Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tekk2k

Whats gonna happen with Tidewater park and Youngs Park?

32 posts in this topic

Whats gonna happen with Tidewater park and Youngs Park?

I was just wondering because in order for that whole 2010 plan for downtown to work, they would almost certainly have to get rid of Tidewater park and Youngs Park. But I haven't heard anything about that from anybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Whats gonna happen with Tidewater park and Youngs Park?

I was just wondering because in order for that whole 2010 plan for downtown to work, they would almost certainly have to get rid of Tidewater park and Youngs Park. But I haven't heard anything about that from anybody.

THey are paying a consultant for a study as what can be done with the two parks. Can't remember when the study is suppose to be complete. If you read in the Hoffler tower's thread there is an article there that has some info on it. They want to extend DT all the way to Tidewater Dr. which puts them in the way of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Norfolk always seems to find a way to destroy low income housing. They will find an excuse. It doesn't matter if it's a worthy one or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Norfolk always seems to find a way to destroy low income housing. They will find an excuse. It doesn't matter if it's a worthy one or not.

So you don't want better housing than those parks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Norfolk always seems to find a way to destroy low income housing. They will find an excuse. It doesn't matter if it's a worthy one or not.

I think norfolk should build some new low income housing in another part of the city, so they could use that very visible property to enhance downtown.It really does a diservice to the new downtown they are trying to develope.That's alot of land those two neighborhoods occupy.I dont condone condemning low income housing without providing those people with affordable housing somewhere else in the city.Tidewater Garden and Youngs Park are eyesores coming into downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, Tidewater Gardens and Youngs Park are too valuable to stay and should be redeveloped. From overhead, the two sites take up a huge portion of land downtown. The city should make efforts to build affordable housing elswehere. But lets not mistake affordable with subsidized. Much of this housing is subsidized by the city, something the city would like to cut back on given budget cuts from the federal government. Wherever the city plans to relocate the two sites, there will not be a one to one transfer. The city will no longer allow that much density for that type of housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This issue has me scratching my head and all I'm coming up with is a bald spot.

They've hired a consultant to deliver the verdict(s). That means that the consultant can catch the flying fruit on this. And believe me, we could open up a farmers market with the projectiles from this one.

How do you replace those projects by 2010? Where's the money going to come from in this enlightened era? Some people just aren't able to participate in home ownership programs, so that method probably won't apply here.

Pushing poor people out....again.. Nasty business. I wish I knew how to solve this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a very difficult problem. I hope we have a new way of thinking that doesn't involve warehousing poor people and instead offers incentives for becoming gainfully employed and owning a home. There still will be some who simply cannot help themselves and they must be provided for.

I do applaud the city for recognizing that that this large chunk of land adjacent to what we have called "downtown" is a rare opportunity for future growth and development. Utilizing a respected and experienced consultant, together with community input and leadership, affords Norfolk the chance to do something special with this land, hopefully for the greatest benefit of all citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I agree, Tidewater Gardens and Youngs Park are too valuable to stay and should be redeveloped. From overhead, the two sites take up a huge portion of land downtown. The city should make efforts to build affordable housing elswehere. But lets not mistake affordable with subsidized. Much of this housing is subsidized by the city, something the city would like to cut back on given budget cuts from the federal government. Wherever the city plans to relocate the two sites, there will not be a one to one transfer. The city will no longer allow that much density for that type of housing.

The problem with those things is that as soon as they propose to build a low income house complex somewhere, the NIMBYs show up and oppose it (which is their right, whether or not they are justified in their position). Think about the Union Mission downtown. Everyone agrees they do great work for the city and help get the homeless a warm meal and off the streets, but as soon as they proposed a new location, in fact several different locations, everyone near the proposed sites went apesh*t about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NRHA is trying to think of the slickest way they can move the black people out without getting sued and creating a political disaster zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kills me is that one minute people are saying that the parks are so cruel and unfair and as soon as they say were are going to tear it down, everyone is screaming racism. I understand that they need to come up with a relocation plan but public housing shouldn't be that close to the CBD. Plus we have to grow, which makes life better for residents, and this happens to all kinds of people. Did people make a racist deal when the trailer parks were torn down. I guess white people that are poor and live in poor facilities are no big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wherever the residents are relocated, its got to be better than where they are now. I don't know why anyone would be upset, except for those who actually WORK... in the downtown area and don't know how to ride a bus. The reason isn't because they are black, or poor, or unfortunate, or whatever, but because they are situated on a gold mine, Norfolk just needs to make that clear, whenever they decide to go ahead with it. Attraction to the city would most definately increase... I know when I ride through that part of the city, its a big downer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's definitely going to be a heated discussion throughout the city and through city council. I think everyone can agree that the "best" use of the land for all Norfolk citizens is not "subsidized housing". We can all see that without the recommendations of a consultant. But there will be those who do not understand or refuse to see the reality of the situation and will scream injustice. The report is the first step in this delicate process to helping everyone understand the greatest benefit and best use through business, tax revenue, and growth. But this needs to be spelled out in plain english with hard numbers to make people open their eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the idea of public housing was great at the time the 1950s. It was just suppose to be temporary housing for people to really get on there feet and not long term which it has become today. It just kills me when I see old photos of that area and all the great architecture that was demolished in the 1950s especially the old DePaul Hospital. If they would have kept the old hospital, the old buildings on church street near downtown and with the combination with all those beautiful old churches, St. Mary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am black and poor,and I love how Norfolk is trying to develope it's downtown and make a name for itself.I've been following development in Norfolk since they built the world trade center off of Waterside Dr.One day Norfolk will have a skyline comparable to Charlotte,but we are certainly going to need that property to accomplish it.I dont think subsidized housing is so bad, because the salaries poor people are bringing home is not enough to pay the skyrocketing cost of rent and mortages.I think subsidized housing keeps a lot of people from being homeless.It's good for the poor whatever race they happen to be,just move it to a more suitable area in our fair city. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I am black and poor,and I love how Norfolk is trying to develope it's downtown and make a name for itself.I've been following development in Norfolk since they built the world trade center off of Waterside Dr.One day Norfolk will have a skyline comparable to Charlotte,but we are certainly going to need that property to accomplish it.I dont think subsidized housing is so bad, because the salaries poor people are bringing home is not enough to pay the skyrocketing cost of rent and mortages.I think subsidized housing keeps a lot of people from being homeless.It's good for the poor whatever race they happen to be,just move it to a more suitable area in our fair city. :)

I totally agree. I don't want to push the poor out. I'm just tired of it being pushed as always a race issue. Poverty affects all races. This land has the potential to add more tax base to the city to help people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some cities have had success in the past placing a certain number or percentage of Section 8 units in fairly large apartment complexes, giving developers certain tax incentives for doing so. This had an additional benefit of desegregating the well to do from those who were not so well off. Many would prefer this to the practice of just sliding ghettos around to free up space downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. I don't want to push the poor out. I'm just tired of it being pushed as always a race issue. Poverty affects all races. This land has the potential to add more tax base to the city to help people.

They have started to do that here in downtown Brooklyn a area that has really grown in the past 10 years. Brooklyns downtown is about the same size as Norfolks Dowtown in area and has a great plans for the near future. A once ghetto area is now the hot spot of New York City. And with all the new housing being put up, there is a percentage of low income people they have to allow in these upscale buildings. It works well in keeping the area diverse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have started to do that here in downtown Brooklyn a area that has really grown in the past 10 years. Brooklyns downtown is about the same size as Norfolks Dowtown in area and has a great plans for the near future. A once ghetto area is now the hot spot of New York City. And with all the new housing being put up, there is a percentage of low income people they have to allow in these upscale buildings. It works well in keeping the area diverse.

The only problem that I see with this doesn't help the people. If I work 60 hours a week now and someone that doesn't work at all now gets to live in the same enviroment as me is not fair to the one busting their buts. We need to work to get people off and not just increasing handouts at the tax payers expense. It's just not fair. Take that money and put it in educating them to being self sufficent and put in to the tax pool. This is a capitalist society not a socialist one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem that I see with this doesn't help the people. If I work 60 hours a week now and someone that doesn't work at all now gets to live in the same enviroment as me is not fair to the one busting their buts. We need to work to get people off and not just increasing handouts at the tax payers expense. It's just not fair. Take that money and put it in educating them to being self sufficent and put in to the tax pool. This is a capitalist society not a socialist one.

This a far more complicated problem but I agree in principle. Interestingly, I attended a talk last night at Prince Books downtown, within a stone's throw almost of Tidewater and Young Parks, by the extremely articulate Juan Williams, NPR and Fox News correspondent. He has just authored a book entitled "Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America - and What We Can Do About It." He's for graduating high school, not dropping out. He's for getting a job, not being unemployed. He's for getting married and having kids, not having kids out of wedlock. He has taken up the cause of Bill Cosby after Bill was challenged with some unfortuante allegations. I don't know what he would say specifically about closing down public housing projects, but I think he would say they were never the best solution and now we need to find a way to treat those who must move fairly. I think the Broad Creek concept of interspersing some lower cost housing within higher cost areas is worthy of further study.

Juan Williams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem that I see with this doesn't help the people. If I work 60 hours a week now and someone that doesn't work at all now gets to live in the same enviroment as me is not fair to the one busting their buts. We need to work to get people off and not just increasing handouts at the tax payers expense. It's just not fair. Take that money and put it in educating them to being self sufficent and put in to the tax pool. This is a capitalist society not a socialist one.

But that's the problem isn't it. Yes, this is a capitalist society, so you should have to work to earn what you get. However, people have an expecatation of a minimum standard of living. Some people, for whatever their reasons, simple don't educate themselves, don't work hard, aren't motivated in general. They just don't care. So in a true capitalist society they should end up with nothing right? Homeless. But then the rest of society doesn't accept that. The sympathy glands kick in, and we say, Oh that poor person, they need some help. It's a socialist thought to help out your fellow man.

There's always this example of why public assistance is good. Since we are capitalistic, there is societal pressure to achieve a lot of material posession. Which if the same pressure if you're rich or poor. So no matter how hard you work and much you achieve, it's not gonna do you much good when you're facing an armed mugger who hasn't had as many good breaks as you, and resorted to criminal means to get what he wants.

I know this is getting kind of off topic, so in conclusion, a little public assistance is a good thing. It might not be fair to those who payed market price, if say a few of the condos in Granby Tower were made to be affordable housing. But well, life ain't fair. I bet we'd all rather complain about the guy who got the house on the cheap, than the guy that mugged me, or the guy that froze to death sleeping on a sidewalk. At least with a home, people have a better chance to turn things around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a nice discussion about welfare reform on the PBS news last night, discussing the relative success of the program, as well as some of it's shortcomings. There will always be those who cannot function very well in the capitalist model. Then there are those who get college degrees while they are receiving some form of assistance. Then there are also those who really do earn it the "old fashioned" way; they inherit it.

I think the role of government is to responsibly smooth the rough edges and to help to ensure the health, welfare and safety of citizens as needed. That is a big part of what makes civilization worthwhile. How we do that is always an open debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said that I didn't think we shouldn't help our fellow man. You got to read the entire post and not pick and choose parts of a comment to push your point. I said educate them to be self sufficent and if they don't want to be then tuff. This doesn't include people that are disabled or elderly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please dont forget about our elderly and disabled.They are a large percentage of the people receiving subsidized housing.What some of these people receive a month is hardly enough to live off of.They dont have the option to go out and get a better paying job.I think as a society we should help lighten the burden for these people that are not able to provide for themselves through no fault of their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.