just say no to Craney Island expansion

[rusthebuss]

I totally agree with the modeling and simulations points. If ODU can run with it and rapidly expand we could see a huge boom for this region. Moving the dry docks and suck are really unfeasible.

[scm]

If you look at Boston, or Silicon Valley, or Raleigh-Durham you

[rusthebuss]

They also have a great quality of life (you left Austin out of that mix), partially because of those universities, partially because they have an absence of industry. And this all comes back full circle to how I started this -- as long as what makes HR unique, the water, is largely consumed by non-tax paying entities with endless appetites, then there will be no reason for knowledge jobs to move here. No one has said anything that ever challenged that. Just more of the same old, same old that results in a $32,000 avg. annual income (vs. $42K national avg). Who is it that said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing, and expecting a different result?

As far as being "crazy", I am friends with Bob Williams, the man behind the development in N. Suffolk. Bob loves telling the story of when laid out his plans for the Portsmouth RE community. People laughed out loud. They aren't laughing now.

This has been fun -- learned a little, saw some ridiculous statements (best was that cruise ships come here because of the container docks -- haven't seen many going to Rotterdam!), saw at least one person that would argue that the sun was coming up in the west if I said it was coming up tomorrow in the east.

Have a great Fourth -- wind picks up, I'm going sailing again.

Scott

Enjoy the weekend. I'm done.

I guess you didn't read the entire comment and shouldn't skim the comments. I said because of the Navy and the Ports the large ships can make in here which helped draw them in here. Location was a key to why it came here. I'll chip in on some reading glasses for you!

[hoobo]

"Long Beach has an industrialized waterfront and people are moving into new downtown high-rises which overlook the port."

Yes, and no -- the LB high rise development is going east of 710, and while some of the port can be seen, most of the view is over the marina and the beach.

"I really don't get "the anti-port expansion because it's not pretty" argument. Where else would you build the port? "

I wouldn't expand the port unless the industrial uses are moved out of downtown. The finite asset, called waterfront property (certainly something well understood in Newport Beach!) is too valuable to tossed away on property that produces a small number of jobs, and no tax base. Much better spent on mixed use development, that attracts higher quality knowledge based jobs (one of the real problems here is the low per capita income), in a greater number than usage as docks.

Scott

I should've addressed these points in more detail. The Port of Long Beach curves around so that it almost parallels the downtown area. The high rises along Ocean Blvd overlook both the Shoreline Marina and the Port complex which includes the berthed Queen Mary. Only a couple older high-rises at the southern end of downtown overlook the beach.

As for Newport Beach, much of the waterfront is residential. There are a couple expensive waterfront resorts: Balboa Bay Club, Newport Dunes, and the Newport Hyatt. Most of the commercial on the water is water-related: yacht sales, cruises, boat-repair services, and plenty of restuarants with a view. There are also three low-rise (4 stories) office buildings. Most tennats are either medical or marine related; the only ones who will pay to rent that space. The Newport Bay waterfront reminds me of Rudee Inlet. The major commercial and office space in Newport is centered in three areas: Newport Center (mall and high-rise law/investment firm offices on an inland bluff with views of the bay and Catalina Island), Hoag Hospital area (medical and tech offices around the hospital, hosptal has ocean views while other buildings do not), and the airport business area where most engineering, land development and banking companies are.

However, Newport's waterfront and Newport Center were not always this way. Newport Center was once part of John Wayne's cattle ranch. Irvine Ranch later bought is and developed it into what is now Newport Center. Newport's waterfront was once a seafood center. The waterfront was full of fishing boats and much of the old town was canneries. SoCal fishing died off so the fishing and canning industry of Newport disappeared. This waterfront was redeveloped through market forces into other marine related businesses as well as non-marine related businesses. Firms doing business with the city popped up around City Hall which was conveniently located next to the old Cannery Village, so that area transitioned to law, architecture, and accounting offices in one/two-story buildings. However, there still remains a small marine-repair industry.

So, Long Beach has been able to review its downtown despite views of the port and its cancer-causing diesel exhaust. Newport has transitioned over time from and industrial waterfront to a commercial one via market forces.

Norfolk has plenty of waterfront residential property thanks to Lafayette River, Broad Creek, the eastern branch of the Elizabeth, and Ocean View. Then there's downtown and Fort Norfolk. So Norfolk isn't hurting for waterfront property. Much of Portsmouth's waterfront is government owned: Norfolk Naval Shipyard, the Naval Hospital, Craney Island, the Municipal complex, and PMT. The first three aren't going anywhere since they're federal installations. Therefore, Portsmouth needs to move its municipal center if it wants more waterfront property. VPA may be persuaded to sell PMT once the Craney Island port opens. It's a long-shot but worth it. However, the only way it happens is if the Craney Island port is built.

[vdogg]

Before saying no, you may want to take a look at this.

Port drives regional economy

[rusthebuss]

Before saying no, you may want to take a look at this.

Port drives regional economy

Nice find. That was the point that I was trying to make the whole time. Thanks vdogg!

[scm]

I guess you didn't read the entire comment and shouldn't skim the comments. I said because of the Navy and the Ports the large ships can make in here which helped draw them in here. Location was a key to why it came here. I'll chip in on some reading glasses for you!

Save the reading glasses contribution. Since you seem to know so much, please educate us on how much the cruise ships draw, and why they need the deep water of our port?

Give up? Let me save you the trouble -- the biggest cruise ships to vist here in the last two years (Carnival's Truimph and Victory) draw 27 ft. 22-24 is typical -- so the argument that "because of the Navy and the Ports the large ships can make in here" is a guess -- you didn't have any idea, did you?. Reality is that for several reasons, the cruise ship model is moving away from the "fly-in" model (post 9/11 reluctance/hassle of flying, rising air fare costs) and towards "homeporting" -- and the market area that can drive to Norfolk is attractive. There were four stop-overs here -- the rest were embarks. The depth of the harbor has nothing to do with, as plenty of ports can handle 27 ft. drafts.

Scott

[Padman]

Arrogant, inflammatory discussions lead nowhere (except getting bogged down in side issues). The economic impacts of the port are very difficult to assess. We'd need volumes of economic data to even begin, and we'd probably spend close to a million dollars just obtaining the data.

[scm]

Before saying no, you may want to take a look at this.

Port drives regional economy

Funny what you find out when you read these things, rather than just skim the headline:

1. "Two top economists at Old Dominion University will attempt to capture the port

[vdogg]

Arrogant, inflammatory discussions lead nowhere (except getting bogged down in side issues). The economic impacts of the port are very difficult to assess. We'd need volumes of economic data to even begin, and we'd probably spend close to a million dollars just obtaining the data.

Quoted for emphasis.

Back to work. Will respond later when I have time.

[rusthebuss]

Sorry wasn't trying start a fight. I was just trying to state that being the port area we are it helps to attract the crusie ships in. Without the Navy and Ports this area would be just another small town. The ports help expand NS to what it is today. CSX also benefits from it.

[sugoiben]

You want the #2 and #4 most fiscally stressed cities in the state (see 2002 Fiscal Stress) "taking one for the team"?

In a word, yes. If that's what you boil it down to, then yes. Because what's the alternative?

So Portsmouth and Norfolk are the #2 and #4 most stressed cities. I wonder how many other Hampton Roads cities would join that stressed list if it weren't for the ports. If they weren't here at all, I think the region would be in a world of hurt. Maybe all that valuable waterfront would be hot commercial properties, with gleaming office towers paying their cities millions in taxes. Or then again, maybe it just would be more suburbia.

[hoobo]

3. While I appreciate the efforts to point out the economic impacts of the port on the region, the starting point was the questionablility of increasing valuable tax exempt property and the impact on the economic well being of the host cities, mainly Norfolk and Portsmouth. Right now, 47% of Portsmouth's and 26% of Norfolk's property is tax exempt (Federal and State). Since both cities are landlocked, VPA expansion reduces the cities tax base. While that may grow jobs in Chesapeake and VB, what is in it for the school children of Portsmouth? You want the #2 and #4 most fiscally stressed cities in the state (see 2002 Fiscal Stress) "taking one for the team"?

Scott

If you take a look at most of that land, it is federal: Norfolk Naval Station and Saint Helena Annex in Norfolk and Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth Naval Hospital, and Craney Island Depot (yes the entire thing is federal land) in Portsmouth. (In fact, Portsmouth municipal center and city jail are on the waterfront. Talk about taking land off the tax rolls.) VPA only has Norfolk International Terminals and Portsmouth Marine Terminals at 811 acres and 219 acres, respectively. That amounts to 0.35% of Norfolk's land (54 sqmi) and 0.015% of Portsmouth's land (33 sqmi). Lambert Point Coal Terminals is owned by Norfolk-Southern. The 450 acre terminal being built in Portsmouth is owned by Maersk. Norshipco, Moon, and the like are all privately owned. So sttop claiming that the state-owned ports are killing the cities financially because they consume a minute amount of their taxable land areas. And because NIT is adjacent to the naval station, that land would likely be part of the base if it wasn't a port facility. However, I will agree that PMT would be residential land since it is across from Port Norfolk and was, until recently, surrounded on the other side by the formerly wooded Cox Property (now Maersk terminals).

Furthermore, VPA's expansion would not reduce the tax base because they are taking federal land used for dredging spoils. This land has never been on the tax rolls because it is infill created by the Corps.

Looking at satellite images of Norfolk and Portsmouth, both cities have plenty of waterfront land thanks to all the deepwater creeks meandering through both cities. Norfolk is maximizing its commercial land in downtown and Fort Norfolk. Portsmouth needs to make better use of its land especially the water views from its city jail cells. As for Norfolk being fiscally stressed, do you think that may have something to do with the hundreds of millions spent on Harbor Park, MacArthur Center, Nauticus, and the Cruise Ship Terminal?

[scm]

As for Norfolk being fiscally stressed, do you think that may have something to do with the hundreds of millions spent on Harbor Park, MacArthur Center, Nauticus, and the Cruise Ship Terminal?

Fiscal stress, as measured by the Commonwealth's Commission on Local Government. has nothing to do with spending. It is comprised of tax base, revenue efforts (taxes, service charges, etc.) and the per capita income of the residents. Since tax base is the first measure, that is why enormous amounts of tax exempt property in Norfolk and Portsmouth have such a deliterious effect.

Scott

[hoobo]

Fiscal stress, as measured by the Commonwealth's Commission on Local Government. has nothing to do with spending. It is comprised of tax base, revenue efforts (taxes, service charges, etc.) and the per capita income of the residents. Since tax base is the first measure, that is why enormous amounts of tax exempt property in Norfolk and Portsmouth have such a deliterious effect.

Scott

Fantastic. Let's kick out the Navy since it's the primary owner of that tax-exempt land (Norfolk Naval Station: 4300 acres; Craney Island Fuel Depot: 1100 acres; Craney Island Dredged Materials Area: 2500 acres; Norfolk Naval SY: 1300 acres; and Portsmouth Naval Hospital: 110 acres). Again, VPA owns a miniscule portion of land in both cities (811 acres in Norfolk and 219 acres in Portsmouth).

You haven't answered any of my questions:

1) How is VPA responsible for Norfolk's and Portsmouth's fiscal stress as it owns less than 0.5% of Norfolk's land and less than 0.05% of Portsmouth land?

2) How do you plan on evicting federal and state waterfront property owners?

3) How do you plan on evicting private industrial waterfront property owners?

4) To where would you locate these facilities?

5) Who will pay for the clean-up of the now available urban waterfront property?

6) From where do you plan on materializing the businesses and residents who would populate these thousands of acres?

[scm]

If they weren't here at all, I think the region would be in a world of hurt.

What makes you think that HR isn't "in a world of hurt"? Look at the comparative data on per capita income between HR and comparable areas:

Hampton Roads Per Capita Income as a Percent of:

Year Charlotte Raleigh Rich. VA US

1980 104% 100% 87% 94% 94%

1990 92% 88% 84% 89% 93%

1995 86% 83% 84% 87% 90%

2000 85% 80% 84% 84% 88%

2001 87% 83% 85% 85% 90%

In the 21 years from '80 to '01, we declined in per capita income against every comparable MSA in the region, against the state, and against the US. (HR Partnership).

Another indication of the decline of HR is the net out-migration young, single, college-educated. From '95-2000, we lost 9% of that desirable demographic. In contrast, among this group, Charlotte grew by almost 35%, Raleigh, Richmond and the state of Va all grew, while we alone had an out-migration. That is not a positive trend.

Like I said before, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing, and expecting a different outcome....

Scott

[hoobo]

What makes you think that HR isn't "in a world of hurt"? Look at the comparative data on per capita income between HR and comparable areas:

Hampton Roads Per Capita Income as a Percent of:

Year Charlotte Raleigh Rich. VA US

1980 104% 100% 87% 94% 94%

1990 92% 88% 84% 89% 93%

1995 86% 83% 84% 87% 90%

2000 85% 80% 84% 84% 88%

2001 87% 83% 85% 85% 90%

In the 21 years from '80 to '01, we declined in per capita income against every comparable MSA in the region, against the state, and against the US. (HR Partnership).

Another indication of the decline of HR is the net out-migration young, single, college-educated. From '95-2000, we lost 9% of that desirable demographic. In contrast, among this group, Charlotte grew by almost 35%, Raleigh, Richmond and the state of Va all grew, while we alone had an out-migration. That is not a positive trend.

Like I said before, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing, and expecting a different outcome....

Scott

NC deregulated its banks so they started to take over all mid-Atlantic banks. Raleigh-Durham capitalized on the location of 3 top educational institutions to develop RTP. That is what spurred that state's growth. Virginia decided to develop NoVa as its tech center, Richmond as its banking center, Charlottesville as its biotech center, and HR as its industrial center. However, the biggest threat to HR is not the state's stereotypical development plans but its cul-de-sac location. Richmond, Raleigh, NoVa, and Charlotte are all along major interstates: 95, 85, and 40. HR is stuck at the end of an interstate and a mariginal one at that. HR needs an interstate to Raleigh and needs to upgrade 13 and 460 to interstate quality if wants to become a business center. It is because of both the ports and the military that HR is a metro area of 1.7 million and not another Wilmington, Charleston, or Savannah.

[scm]

Virginia decided to develop ...HR as its industrial center.

A recipe for disaster as we move into a knowledge based economy, and just my point. As long as we tie up our most desirable property in industrial uses, that pay no real or personal property taxes, then we can look forward to a Detroit like outcome. Knowledge based jobs are the wave of the future, and where income growth lies. It is time for the residents of HR to stop the expansion of the "industrial center" of Va, and create an environment that appeals to the creative class, instead of surrendering them to Raleigh and Richmond.

Scott

[hoobo]

A recipe for disaster as we move into a knowledge based economy, and just my point. As long as we tie up our most desirable property in industrial uses, that pay no real or personal property taxes, then we can look forward to a Detroit like outcome. Knowledge based jobs are the wave of the future, and where income growth lies. It is time for the residents of HR to stop the expansion of the "industrial center" of Va, and create an environment that appeals to the creative class, instead of surrendering them to Raleigh and Richmond.

Scott

Um, Detroit died because U.S. automakers didn't adapt and foreign automakers built their plants in non-union states. but we can just gloss over that fact, can't we.

Now please answer my previous 6 questions. Why do you avoid them? Here they are again:

Fantastic. Let's kick out the Navy since it's the primary owner of that tax-exempt land (Norfolk Naval Station: 4300 acres; Craney Island Fuel Depot: 1100 acres; Craney Island Dredged Materials Area: 2500 acres; Norfolk Naval SY: 1300 acres; and Portsmouth Naval Hospital: 110 acres). Again, VPA owns a miniscule portion of land in both cities (811 acres in Norfolk and 219 acres in Portsmouth).

You haven't answered any of my questions:

1) How is VPA responsible for Norfolk's and Portsmouth's fiscal stress as it owns less than 0.5% of Norfolk's land and less than 0.05% of Portsmouth land?

2) How do you plan on evicting federal and state waterfront property owners?

3) How do you plan on evicting private industrial waterfront property owners?

4) To where would you locate these facilities?

5) Who will pay for the clean-up of the now available urban waterfront property?

6) From where do you plan on materializing the businesses and residents who would populate these thousands of acres?

[scm]

Now please answer my previous 6 questions. Why do you avoid them? Here they are again:

You really don't like being ignored, do you?

1. To quote the Assembly Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, "The results of these local fiscal indicators taken together suggest that the tax-exempt status of the VPA

[rusthebuss]

Maybe this thread should be closed vdogg.

[hoobo]

You really don't like being ignored, do you?

1. To quote the Assembly Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, "The results of these local fiscal indicators taken together suggest that the tax-exempt status of the VPA

[vdogg]

Maybe this thread should be closed vdogg.

There really have been no rules broken as far as I can see. Just an argument, that is a bit circular at times, but nothing over the top from what I can tell. I will say that we've come close to personal attacks in a few of these, and we should really shy away from that.

Woops, spoke to soon.

locked.

[scm]

But what it does not need is to uproot its industry and ports to provide better vistas as you sail your boat around during your retirement.

Don't tell my wife -- she thinks I go to work every day.

See what happens when you ass-u-me..........