St. Paul's Quadrant (Phase 2-Under Construction)

[Helium3]

Progress will be made, it just doesn't seem like it'll be happening any time soon. It's a shame, but at least other parts of downtown are growing in the meantime. The St. Paul's Quadrant will eventually get its chance, whenever that may be. 

[lil-bear]

You would think the first sign would be removal of the public housing units in phases, restore the street grid, and dig out the retention ponds.

[Helium3]

I believe that all of that is going to happen eventually. But again, most likely not for a long time. It'll probably be at least a few years before any of that has any real momentum. 

[lil-bear]

Hurry up and then wait.... That what it seems like.

[Norva757]

https://pilotonline.com/news/government/local/most-of-norfolk-s-public-housing-could-be-gone-in/article_359e3039-d094-50bf-b951-ee78dfa7c764.html

 

The city has a real good opportunity with this land once the housing projects are razed. I hope they don't choose this to be another Broad Creek development. This should be a dense and urban area

[vdogg]

Broad Creek, another Burfoot special. Thank God he's no longer with the city.

[brikkman]

2 hours ago, Norva757 said:

https://pilotonline.com/news/government/local/most-of-norfolk-s-public-housing-could-be-gone-in/article_359e3039-d094-50bf-b951-ee78dfa7c764.html

 

The city has a real good opportunity with this land once the housing projects are razed. I hope they don't choose this to be another Broad Creek development. This should be a dense and urban area

it should be slated for business district extended.

 

[BFG]

I have no issues with residential, esp. if the current residents have a legitimate chance of being able to live there. From what I understand, that will be the case. 

But please, please, PLEASE do not turn this into something boring and suburban. Norfolk has a chance to create a truly urban area and expand its downtown into something amazing. You can still have residential with an urban feel. 

[brikkman]

I certainly do have a problem with it. If Norfolk and the region wants to move away from the military being sole provider, this is something they have to consider. They need to create industry, more importantly creating an environment for business and industry to thrive.  Its not about building tall building, but I can't help to think would clark and nexson (sp*) went to town center if they weren't jocking for real estate and tax advantages?  Would town center even been built today if that land was available for expansion?  I'm just not understanding why the vision is what it is. I think with all the available land in those housing projects the city can achieve both: recreate mixed income environments while growing its business districts. The latest plans do not fully take advantage of this opportunity.

[BFG]

It's funny...VB is building Town Center to look more and more urban, yet Norfolk seems to want to go in the opposite direction. I envy other cities with downtowns that are growing upward and outward; even if SPQ becomes a cluster of midrise or 8-15 story offices and apartments/condos, I'd be okay with that, as it would still have an urban feel (think how DC is laid out). That would still have an awesome presence from the Interstate.

But, a bunch of townhouses and single family homes like Broad Creek is bland to me, and there's other parts of town where you can do that. I don't get how Norfolk is progressive on so many other ideas, yet afraid to think outside the box when you're going to have a blank canvas to work with. Your downtown is seeing its highest activity in about 15 years, build on that momentum.

[baobabs727]

Personally, I never envisioned an SPQ full of tall buildings. I'm not even sure where that's coming from. Hoping that the City will one day make available land suitable for a tower at the very edge of the SPQ facing the water on the Waterside Drive.  But that's it. Definitely need a residential component, retail redevelopment of the triangle property with mini big box stack and parking garage. Mid-rise office combo residential, etc.

[mistermetaj]

9 hours ago, BFG said:

It's funny...VB is building Town Center to look more and more urban, yet Norfolk seems to want to go in the opposite direction. I envy other cities with downtowns that are growing upward and outward; even if SPQ becomes a cluster of midrise or 8-15 story offices and apartments/condos, I'd be okay with that, as it would still have an urban feel (think how DC is laid out). That would still have an awesome presence from the Interstate.

But, a bunch of townhouses and single family homes like Broad Creek is bland to me, and there's other parts of town where you can do that. I don't get how Norfolk is progressive on so many other ideas, yet afraid to think outside the box when you're going to have a blank canvas to work with. Your downtown is seeing its highest activity in about 15 years, build on that momentum.

St. Paul's quadrant will be nothing like Broad Creek. It might not have high rises, but it will be urban in design. That has been the plan the entire time.

[Norva757]

On ‎7‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 9:55 AM, mistermetaj said:

St. Paul's quadrant will be nothing like Broad Creek. It might not have high rises, but it will be urban in design. That has been the plan the entire time.

We really are not sure what the city has planned. I do know by law there has to be housing there that people can afford that were disabled. I can't remember the percentage but I think its a federal law.

[brikkman]

The biggest issue for me is that we are talking about 3 public housing areas. I know most of you probably never have been in the inside of these, but its an incredible waste of space from poor design. That is very likely consider the year they were built. The way that they utilize space in design, they could literally take every resident out of tidewater gardens and move them to the other 2 areas and not loose a beat. I'm not suggesting that no housing be left in TG, but creating a new public housing with new trinkets sounds like what this is... and when you strip down everything they are suggesting, if that is the goal specifically for TG, then again, its a bad plan..

[baobabs727]

Norfolk to hold public hearings on the razing of public housing in the St. Paul's quadrant.

 

https://pilotonline.com/news/government/local/norfolk-is-holding-forums-on-possible-demolition-of-public-housing/article_234c7335-d9ed-5202-9d9c-a30b7078c835.html

 

Edited August 7, 2017 by baobabs727

[Virginia City]

So much wasted space in there.

[brikkman]

20 hours ago, Virginia City said:

So much wasted space in there.

Exactly my point. Its emphasized more when you see aerial  photos of the area. The fact that one believes we should create a "redo" of the area is preposterous to me. Even the most recent version of it doesn't fully utilize the area to its full potential. Keep in mind, that's just tidewater park, we haven't even factor in the other two areas into this equation. Someone needs their head thump if they believe this/that is the best suited for Norfolk. I just do not understand the thought processes behind it. Maybe their goal isn't to grow Norfolk's economy? I use to hear rumors about that as kid. Many people told me about how the CBA transitioning into the NBA/ leaving Norfolk was a decision to keep Norfolk small. As i'm told, the "leaders" didn't want Norfolk to be a big time city. Although unfounded, it plays into that philosophy.

[BFG]

That idea wouldn't surprise me, and would explain why so many grand ideas sat on the table, or were underwhelming. 

I can only hope that the current, younger council sees that that was a mistake, and plans to undo it.

[brikkman]

2 hours ago, NFKjeff said:

It was the ABA, and it did not transition into the NBA. The ABA folded and some of the teams such as New Jersey, and San Antonio were absorbed by the NBA. If somebody told you the that had anything to do with a conspiracy to "keep Norfolk small" they are truly mis-informed. BTW, Charlotte, NC once had an ABA team which folded, the Carolina Cougars, and I don't believe it hurt their future very much.

yes ABA and yup, they did fold. I never believed in that conspiracy (should have emphasized rumor), it required too many to be involved. I guess my point of it was, I wonder was it some underlying slant that makes that folktale true?

[BFG]

I think that one simply boiled down to not having a front office who could afford a team. The Squires got rid of several legendary players (Dr. J, George Gervin) just to barely stay in the black.

IMO, an owner with deeper pockets and playing in one venue would've allowed them to build a fanbase and join the NBA. That's one of my favorite "What Could've Been" stories. 

[baobabs727]

Ok, from my understanding, nobody's trying to have a "redo" here and build public housing.  But you do kinda have to think about where all these people are going to go, right?  Some will be displaced voluntarily, some not so voluntarily, while others will choose to wait it out and stay.

To that end, what's being proposed (preliminarily) is a modern, mixed-use community with some section 8 but majority market rents...plus offices, retail and restaurant.  Hopefully there will be some residential above retail and mid-rise office, not just rows of single-family homes separated from commercial. 

What's so wrong with that plan?  Is it simply the apparent absence of skyscrapers that bothers some?

Edited August 8, 2017 by baobabs727

[BFG]

1 hour ago, baobabs727 said:

Ok, from my understanding, nobody's trying to have a "redo" here and build public housing.  But you do kinda have to think about where all these people are going to go, right?  Some will be displaced voluntarily, some not so voluntarily, while others will choose to wait it out and stay.

To that end, what's being proposed (preliminarily) is a modern, mixed-use community with some section 8 but majority market rents...plus offices, retail and restaurant.  Hopefully there will be some residential above retail and mid-rise office, not just rows of single-family homes separated from commercial. 

What's so wrong with that plan?  Is it simply the apparent absence of skyscrapers that bothers some?

I think some of it comes from the plans for the first apartment building going at the corner of Bute and St. Paul. Although it's only one building, it just has such a generic suburban feel, that it's easy to think the rest of SPQ will follow suit.

In 10 years, we'll probably look back on this discussion and laugh at all the fears we had.

[urbanlife]

9 hours ago, baobabs727 said:

Ok, from my understanding, nobody's trying to have a "redo" here and build public housing.  But you do kinda have to think about where all these people are going to go, right?  Some will be displaced voluntarily, some not so voluntarily, while others will choose to wait it out and stay.

To that end, what's being proposed (preliminarily) is a modern, mixed-use community with some section 8 but majority market rents...plus offices, retail and restaurant.  Hopefully there will be some residential above retail and mid-rise office, not just rows of single-family homes separated from commercial. 

What's so wrong with that plan?  Is it simply the apparent absence of skyscrapers that bothers some?

This is what makes the most sense, the number of low income housing units isn't the issue, the amount of wasted space on only low income housing is. Obviously it is hard to say what should happen in SPQ, I personally would love to see it become an extension of downtown and be turned into some sort of grid and sold off for development with the mindset that it must follow urban guidelines. It would be amazing for you guys to see the Norfolk skyline full of cranes as it doubles in size. Though I will always be skeptical of that ever happening unfortunately.

The Pearl District in Portland, Oregon is a great example of what can be done when a city and the people of the city push for a true redevelopment of a district that basically doubles the size of downtown. When the redevelopment started, the Pearl was considered to be a neighborhood north of downtown. Today, you can't tell the difference between downtown and the Pearl because it is merely an urban extension of downtown. At the time when it was the River District, it was a seedy area that was home to old rail buildings, empty lots, and flop houses, it was considered to be a dangerous part of town. Today, it is the most expensive area code in the state, yet it also has a large number of low income housing units in the district. To add to this, while the planning to make this happened took a decade to start, it only took 15 years for almost the entire area to be built up with only a small portion left to go. Luckily the Post Office building will be coming down and freeing up a huge chunk of land in the Pearl which will be more than likely turned into a key urban focal point in the district.

While I get that there are differences between the two cities, it isn't far fetched for Norfolk to see the same kind of redevelopment happen, but it requires the right people to be pushing for this kind of vision. The people that are elected into office need to have this kind of vision, the city leaders need this vision, and the people of Norfolk need this vision. Obviously it is a very hard cocktail to make, but when it happens, great things come from it.

A fun fact, the Pearl District in Portland and the SPQ in Norfolk when you include all three housing projects to VB Blvd, they are both roughly the same size. That puts it into perspective of what is actually possible in SPQ.

http://www.oregonlive.com/history/2015/02/throwback_thursday_portlands_p.html

Edited August 9, 2017 by urbanlife

[mikeas]

City should invest in utilities infrastructure and setup a "quadrant" for an urban format commercial park.  Pull a few more tech companies into town with a couple thousand employees and the supporting businesses will fall into place.

[brikkman]

15 hours ago, baobabs727 said:

Ok, from my understanding, nobody's trying to have a "redo" here and build public housing.  But you do kinda have to think about where all these people are going to go, right?  Some will be displaced voluntarily, some not so voluntarily, while others will choose to wait it out and stay.

To that end, what's being proposed (preliminarily) is a modern, mixed-use community with some section 8 but majority market rents...plus offices, retail and restaurant.  Hopefully there will be some residential above retail and mid-rise office, not just rows of single-family homes separated from commercial. 

What's so wrong with that plan?  Is it simply the apparent absence of skyscrapers that bothers some?

I stated in an earlier post it wasn't about tall buildings, but generally speaking, I agree with urbanlife as an extension of DT. This is nearly a perfect setup for Norfolk to move forward. The region has an unfair reliance on the military and government, this is a good opportunity to move towards a different direction by taking advantage of some industries like silicon valley did in CA and banking in NC. Time for Norfolk to get its piece of the pie or at very least, set itself up to have the opportunity. More importantly, we are talking about an incredible amount of space between the three housing projects (throw in the cedar lot if you want). Why are they blocking their opportunity to grow their DT district which is helpful for literally everyone in the region. Right now and rightfully so, people Jockey for position to get land in DT, the mall is taking up a big chunk of that. We have a perfect landscape to work with and literally no one has to loose out. Additionally, they are loosing out on another LRT destination with harbor park station sitting yards away. I guess to answer your question directly, it is a great waste of space considering what Norfolk needs to grow as a city. We are talking about at least 3 huge chucks of land. And to be clear, my gripe is exclusively with Tidewater gardens area, not the other two project areas.