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949. What Norfolk did through urban renewal wasn't necessarily what we would call socially acceptable today by segregating low-income residents from other residents, but it did generate an enormous positive effect on the city's economic development.

[varider]

I would disagree with this, but there is little that could really be debated about this because Norfolk chose to go so far to one direction with urban renewal. Sure, things are finally starting to happen, but it also took over 50years for much of this to happen, and I dont think one could successfully argue that it was because the city tore down so much of their downtown.

I guess the closest thing that could be debated there is the urban renewal to downtown and the renovation to Ghent. If the city tore down all the old buildings of Ghent to make room for progress would that neighborhood be the same as it is today? There would be a good chance much of the area would be open land or suburban apartment complexes.

The only other hypothetical argument would be if the city spent that money toward rehabilitating its downtown through the effects of gentrification there is a possibility the downtown would of been far more successful and would have grown to a much larger size by now. Ghent wasnt always the safest place to be and I remember downtown Norfolk even after urban renewal still wasnt the safest place to be either.

Also another factor to look at is housing, it would be much easier and cheaper to renovate older buildings that it is to build new ones, thus would mean the city would of had a higher and more affordable housing stock by now that would or producing much more vibrant street life. In the sense, it could of been much more like a Philly north if the city decided to save rather than tear down.

Of course all of this is theory, and I am a strong believer in working with what is currently at hand, which means Norfolk has to push for more modern day theories in urban planning that has had true signs of working and allow for architecture to adapt to new forms of construction to help reshape the city, much like what we are going to see with the new library building. Hopefully within another 50 years, Norfolk will be so far developed that the mistakes that the city made over 50 years ago are much less noticed.

Uhh I don't even seee the point of loooking back on the urban renewal days. Supposedly the buildings were all crapped up with no plumbing or running H20. I dont really care about the past becasue I have seen how much progress the city has made in the last couple decades. Downtown is now home to thousands of more residents, new restaurants, is arguably the shopping "mecca" of Hampton Roads, has AHL hockey, MiLB baseballl, new hotels, office towers, parks, sidewalks, transit improvements.. I'm even more excited for the future. The new residential units that come online and people move into, the more opportunity for retail and a sustainable city. The new library, consolidated courts complex, potential for new office buildings once the economy is prosperous again, transit extensions/improvements such as HSR, LR.. retail consultant, etc, etc.Everything is setting up for downtown Norfolk to be a happenng place in the coming years. The city sat stagnant for so long.. but there's no arguing the resurgence and revitalization of the urban center in the past decades. The 1984/2008 picture can attest to this resurgence and the past developments like Wells Fargo, Belmont, TCC, Arts HQ, 201 show that the momentum is not slowing down. Norfolk may be a force to be reckoned with by 2020. Just my opinion.

[urbanlife]

Listen, I can't speak for everyone, but I took UP 101, so you don't have to repetitively state what we all know could have been done. But I am telling you that this is the reason why Norfolk chose to level its downtown. Slums in the central business district don't make much appeal to businesses wanting to relocate. It's what most cities did with urban renewal funds and it's what Norfolk did (hearing from the Planning and Economic Development departments). In the time of urban renewal, it was in fact much cheaper to demolish and construct new buildings and low income apartments than it was to renovate the buildings because the government was giving low interest loans to cities subsidizing two-thirds of the money needed to subsidize planning, start-up costs, property acquisition, demolition, and relocation of federally approved urban renewal projects under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949. What Norfolk did through urban renewal wasn't necessarily what we would call socially acceptable today by segregating low-income residents from other residents, but it did generate an enormous positive effect on the city's economic development.

Oh I am not arguing the points that our country made during that era, I have read alot about that and it was a choice that was made where there was little effort put into the possibility of the effects of erasing so much history for the effort of progression...but then again, buildings that were only 50 years old in 1950 were just seen as rundown old buildings, much like how we look at buildings that were constructed 50 years ago today. (basically, that kind of mindset is what needs to stop in this country, it is not always best to tear down every fabric of our history.)

But with that said, I do understand why they made those choices, even if they turned out to be the wrong ones to make.

The current state of Norfolk, I see alot of possibility for the city, especially with light rail coming online. Trust me when I say, that light rail will be the game changer for that city. In the next ten years you guys are going to see alot of new things begin to happen there that is focused around that, including the extension to the Oceanfront and the beginning work on the second line in the city. Though, I dont think Norfolk will be fortunate to stay the center of the region, I think we will see that center begin to spread over the 264 corridor, which means most of the major urban growth will happen between downtown and the oceanfront.

It will be interesting to see what kind of power struggle that comes from this, in order for Norfolk to out do VB, it will need to look at strengthening its routes between downtown and Oceanview, the inner connection of Norfolk's neighborhoods are key to their successes.

Uhh I don't even seee the point of loooking back on the urban renewal days. Supposedly the buildings were all crapped up with no plumbing or running H20. I dont really care about the past becasue I have seen how much progress the city has made in the last couple decades. Downtown is now home to thousands of more residents, new restaurants, is arguably the shopping "mecca" of Hampton Roads, has AHL hockey, MiLB baseballl, new hotels, office towers, parks, sidewalks, transit improvements.. I'm even more excited for the future. The new residential units that come online and people move into, the more opportunity for retail and a sustainable city. The new library, consolidated courts complex, potential for new office buildings once the economy is prosperous again, transit extensions/improvements such as HSR, LR.. retail consultant, etc, etc.Everything is setting up for downtown Norfolk to be a happenng place in the coming years. The city sat stagnant for so long.. but there's no arguing the resurgence and revitalization of the urban center in the past decades. The 1984/2008 picture can attest to this resurgence and the past developments like Wells Fargo, Belmont, TCC, Arts HQ, 201 show that the momentum is not slowing down. Norfolk may be a force to be reckoned with by 2020. Just my opinion.

Because cities should never forget the mistakes that they have made over the years. That is the only way to try and prevent from making the same ones twice. But in the past 10-12 years, Norfolk has clearly been showing signs of improvement and moving in the right direction, for the most part.

Edited February 2, 2010 by urbanlife

[VBIllini13]

Okay, I get what you're trying to say now, and yes, I agree.

[varider]

The current state of Norfolk, I see alot of possibility for the city, especially with light rail coming online. Trust me when I say, that light rail will be the game changer for that city. In the next ten years you guys are going to see alot of new things begin to happen there that is focused around that, including the extension to the Oceanfront and the beginning work on the second line in the city. Though, I dont think Norfolk will be fortunate to stay the center of the region, I think we will see that center begin to spread over the 264 corridor, which means most of the major urban growth will happen between downtown and the oceanfront.

It will be interesting to see what kind of power struggle that comes from this, in order for Norfolk to out do VB, it will need to look at strengthening its routes between downtown and Oceanview, the inner connection of Norfolk's neighborhoods are key to their successes.

I agree LR may be the game changer.

It will be very interesting to see if the urban center shifts to Virginia Beach in the coming years. The reason I think VB might be able to give Norfolk a run for their money is the fact that they are planning to build a grid system, have a larger population/tax base, are a resort area, and have a higher median income. But who knows. They need to get TC funded before we even talk about this.

[usermel]

Hey guys/gals I feel the next step to urban growth is city to city partnerships. Va Beach/Norfolk together can work wonders. Maybe the new givernor will do more to attract new BIG companies here!! We all have GREAT ideas and as I always say "thats a good thing"!! Norfolk needs more but, has done something. Not as much as we would like but, hey, this is the south! And we have a very strong military economy that the metro has gotten fat of for years so a strong financial center never needed to be a priority. I hope now we will be a region and metro and city(Norfolk) about both income makers. Imagine a Chase bank downtown Norfolk and many law firms etc.! Imagine downtown Norfolk becoming a place people in the suburbs want to live. Imagine downtown Norfolk being the place to be all year around. Cities are what WE make them.

The city of Norfolk needs to FOCUS on making Norfolk the total center of ALL entertainment and financial center as well and shopping center and much more. The reason New York City and D.C and other cities have strong downtowns is they are the center of culture and finance and shopping and entertainment etc.! Norfolk has been a military town/city forever going back to the start of our great region. When the population was over 300,000 in the 1950's it was because of the military during and right after the war. After the Vietnam War ended. The population in Norfolks city limits went down and down and leveled of to were it is now. This area is built on military money from Oceana and the ship building and of course the miltary bases! L.G.N.M

[usermel]

Also guys/gals. When we become a metro FOCUSED economic development outside of what the military brings then we may become as Charlotte has and Atlanta. That said, it may be why Norfolk hasnt grown as much as we'd like for fear they would lose military contracts like Oceana almost lost out to Florida or Texas(I forget which state) because of complaints of overgrowth!! Truly I have no idea if it being the way it is isnt better because of the stability we have even during the downturn we had an above the nation averge in unemployment! Oh well, the beat goes on and in 30 years if Im still alive I hope to see a very very urban metro and Norfolk!!! L.G.N.M

[urbanfan]

Also guys/gals. When we become a metro FOCUSED economic development outside of what the military brings then we may become as Charlotte has and Atlanta. That said, it may be why Norfolk hasnt grown as much as we'd like for fear they would lose military contracts like Oceana almost lost out to Florida or Texas(I forget which state) because of complaints of overgrowth!! Truly I have no idea if it being the way it is isnt better because of the stability we have even during the downturn we had an above the nation averge in unemployment! Oh well, the beat goes on and in 30 years if Im still alive I hope to see a very very urban metro and Norfolk!!! L.G.N.M

Actually, all we would have to do to become Charlotte is buy back the banks they bought from us. People seem to forget that Charlotte is what it is today because they successfully and aggressively bought up as many banks as they possibly could at our expense. Had bankers in Norfolk had that type of aggressiveness, it would be Norfolk not Charlotte with the incredible explosion.

[virginia pe]

Actually, all we would have to do to become Charlotte is buy back the banks they bought from us. People seem to forget that Charlotte is what it is today because they successfully and aggressively bought up as many banks as they possibly could at our expense. Had bankers in Norfolk had that type of aggressiveness, it would be Norfolk not Charlotte with the incredible explosion.

It wasn't the Norfolk bankers who were asleep at the switch. There are a number of reasons the North Carolina banks have taken over the industry.

Traditionally, many states restricted banks to operating in just their home county, or their home county and other contiguous counties. Banks could form state-wide associations, but they were still separate, local banks. This was an effort to protect "local banks" - people wanted to deal with the hometown bank, not some big corporation, and the states passed regulations to accommodate them.

For years, banking regulations in North Carolina were less restrictive than in most other states. This allowed NC banks to be more innovative, offering services and products to their customers that were not permitted in other states. NC also permitted state-wide banks, so a customer could do business with his bank anywhere in the state. The NC banks grew bigger, stronger, and more versatile.

Everything changed after Congress allowed interstate banking in 1994. NC passed laws permitting their banks to go into other states more quickly than the other states, giving the NC banks a head start on interstate banking.

Since the NC banks were already operating state-wide, they were better able to put together the large organizations needed to operate multi-state banking operations. The home town banks were required by the state regulations to be small, so they did not have enough strength to fight the big boys when the federal laws were changed. Ironically, regulations that forced the small-town banks to stay small in order to protect them from the big banking giants contributed to the demise of the banks they were intended to protect.

Because of the big corporations that were headquartered in the states near North Carolina (Virginia, Georgia, Florida), those markets were more attractive to the NC banks than NC was to banks in other states, so the NC banks acted more agressively to expand into the more lucrative areas. North Carolina was not a very attractive market to Sovran Bank, Bank of Virginia, First Virginia, etc., but Virginia very tempting to Wachovia and NationsBank.

While the Norfolk bankers could have been more aggressive, it was more a combination of Congress and state legislators that got us where we are today than the bankers themselves.

[usermel]

Great,great info Virginia PE. Our state is always a move to slow. Remember the Triangle Medical complex that we were about to get? That also went to North Carolina. I have been to Raleigh and Greensboro and Charlotte and some of the other cities in North Carolina and one thing is clear. The growth is statewide especially in the larger cities. Virginia PE had some great facts and cleared up alot for all of us I believe! From the local to the county to the state government its a system of steps. North Carolina just knew for some reason that they were making the best moves for there state long term.

VA may just be so dependent on the Northern Virginia government jobs and companies and Richmonds political influence as well as Fortune 500 comapnies and our areas military presence that they just dont see urgency to make the moves North Carolina did on a statewide level. I just hope that soon we can get pliticians in place that finally want to diversify our states economy as a whole and not just the D.C metro area(NOVA)! GREAT INFO VIRGINIA PE!!! L.G.N.M

[fanguy9010]

Not quite sure I understand the fascination with banking/finance. Plus, isn't Richmond already the regional banking/finance center for most of VA, and parts of surrounding states. Baltimore is the banking/finance for NoVA, DC, and surrounding states.

[varider]

Not quite sure I understand the fascination with banking/finance. Plus, isn't Richmond already the regional banking/finance center for most of VA, and parts of surrounding states. Baltimore is the banking/finance for NoVA, DC, and surrounding states.

Uhh maybe becasue banking/finance = lots of jobs + lots of money + lots of taxes+ lots of skyscrapers + lots of young professionals = a vibrant downtown?&& why do you keep bringing up RIC? Norfolk is the financial center of SE VA/NE NC.. so that's all I care about.

[urbanlife]

Uhh maybe becasue banking/finance = lots of jobs + lots of money + lots of taxes+ lots of skyscrapers + lots of young professionals = a vibrant downtown?&& why do you keep bringing up RIC? Norfolk is the financial center of SE VA/NE NC.. so that's all I care about.

Doesnt Richmond have more financing and banking companies that Norfolk does?

[varider]

Doesnt Richmond have more financing and banking companies that Norfolk does?

Yeah, but what does that have to do with Norfolk?

HR has: HQs (#= amongst VAs biggest banks)

Towne Bank #6 (Portsmouth)

HR Bankshares #14 (Norfolk)

Bank of the Commonwealth # 20 (Norfolk)

Old Point National Bank #27(Virginia Beach)

Monarch Bank #35 (Norfolk)

First Bankshares #89 (Suffolk)

Bank @Lantec #106 (Virginia Beach)

Virginia Co. Bank #107 (Newport News)

Chartway (Credit Union) (Virginia Beach)

Regional HQs w/ office towers

SunTrust#5

Bank of America#4

Wells Fargo#1

BB&T#3

RIC has: HQs

First Market Bank #16(RIC)

Eastern VA Bankshares #22 (Tappahannock)

Franklin Financial Corp #26 (Glen Allen)

Community Bankers Trust #33 (Glen Allen)

Village Bank & Trust #36 (Midlothian)

First Capital Bank #46 (Glen Allen)

Virginia BanCorp #62 (RIC)

Peoples Bank of VA #68 (RIC)

Bank of Virginia #72 (Midlothian)

Virginia Buiness Bank #86 (RIC)

Regional HQs w/ Office Towers

I have no idea.

http://static.mgnetwork.com/rtd/flash/Bank/index.html

So from what I see.. Norfolk can hold it's own against RIC in the financial sector..and I don't think RIC is the "center of banking." If anybody is it would be NoVa

[fanguy9010]

@varider, sorry if i offended, but what i was getting at is that having a lot of finance/banking firms isn't necessarily going to create more vibrancy in downtown Norfolk or propel Hampton Roads status. Richmond's downtown area has an impressive roaster of banking/finance firms, law firms, and advertising agencies by most most standards yet I wouldn't consider it vibrant at all. NoVA doesn't particularly have lots of finance type firms, but its collection of defense consulting and information technology firms is among the best in world and it an extremely vibrant and thriving area.

Hampton Roads has a lot going for it: Port of Virginia, DoD/Navy, decent Sized Airport, beaches, etc but it is lacking a presence of major corporations. Once HR can convince some major corporation to move their HQ or set up major operation in HR, HR could easily be on its way to becoming the next Charlotte. I keep bring up RVA cause its a good point of reference for me, I live there for right now.