Jump to content

Norfolk Off-Topic


vdogg

Recommended Posts


Some news articles are labeling Norfolk one of the  worst if not the worst city to live in on the east coast. Which is sad to me because it seems the people writing the articles only focus on the news which in turn is fair but they really should actually spend time here to get the real feeling because I honestly do not think we are more dangerous than Detroit and Emporia which is not a attack on their cities but its just a fact that there is no way we are that dangerous. 

Edited by mintscraft56
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mintscraft56 said:

Some news articles are labeling Norfolk one of the  worst if not the worst city to live in on the east coast. Which is sad to me because it seems the people writing the articles only focus on the news which in turn is fair but they really should actually spend time here to get the real feeling because I honestly do not think we are more dangerous than Detroit and Emporia which is not a attack on their cities but its just a fact that there is no way we are that dangerous. 

Who is writing what, and where?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mintscraft56 said:

Some news articles are labeling Norfolk one of the  worst if not the worst city to live in on the east coast. Which is sad to me because it seems the people writing the articles only focus on the news which in turn is fair but they really should actually spend time here to get the real feeling because I honestly do not think we are more dangerous than Detroit and Emporia which is not a attack on their cities but its just a fact that there is no way we are that dangerous. 

I wouldn’t put any stock in such an article. Usually it’s clickbait BS that no one takes seriously. Besides, next week Norfolk will end up in an equally questionable “best cities” puff piece. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, baobabs727 said:

Who is writing what, and where?

This is a older article but its still worth mentioning. fea9736986f97b2a2cbc6531d3a39bae.png 

 

We are even ranked more dangerous than New York City and Los Angeles. And we are as dangerous as Chicago. 

baf71cbadd2691a02abcea75b63777ae.pngbb4ed7ebd08d09802a73ece8682ff083.png6d11dc94321af1d88bd9ff4cdaea9ad6.png

Pretty surprising for me. 90% of other cities are ranked higher. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2022 at 2:14 PM, Arctic_Tern said:

Norfolk's border's are set, and they aren't going to move for at least 100 years. We can not look towards land expansion as our means of growing our economy. Looking outward for help from Chesapeake or Virginia Beach is a fools errand as well. They do not care if Norfolk or the area grows, they have what they want. Helping Norfolk could change the power structure of the area and they don't want that. Norfolk needs to plan with the mind that only Norfolk will help itself.

Amsterdam has a population of  over 900,000 people, within an area of 64 square miles. It is an international hub and can more than throw its weight around. It doesn't do all that with tall skyscrapers, but with amazing planning with a dense and walkable mindset.

If Norfolk wants to grow, they need to adopt the Amsterdam mindset. No more suburban neighborhoods, or gigantic surface parking lots, but dense, walkable and attractive housing. It needs to find ways to integrate dense low-to-midrise planning into every corner of the city to maximize its potential. They need to remove parking minimums, enact parking maximums, require businesses to implement pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and work on ways to open up the city to all forms of transportation. They need to revise their housing requirements to make it economic and easy for people to build  "missing middle" multifamily housing. There's a lot that they can do to make Norfolk an attractive place to live, but they actually have to start doing it.

I agree with most of what you’re saying, but I don’t believe in legislating certain discretionary behaviors. Parking maximums will never happen. The war on the automobile is, at times, unseemly, and mostly unnecessary. We are still a nation of the automobile. We continue to choose that singular mode of transport as our preferred option. Yes, some even say it’s an American  obsession:  It’s in our DNA.   In the coming generations, people may increasingly choose to ditch their car (or one of them), and live where developers have chosen to build pedestrian/alternative transportation friendly developments,  perhaps located within certain districts or zones as encouraged by City leaders planners. Incentivized? Maybe. But not for the entire city.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, baobabs727 said:

I agree with most of what you’re saying, but I don’t believe in legislating certain discretionary behaviors. Parking maximums will never happen. The war on the automobile is, at times, unseemly, and mostly unnecessary. We are still a nation of the automobile. We continue to choose that singular mode of transport as our preferred option. Yes, some even say it’s an American  obsession:  It’s in our DNA.   In the coming generations, people may increasingly choose to ditch their car (or one of them), and live where developers have chosen to build pedestrian/alternative transportation friendly developments,  perhaps located within certain districts or zones as encouraged by City leaders planners. Incentivized? Maybe. But not for the entire city.   

I mean, I'm not saying we need to completely outlaw cars or that these changes would even be possible in an accelerated short time period. But things like parking maximums or excess parking acreage fees are a really good way to ensure that land is used in the most valuable way instead of being eaten by parking. And being able to maximize land usage is an incredibly important priority for a city that is proverbially landlocked and does not have access to county taxes like other cities. There are means to solve parking by means that do and don't use a car, but there's very few ways for Norfolk to get taxes out of a large surface parking lot. 

I would also say people use cars because they are the most convenient option, because we build infrastructure that makes them the most convenient option. If you make other forms of transportation as or more convenient, people will use those. There is nothing inherently better about one transportation system over the other in a vacuum, and you need to build infrastructure in a way that benefits your city. I just don't think Norfolk has anything to gain by increasing car infrastructure, and has a ton to gain by increasing other infrastructure

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Arctic_Tern said:

I mean, I'm not saying we need to completely outlaw cars or that these changes would even be possible in an accelerated short time period. But things like parking maximums or excess parking acreage fees are a really good way to ensure that land is used in the most valuable way instead of being eaten by parking. And being able to maximize land usage is an incredibly important priority for a city that is proverbially landlocked and does not have access to county taxes like other cities. There are means to solve parking by means that do and don't use a car, but there's very few ways for Norfolk to get taxes out of a large surface parking lot. 

I would also say people use cars because they are the most convenient option, because we build infrastructure that makes them the most convenient option. If you make other forms of transportation as or more convenient, people will use those. There is nothing inherently better about one transportation system over the other in a vacuum, and you need to build infrastructure in a way that benefits your city. I just don't think Norfolk has anything to gain by increasing car infrastructure, and has a ton to gain by increasing other infrastructure

In terms of emissions, land and resource utilization, safety, personal and public costs, cars/highways are pretty bad compared to other transportation modes in an urban context, though.  That aside, I agree with what you're saying. 

There are so many problems that "too much" parking creates.  It's more wasted (or underutilized) space, it also drives up the cost of construction and the price of rent.  Even if residents are paying $225/month (that's the going rate in JC at the moment) for garage parking, that doesn't cover the cost to build or maintain that parking over a 30+ year period.  So the difference is made up in higher rents charged to all tenants whether they own cars or not.  In the new-construction "luxury" market in my town, buildings that have zero parking are charging less in base rent than buildings that have parking, despite those buildings charging tenants a monthly parking fee on top of the rent.  So if policymakers are looking for ways to address housing affordability, doing away with zoning requirements to overbuild parking at an arbitrary 2 spaces/unit or whatever might be one good tool (among many) to help address the problem.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Arctic_Tern said:

I mean, I'm not saying we need to completely outlaw cars or that these changes would even be possible in an accelerated short time period. But things like parking maximums or excess parking acreage fees are a really good way to ensure that land is used in the most valuable way instead of being eaten by parking. And being able to maximize land usage is an incredibly important priority for a city that is proverbially landlocked and does not have access to county taxes like other cities. There are means to solve parking by means that do and don't use a car, but there's very few ways for Norfolk to get taxes out of a large surface parking lot. 

I would also say people use cars because they are the most convenient option, because we build infrastructure that makes them the most convenient option. If you make other forms of transportation as or more convenient, people will use those. There is nothing inherently better about one transportation system over the other in a vacuum, and you need to build infrastructure in a way that benefits your city. I just don't think Norfolk has anything to gain by increasing car infrastructure, and has a ton to gain by increasing other infrastructure

I think we agree on most items.  Indeed, America has promoted and enabled the unfettered growth of vehicular transportation and its attendant architecture/infrastructure over the past century plus, largely based on the theory--and at one time, based on the reality--that ours is a vast country with plenty of room for highways, byways...and...strip malls, too lol. I agree it's high time to revisit and to revise that mentality with a robust sense of purpose as we run out of developable land. 

But of course all of the alternatives come with a giant price tag.  And with public subsidies.  And tax increases.  Are we, as a society, ready and willing to make the necessary and sizeable investments in future modes of clean, efficient, and affordable (to the user) public transportation?  Time will tell.

Edited by baobabs727
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The city plans to replace or renovate five schools in the next decade using casino revenue. Up first: Maury and Booker T. HS, Norview,  Jacox and Granby Elementrary Schools. The article mentions replacing Maury, but I hope they plan to maintain the building for some purpose, even if it's offices or (sigh) more apartments. That's too beautiful and historic of a building to demolish.

https://www.pilotonline.com/government/local/vp-nw-casino-school-renovations-norfolk-20220414-j2iqbpadsnadrezsgaytrowgva-story.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BFG said:

The city plans to replace or renovate five schools in the next decade using casino revenue. Up first: Maury and Booker T. HS, Norview,  Jacox and Granby Elementrary Schools. The article mentions replacing Maury, but I hope they plan to maintain the building for some purpose, even if it's offices or (sigh) more apartments. That's too beautiful and historic of a building to demolish.

https://www.pilotonline.com/government/local/vp-nw-casino-school-renovations-norfolk-20220414-j2iqbpadsnadrezsgaytrowgva-story.html

Yeah that building is beautiful. Honestly with its location something like a civic center or a library would be a perfect use for it if they decide to not use it as a school anymore.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I over spoke I wouldn't say peeked but let's say plateaued. There are somethings to be very excited about for sure, but all in all Norfolk has no pull. That's not just a Norfolk problem but a Hampton Roads problem no city has it's "THING" figured out. The area as a whole just doesn't seem to do anything remotely progressive, we're always on the outside looking in. While I remain optimistic it's hard to overlook the facts, we're not doing anything different than what we did before. So I would suggest we just do something different. 

After some research the fiscal stress is above average to high in all of south Hampton Roads cities, only VB has below average fiscal stress. I propose all cities revert to towns, since there are no counties is Hampton Roads it would throw a wrench in the system and force the state and area to find a better solution. Or maybe Chesapeake, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Portsmouth all revert to towns allowing a larger county to be created. 

From Virginiaplaces.org 

One threat to counties is the disappearance of independent cities when they shift to "town" status. The county gains property tax and sales tax revenue from the area that used to be an independent city, but the additional costs of providing education and social services to former city residents will exceed the additional tax revenue.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kevin Cheph Randall said:

Btw I didn't know Norfolk's airport was 75yrs old. Over 1 million people have moved to the area in that time, and still relying on a 75 yr old airport is.....not the way

 

 

The airport itself is 75 years old but the current building dates back to the mid-1970s. It still needs a major overhaul IMO.

As for the towns concept, a friend told me HR considered doing such a thing a couple decades ago, similar to how Long Island operates. I’d be interested to see how that could work, although I think we need to see how the Bay Area does with San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland. SF and SJ have more people; Oakland has roughly the same population as VB, but they seem to operate independently. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2022 at 7:53 AM, Kevin Cheph Randall said:

Maybe I over spoke I wouldn't say peeked but let's say plateaued. There are somethings to be very excited about for sure, but all in all Norfolk has no pull. That's not just a Norfolk problem but a Hampton Roads problem no city has it's "THING" figured out. The area as a whole just doesn't seem to do anything remotely progressive, we're always on the outside looking in. While I remain optimistic it's hard to overlook the facts, we're not doing anything different than what we did before. So I would suggest we just do something different. 

After some research the fiscal stress is above average to high in all of south Hampton Roads cities, only VB has below average fiscal stress. I propose all cities revert to towns, since there are no counties is Hampton Roads it would throw a wrench in the system and force the state and area to find a better solution. Or maybe Chesapeake, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Portsmouth all revert to towns allowing a larger county to be created. 

From Virginiaplaces.org 

One threat to counties is the disappearance of independent cities when they shift to "town" status. The county gains property tax and sales tax revenue from the area that used to be an independent city, but the additional costs of providing education and social services to former city residents will exceed the additional tax revenue.

 

 

 

Ok, I dont want to come off rude, but what in the hell. If Norfolk was to revert to a town then that would greatly be a punch in our own gut here. Norfolk is undoubtedly a city we have a metro and we have competition. Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Newport News are some of the only cities that should stay and VB is a acceptation to that aswell. 

We have a history dating back to the 1600s and we have been a city since 1845. We even destroyed our city to make it bigger. So if we were to become a town it would just destroy everything we had worked up for to maintain the true and fair independent city status that we have today.

Now if your talking about boroughs then I would be on board. Boroughs of Norfolk would greatly increase the working together factor with other cities and unite the area under one name. 

Edited by mintscraft56
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, mintscraft56 said:

Ok, I dont want to come off rude, but what in the hell. If Norfolk was to revert to a town then that would greatly be a punch in our own gut here. Norfolk is undoubtedly a city we have a metro and we have competition. Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Newport News are some of the only cities that should stay and VB is a acceptation to that aswell. 

We have a history dating back to the 1600s and we have been a city since 1845. We even destroyed our city to make it bigger. So if we were to become a town it would just destroy everything we had worked up for to maintain the true and fair independent city status that we have today.

Now if your talking about boroughs then I would be on board. Boroughs of Norfolk would greatly increase the working together factor with other cities and unite the area under one name.

My thought behind the comment wasn't a shot at Norfolk. But more of a nuclear option that cities should start to weigh. I agree with you wholeheartedly that Norfolk is established and has a history that stretches back to the 1600s. It's also Norfolk's established history that would supersede any municipal title. What I'm trying to say is Norfolk is Norfolk period. The town of Norfolk, The district of Norfolk, The Burrough of Norfolk, the City of Norfolk wouldn't matter because of Norfolk's established history. Core Norfolk wouldn't lose it's identity ,with that said Norfolk's population is far too great it exceeds 50,000 people so it's not possible for Norfolk to revert to town status. 

Not to be rude either, the stance you took is misguided. Your first reaction was to defend Norfolk's border as if being an independent city has help Norfolk, or Portsmouth at all. But your stance is one that many Virginian's take, the sense of identity supercede rationality. If Norfolk could lose it's borders right now, it wouldn't lose any identity locally, and the benefits would far outweigh the negatives. I personally wouldn't care what they called the area, as long as we can unite as one. 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kevin Cheph Randall said:

My thought behind the comment wasn't a shot at Norfolk. But more of a nuclear option that cities should start to weigh. I agree with you wholeheartedly that Norfolk is established and has a history that stretches back to the 1600s. It's also Norfolk's established history that would supersede any municipal title. What I'm trying to say is Norfolk is Norfolk period. The town of Norfolk, The district of Norfolk, The Burrough of Norfolk, the City of Norfolk wouldn't matter because of Norfolk's established history. Core Norfolk wouldn't lose it's identity ,with that said Norfolk's population is far too great it exceeds 50,000 people so it's not possible for Norfolk to revert to town status. 

Not to be rude either, the stance you took is misguided. Your first reaction was to defend Norfolk's border as if being an independent city has help Norfolk, or Portsmouth at all. But your stance is one that many Virginian's take, the sense of identity supercede rationality. If Norfolk could lose it's borders right now, it wouldn't lose any identity locally, and the benefits would far outweigh the negatives. I personally wouldn't care what they called the area, as long as we can unite as one. 

 

 

 

I guess you do have a point at it. I dont know what will come of the cities but Norfolk for sure is not going anywhere anytime soon border wise, because even if we did drop it I cant see other cities agreeing to it aswell. 

Or all the Cities could go back under the Norfolk County name. Obviously being named after the centre city. Kinda like Los Angeles County. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2022 at 6:11 PM, Kevin Cheph Randall said:

My thought behind the comment wasn't a shot at Norfolk. But more of a nuclear option that cities should start to weigh. I agree with you wholeheartedly that Norfolk is established and has a history that stretches back to the 1600s. It's also Norfolk's established history that would supersede any municipal title. What I'm trying to say is Norfolk is Norfolk period. The town of Norfolk, The district of Norfolk, The Burrough of Norfolk, the City of Norfolk wouldn't matter because of Norfolk's established history. Core Norfolk wouldn't lose it's identity ,with that said Norfolk's population is far too great it exceeds 50,000 people so it's not possible for Norfolk to revert to town status. 

Not to be rude either, the stance you took is misguided. Your first reaction was to defend Norfolk's border as if being an independent city has help Norfolk, or Portsmouth at all. But your stance is one that many Virginian's take, the sense of identity supercede rationality. If Norfolk could lose it's borders right now, it wouldn't lose any identity locally, and the benefits would far outweigh the negatives. I personally wouldn't care what they called the area, as long as we can unite as one. 

 

 

 

Overall I think its pie in the sky, not because what you said isn't true, but over the last 20 years at least, places like Va.beach has made it known they "are different" and wish to be different than Norfolk. To Va.beach's credit, Norfolk hasn't kept up with what it needed to be idolized anyways. A lot of what we have seen in Norfolk was probably natural progress more so than anything.  I've always seen Norfolk having a bad run of management in general at all levels. Other cities don't want to be attached to that but love to benefit from it. Best thing Norfolk could do is up its profile and provide what the other cities can not and do it WELL. I think we have all said it before, if we operated as one city/county etc.., we would definitely have a sports team and higher profile. I hear more people from around the country reference Va.beach (although they are really just referencing the beach) than Norfolk, that is very different from when I was a kid in the 80s/90s..

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, brikkman said:

Overall I think its pie in the sky, not because what you said isn't true, but over the last 20 years at least, places like Va.beach has made it known they "are different" and wish to be different than Norfolk. To Va.beach's credit, Norfolk hasn't kept up with what it needed to be idolized anyways. A lot of what we have seen in Norfolk was probably natural progress more so than anything.  I've always seen Norfolk having a bad run of management in general at all levels. Other cities don't want to be attached to that but love to benefit from it. Best thing Norfolk could do is up its profile and provide what the other cities can not and do it WELL. I think we have all said it before, if we operated as one city/county etc.., we would definitely have a sports team and higher profile. I hear more people from around the country reference Va.beach (although they are really just referencing the beach) than Norfolk, that is very different from when I was a kid in the 80s/90s..

 

Well, there has definitely been a drop-off in leadership quality since Mayor Fraim retired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news are starting to pick up on the recent Downtown Growth it feels good to read the first few words "Downtown Norfolk is having a moment" as indication to our recent projects. 

Hopefully other developers might take a peek into the area with articles like these being published? 

Cite: https://www.dailypress.com/business/vp-nw-downtown-apartments-0423-20220423-tdr23yoayvhhlmq5j6vrdewgim-story.html 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mintscraft56 said:

The news are starting to pick up on the recent Downtown Growth it feels good to read the first few words "Downtown Norfolk is having a moment" as indication to our recent projects. 

Hopefully other developers might take a peek into the area with articles like these being published? 

Cite: https://www.dailypress.com/business/vp-nw-downtown-apartments-0423-20220423-tdr23yoayvhhlmq5j6vrdewgim-story.html 

Disappointing they didn’t discuss any projects in the pipeline. All of the apartments in SPQ, potential project at the Greyhound building, another Marathon conversion on York St - would have been nice to see some discussion on these projects even if not in as much detail as the four mentioned. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HRVA said:

Disappointing they didn’t discuss any projects in the pipeline. All of the apartments in SPQ, potential project at the Greyhound building, another Marathon conversion on York St - would have been nice to see some discussion on these projects even if not in as much detail as the four mentioned. 

True, but either way it sheds good light into how fast the city is growing. However I am on the same track as you on wishing they would have added the other projects too in order to give the reader a better look into it.

We are growing fast for Norfolk standards. 

  • 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.

×
×
  • 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.