Norfolk Development 2

[BFG]

I think my biggest concern with an arena is where can it go downtown? If we want this in the next five years, I'd say build in SPQ, but obviously that's already planned out for the future. Light rail exists, but I can't imagine there being enough roads to handle 15,000 fans when you only have one Interstate leading into downtown. I don't know the timetable for knocking down Young Terrace, but I really don't want the area to wait more than a few years to do something they should've done 25 years ago. MacArthur is another great site, but its future is even more questionable than Military Circle's.

When the "Rhinos" NHL team was proposed in the late-90s, the plan was to tear down the.......whatever that hotel across from Scope is. They change names every few years, it seems, but there. I think you'd have to close off the remainder of Monticello though.

Maybe the old USPS site? 

[carolinaboy]

13 minutes ago, BFG said:

I think my biggest concern with an arena is where can it go downtown? If we want this in the next five years, I'd say build in SPQ, but obviously that's already planned out for the future. Light rail exists, but I can't imagine there being enough roads to handle 15,000 fans when you only have one Interstate leading into downtown. I don't know the timetable for knocking down Young Terrace, but I really don't want the area to wait more than a few years to do something they should've done 25 years ago. MacArthur is another great site, but its future is even more questionable than Military Circle's.

When the "Rhinos" NHL team was proposed in the late-90s, the plan was to tear down the.......whatever that hotel across from Scope is. They change names every few years, it seems, but there. I think you'd have to close off the remainder of Monticello though.

Maybe the old USPS site? 

All very valid points. Thank you. My thought is either retrofit the MacArthur Mall (the Starwood project ain't happening and large malls are dying all over the country) to keep some retail and include a new arena in the footprint. The parking infrastructure and light rail stop is already there and it's easily accessible from the interstate. My second choice would be to get rid of Scope and build a new arena there that pays homage to the architectural style of the Scope.

[vdogg]

I’m not even sure where to put this. We have so many Arena threads already I think I’m going to wait for things to be a bit more fleshed out before dedicating a specific thread. We don’t even know the scope of the project yet, and a lot of that will depend on who is chosen.

[baobabs727]

On 1/7/2021 at 3:07 PM, carolinaboy said:

It just seems to me that all the effort over the last decade or two to reinvent and reenergize downtown would be harmed if a new arena were not built downtown. Most of what we talk about here is in downtown or very near; the office towers, light rail, hotel towers, apartment complexes, entertainment venues, commercial development, most of the exciting stuff is downtown. A completely new arena is a holy grail of  development and it seems like that is WHAT all the effort has been for, to put things like this downtown when the RARE chance arises. An arena, and the people and revenue it would lure are the precise reason why people have invested so heavily in downtown. To not put it there makes these investments more risky for the people who made them and sort of ignores them. All putting an arena at Military Circle does is pushes for the city to now provide infrastructure there when they have already invested in it and it exists downtown. Having said all this I am very excited about an arena, no matter where it may end up being.

We have a real opportunity now with the potential casino development and an arena. I have said a couple of times I feel like both are proposed for the wrong locations. If the casino goes where proposed, to me it makes it more essential to put an arena very close to it not far away from it. I just hope we get both of these rare chances right. I'm not concerned about proximity to VA Beach. They had their opportunity (with both light rail and an arena) and blew it. I just don't want Norfolk to do the same (or at a minimum hurt the momentum downtown has had).

To my knowledge, not one single dollar of new investment downtown over the past 30 years has been predicated on the future development of an arena in downtown.  And I lived in and invested in downtown from 2003 to 2020.

Edited January 16, 2021 by baobabs727

[baobabs727]

On 1/6/2021 at 3:10 PM, Icetera said:

At least it is in between two close "downtowns" with LRT access.  This could certainly be a lot worse (*cough cough* Richmond).

I agree. Military Circle is more central to the major population centers of S. HR, and Highway and secondary road access there is far superior to DT.  DT is pretty much a cul de sac ...complete with tunnels.  Add to that the ever-present DT flooding issues, and MC is a no-brainer. 

[BFG]

So I decided to look up a few trademarks, just for fun. Something caught my eye.

http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4804:6de9yq.8.1

The Norfolk Neptunes, filed by PW Branding, which I’m guessing is Pharrell Williams, one half of the music duo The Neptunes. My first thought is they’re indeed putting an NBA plan together, but I’m leaning more towards something involving the Professional Collegiate League, which plans to challenge the NCAA. Norfolk and Richmond are getting teams, and the DC and Carolina team names were recently unveiled. 

https://thepcleague.com

EDIT: the search expired, but this was the result.

Edited January 26, 2021 by BFG

[BFG]

On second thought...one of the other teams is the Carolina Flight. This is their trademark application. Another team, the DC Stealth, shows the same owner. Looking at the trademark for the Neptunes, it was filed January 8, a day or two after the NBA said it's looking to expand. I think VA is putting its hat in the ring, or getting ready for when the league is ready.

Icetera posted on the RVA forum that the league might play its games in VB this summer, in a "bubble" format similar to Orlando.

Edited January 27, 2021 by BFG

[Virginia City]

On 1/26/2021 at 2:06 PM, BFG said:

On second thought...one of the other teams is the Carolina Flight. This is their trademark application. Another team, the DC Stealth, shows the same owner. Looking at the trademark for the Neptunes, it was filed January 8, a day or two after the NBA said it's looking to expand. I think VA is putting its hat in the ring, or getting ready for when the league is ready.

Icetera posted on the RVA forum that the league might play its games in VB this summer, in a "bubble" format similar to Orlando.

 

I just don't see that happening at all.

[Icetera]

13 hours ago, Virginia City said:

 

I just don't see that happening at all.

You do not see the location happening or do not see the league happening?  For the first year, the location makes sense as the league is to be headquartered out of Richmond.

[Virginia City]

2 hours ago, Icetera said:

You do not see the location happening or do not see the league happening?  For the first year, the location makes sense as the league is to be headquartered out of Richmond.

 

Nope, I'm dumb, my apologies.  @BFG had just mentioned about a possible NBA team and then next line talked about the league doing a bubble like in Orlando (something the NBA did last season). I assumed he was still taking about the NBA and them doing a bubble in Virginia Beach and that sounded illogical.

[BFG]

Sorry for the confusion, but yeah, the possible bubble would be for the PCL.

[vdogg]

22 minutes ago, Asdfjkl; said:

The Downtown Plan 2030

Planning for the various sections of Downtown. Focus is on resiliency, Fort Norfolk, MacArthur Center, St. Paul’s, and Harbor Park. Interesting exclusion of the new CHKD tower.

 

The reason for the exclusion is because this plan came out years ago, before CHKD was even a thought. The plans are typically created in 10, 20, and 30 year increments and are updated multiple times. I think this plan came out in 2010 but was updated a few years back when River Tower was proposed. Not sure why they’re sending it out again today. I’ve looked at it, but can’t figure out what changed.

[vdogg]

L insert shows River Tower and EVMS. I know we’ve posted this here before because I remember arguing with some over the realtivey low rise building they have fronting Brambleton when I thought it should be something tall and signature.

[BFG]

Looks like this plan now includes plans for MacArthur.

[lammius]

Hope they go with Option 3. Do it right. 

[Arctic_Tern]

 

Thought this was interesting.  I had seen renderings of a potential expansion of the glass blowing center, but haven't seen anything else about expansion of the museum itself.  I thought the area that now has parking to the left was owned by EVMS though?  And it looks like the parcel where the expanded glass blowing studio would go is where the current Norfolk Red Cross is.  Not sure if that all is still in the cards.

[vdogg]

Minimum 12-stories for tower on third anchor site, that’s new. First time I’ve ever seen them set a floor on building height. More of this please.

 

[BFG]

Leave it to the Pilot to sensationalize this and make it seem like demolition is the only option. 

https://www.pilotonline.com/business/consumer/vp-bz-macarthur-center-downtown-20210305-b65fhxqbcjg63da6lvddtmvtxu-story.html

[mistermetaj]

34 minutes ago, BFG said:

Leave it to the Pilot to sensationalize this and make it seem like demolition is the only option. 

https://www.pilotonline.com/business/consumer/vp-bz-macarthur-center-downtown-20210305-b65fhxqbcjg63da6lvddtmvtxu-story.html

It might not be the only option, but it is the best options. This is a prime opportunity to reimagine Norfolk in the middle of downtown. You can't leave it non-contiguous. Like St Pauls, reestablishing the grid is the single most important thing Norfolk can do here.

[BFG]

I agree it makes the most sense, and creates the perfect gateway to SPQ. It’s just that I think the Pilot kinda put the cart before the horse here. Lotta people aren’t gonna read past the headline. 

[mistermetaj]

9 hours ago, NFKjeff said:

I disagree. I think the street grid can be restored (in part ) without razing 4,000 valuable parking spaces. I believe keeping those parking decks is key to attracting residential and office, and creating a reasonable retail mix. 

They razed the large parking garage on the site of the Wells Fargo tower.

If the McArthur garage is an economic catalyst, it can be the last piece to be torn down, but it shouldn't be saved at the expense of connectivity and restoration of Norfolk's core.

On 3/2/2021 at 11:47 PM, Arctic_Tern said:

 

Thought this was interesting.  I had seen renderings of a potential expansion of the glass blowing center, but haven't seen anything else about expansion of the museum itself.  I thought the area that now has parking to the left was owned by EVMS though?  And it looks like the parcel where the expanded glass blowing studio would go is where the current Norfolk Red Cross is.  Not sure if that all is still in the cards.

I always thought Norfolk needed their version of a mall (a la Washington DC) connecting the museum to the opera house. This isn't quite what I had in mind, but hopefully it's a step towards a plan to link 2 of the most architecturally significant structures in Norfolk with a beautiful public space.

[urbanlife]

Option 2 for the mall makes the most sense, it preserves the parking garages and potentially the frame of parts of the mall structure to allow for renovations rather than building new. This would help create a retail street and an urban meetup style place for downtown.

[Arctic_Tern]

Option 2 is what I see happening most likely. The City is going to have a ton of property they're trying to develop at the same time (MacArthur, SPQ, Harbor Park, Fort Norfolk, Military Circle) so there probably isn't going to be as much pent up demand for a ground-up rebuild of the MacArthur space. Since the garages have already been around for some time I think Option 2 brings in a modest reconnection of the downtown space, and if planned with forethought could pave the way for future redevelopment after around 10-20 years.

[baobabs727]

23 hours ago, urbanlife said:

Option 2 for the mall makes the most sense, it preserves the parking garages and potentially the frame of parts of the mall structure to allow for renovations rather than building new. This would help create a retail street and an urban meetup style place for downtown.

Agreed. And number three is likely too costly in the end and unlikely to draw substantial redevelopment $$$$ within an acceptable timeframe. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. 

4 hours ago, NFKjeff said:

It’s probably a good thing that the ultimate fate of the malls ownership may take awhile to be settled. I think the fact that the city owns the land helps their cause. In the mean time a lot of thought and study needs to go into which plan they choose. 
 

Right now I am most in favor of option 2. Coming out of the pandemic we have no real idea how the office market is going to respond. If the city chose to tear the entire structure down without considering all of the options we could end up with another three decades of surface parking.  I feel like the existing structure gives them a lot of leverage to help entice new development that a barren lot would not offer. I think a mix of residential and retail (dining, entertainment, grocery, etc.) would be ideal, and if office space could be supported as well why not. 
 

Maybe the city should hold a charette open to those living in downtown areas to gauge what types of services and amenities they would support which at the same time would not be a direct threat to existing downtown businesses.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the city only owns Nordstrom. 

Edited March 7, 2021 by baobabs727

[baobabs727]

1 hour ago, NFKjeff said:

It’s probably a good thing that the ultimate fate of the malls ownership may take awhile to be settled. I think the fact that the city owns the land helps their cause. In the mean time a lot of thought and study needs to go into which plan they choose. 
 

Right now I am most in favor of option 2. Coming out of the pandemic we have no real idea how the office market is going to respond. If the city chose to tear the entire structure down without considering all of the options we could end up with another three decades of surface parking.  I feel like the existing structure gives them a lot of leverage to help entice new development that a barren lot would not offer. I think a mix of residential and retail (dining, entertainment, grocery, etc.) would be ideal, and if office space could be supported as well why not. 
 

Maybe the city should hold a charette open to those living in downtown areas to gauge what types of services and amenities they would support which at the same time would not be a direct threat to existing downtown businesses.

Agreed. Unfortunately, nothing will materialize as quickly as we’d like. Your timeframe seems realistic, if slightly optimistic. Downtown Norfolk is not as robust or as vibrant as it has been in the past—in any sector. Downtown Norfolk has a poor reputation for retail sales and an average one for dining and entertainment. Couple all of that with the deteriorating/collapsing brick and mortar retail landscape everywhere, the perpetual lack of outside/national deep pocketed investments in this town and truly anemic local  job growth, and it’s going to be a long, long haul. I say this with a heavy heart ...and a clear head. 

Edited March 7, 2021 by baobabs727