Jump to content

Norfolk Off-Topic


vdogg

Recommended Posts

I think a realistic announcement could be another anchor tenant at MacArthur, perhaps the Target that most people seem to want. I don't think there's any new news on the casino or light rail. Perhaps some more about the African Museum will be announced?

My wishes would be more development at Ft. Norfolk. Perhaps a hotel. Typically large hospitals have a hotel across the street..... Sentara,/CHKD/EVMS does not.

My longshot would to completely demo Military Circle and put a 20,000 seat arena there. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


What I'd like to hear:

  • Gateway Tower is fully or near fully leased, bringing more workers into downtown from the suburbs;
  • Target to take over Nordstrom spot at MacArthur helping to revitalize the mall;
  • Light rail to ODU and Base;
  • Scope and grounds to finally be enlarged/revitalized/modernized. VA Symphony practice space to be constructed and Chrysler Hall to be revitalized;
  • Revitalization of the waterfront area near Harbor Park. Make it a linear type park connecting Harbor Park to the Dominion Tower area. This may lead to future development near Harbor Park;
  • Saint Paul's quadrant seeing interest by the private sector for development opportunities and a time line for beginning removing some of the affordable housing

Interesting ideas:

  • New City Hall/Governmental Complex on site of current Wyndham Garden hotel;
  • Substantial hotel on Sentara Norfolk General campus;
  • The area adjacent to The Hague (waterway) being developed as a nice promenade/park with hardscaping and enhanced landscaping (place-making);
  • Art (sculptural/lighting/interactive) expanding into more of downtown (place-making);
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the 13News and WAVY live streams of the speech. Signal was kinda spotty but from what I caught:

-Usual economic and infrastructure announcements (low unemployment, housing purchases up, etc.)

-Several apartment developments that we’ve talked about. Off the top of my head, that’s another 500-1,000 units for the city. 

-Starwood and Gateway Tower developments are in the planning stages. The city is committed to finding a replacement for Nordstrom. No new tenant named for Gateway. 

-TCC Arts Center also still in planning.

-Probably the biggest development of the speech, Mayor Alexander realizes the city’s need for a new arena (applause), and said Norfolk is committed to building a new arena.

 -Mayor also thanked the Pamunkey tribe chief for his commitment to a casino in Norfolk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, zeppelin14 said:

Am I the only who noticed that in the pic, St. Paul's Blvd is down to one traffic lane with the right lane being only for buses and bikes?

 I was trying to ignore it. That is a heavily traveled road, and if they went through with that it would  be a disaster. For some reason Norfolk has this moronic idea that reducing lanes helps traffic flow. They’re trying it with Hampton Boulevard, and I guess now they want to try it with Saint Pauls. Simply unbelievable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoever designed that rendering has never tried to get onto 264 on a weekday. Hopefully that's just the artist's perspective, and not a proposed reality. I'm all for a bike-friendly Norfolk, but downtown is too compact to take away vehicular lanes, esp. when there's a bus stop at that very location.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, lammius said:

99.7% sure it’s art and you guys are reading too much into it. 

However, I’d point out that road diets aren’t usually aimed at improving traffic flow. They’re usually intended to slow traffic and reduce fatalities (there are over 40,000 traffic deaths a year in the US).  It’s not Norfolk being “Norfolk,” it’s a shift in philosophy in cities across the country. Whereas for decades last century the priority in street design and operation was to move more vehicles quickly, now the priority is to reduce fatalities, even if it slows traffic.  A pedestrian hit at 30 mph has a 50/50 shot at survival. At 20 mph there’s a 90% chance of survival. And for every 1 mph reduction in speed, the frequency of crashes decreases 5%.  So reducing speeds results in fewer crashes and less risk of fatalities.  In the US that philosophy is called “Vision Zero.”  In Europe it’s called “Stop the Child Murder.”  Something about the name has made their campaign more effective than the US counterpart. 

And if we truly want Downtown to expand across St Paul’s and Brambleton then the area needs to be walkable. Pedestrian bridges alone aren’t going to be enough. Even Virginia Beach has talked about reducing lanes on VB Blvd to make Town Center and Pembroke Mall more walkable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like the fact that motorists hate traffic getting onto 264, pedestrians hate crossing st pauls blvd, and when saint pauls district becomes a reality, it is going to be vital to be able to safely and easily cross st pauls blvd. One of the points of a road diet is to divert vehicle traffic onto other streets. Downtown norfolk is an urban aria, and relies on foot traffic, unlike the suburbs. If its difficult to walk around downtown than that serves as a deturrant to doing buisness, or living there. On a side note, if our cities weren't so sprawling,  driving in downtown traffic wouldn't suck so bad. If downtown had parking garages with direct access to the interstate, it would also reduce traffic on st pauls. Downtown norfolk is very conpact, but the problem is that we, as Americans still want to park as close to where we are going as possible. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A skywalk connecting the MacArthur side of downtown to the St. Paul District is a must. That or underpasses along St. Paul Blvd. (like the ones at Tidewater and VB Blvd or 21st and Monticello), but I can't see how the city could make such a thing work there. I'd definitely put a skywalk at St. Paul and Charlotte St., close to the HRT transfer station.

Explained the way laminus did above, that makes sense. The biggest flaw with this area is it being so vehicle dependent, and public transportation is seen as an option for poor people. We definitely need to be better connected and less dependent on cars.

Edited by BFG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one and only good thing that I can see in our lack of regionalism is that if somthing fails in one city, we can try it in the city next door. Could have been virginia beach but, If norfolk gets the arina, Hampton roads gets the arina. And if it fails in norfolk for whatever reason,  we can try it somewhere else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Virginia City said:

Honestly, Norfolk is the best possible place to put an arena.  It is the center of the whole metro area.

Agreed, and if we want to legitimately re-develop the military highway aria, than we need a legitimate anchor. An arina would be a good excuse to make the aria walkable. If we put it downtown, it can either fit near the new casino, or it can anchor the st pauls district. If it were on church street, it would create enough foot traffic to support many businesses. The best thing about putting anything in Norfolk is that it is an almost equal drive from all corners of the region. If it were at the beach, people in newport news, and Suffolk may find it inconvenient. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure there’s much space downtown...maybe next to Harbor Park, but it would require rerouting roads, and might even overlap the light rail line. I would’ve chosen somewhere in the St. Paul area, but it looks like that’s all planned. 

Maybe if/when they start tearing down Young Terrace?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lane reductions = misguided, veiled politically-fueled attempt at forced societal behavioral change. Slows traffic...yes, sure, but at the expense of increased commute times, heightened driver frustration and attendant road rage, increased neighborhood cut-throughs, increased EMS response times at peak traffic hours and during nuisance flooding incidents.

I happen to be an urbanite who walks everywhere yet owns several autos, including two which practically predate modernity and gulp gas & oil by the barrel.

And as to the aforementioned societal change? Nope.  Not giving up my combustion engines anytime soon.

 

Edited by baobabs727
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2019 at 11:26 PM, lammius said:

99.7% sure it’s art and you guys are reading too much into it. 

However, I’d point out that road diets aren’t usually aimed at improving traffic flow. They’re usually intended to slow traffic and reduce fatalities (there are over 40,000 traffic deaths a year in the US).  It’s not Norfolk being “Norfolk,” it’s a shift in philosophy in cities across the country. Whereas for decades last century the priority in street design and operation was to move more vehicles quickly, now the priority is to reduce fatalities, even if it slows traffic.  A pedestrian hit at 30 mph has a 50/50 shot at survival. At 20 mph there’s a 90% chance of survival. And for every 1 mph reduction in speed, the frequency of crashes decreases 5%.  So reducing speeds results in fewer crashes and less risk of fatalities.  In the US that philosophy is called “Vision Zero.”  In Europe it’s called “Stop the Child Murder.”  Something about the name has made their campaign more effective than the US counterpart. 

Ohh those crazy child-protecting Euros! Yeah, who would dare be pro-child murder? Almost as bad as pro-endangered toad murder. Pulls at the heartstrings with all the torque of an H1 Diesel Hummer.

Edited by baobabs727
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more of a paradigm shift than forced societal behavior change. Who and what are our streets for? For the last 50 years it was only the car. Now we are answering that question differently and giving more space and power to the pedestrian, and its transforming the city.  Also by now it's pretty much a non-partisan issue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_streets

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can't tell, this new arena is a big deal to me. I used Smoothie King Center in New Orleans as the precedent for this mockup (outlined in black). Smoothie King seats 17,500, but it's also 20 years old, so it may not be the best example, given what newer arenas offer.

However, it's not that much smaller than other modern arenas. While it barely fits next to Harbor Park - I think it would interfere with the Amtrak platform - it does fit in the St. Paul District. I dunno how a parking garage works here, and it might not mesh well with all the proposed housing. That said, I think where I placed it was where the city wants more towers anyway, so it might fit after all. Plus even in St. Paul, it's within walking distance of a two light rail lines, although getting from City Hall Ave. or Harbor Park to Church St. is not the most pedestrian friendly route. In my "plan", that changes.

arena1.jpg

arena2.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wholeheartedly believe a new arena must be in downtown (or very close). If not, it may kill the momentum downtown has built. A new arena would truly be a game changer for Norfolk (and the region). If downtown, it would be a greater catalyst for PRIVATE SECTOR development than MacArthur has been and it would help stabilize existing residential and commercial enterprises that have taken the risk of operating in downtown Norfolk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

I wholeheartedly believe a new arena must be in downtown (or very close).

Do you consider Military Circle close? I think everyone knows, even in city council, that the mall location is the best location for a new arena. It would be huge for that area and this gives the city a great chance to expand light rail north, even if initially it 'ends' at the arena but is open to build north after the arena is open. An arena in Military Circle will not affect building progress in downtown.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, zeppelin14 said:

Do you consider Military Circle close? I think everyone knows, even in city council, that the mall location is the best location for a new arena. It would be huge for that area and this gives the city a great chance to expand light rail north, even if initially it 'ends' at the arena but is open to build north after the arena is open. An arena in Military Circle will not affect building progress in downtown.

A new arena is a win wherever it may go.

I just like the idea of it downtown. Light rail is already there. Hotels are already there. Parking structures are already there. The baseball stadium is already there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand why Military Highway makes it the best spot logistically for the rest of Hampton Roads. And I understand the desire of city council and the mayor to help jumpstart redevelopment there. But I gotta agree with Carolina Boy. They should just bulldoze Scope and build there. It's downtown near a bunch of hotels, convenient to light rail and it wouldn't leave us with an aging dinosaur of an arena in a prime location.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.