Arctic_Tern

Thing is if I were a betting man I'd say that they probably don't have a great case, and are just trying to force the City of Norfolk to hand over millions of dollars to make them go away. I'm guessing that they had conversations about a Casino with Pishko, and maybe Pishko even said the city would help. But I would be flabbergasted if there was one drop of ink on a contract that actually said so. If there was, this lawsuit wouldn't be happening now. They're just going for something along the lines of "Pishko misrepresented what the city intended in discussions with Cordish" which is why so much of this has been focused on Pishko, and not any actual contract verbage.

I'm kinda glad that that proposed waterside tower never went through. Cordish is not being a good corporate community member. This reeks of desperation.

Just wanted to add a few shots going down the left side of the building to show what they're doing on the pier side of things. Looks like something significant will be going up there.

Really glad they were able to get something working for that site. Will really help those residents, and I'm glad to see that investor standing up when the other big box stores wouldn't. This should be good for the community and I hope things go well.

I mean, they could. But they'd be missing the $170M grant that the state and federal government was putting up to fund the project. They could try and get that money again but I think the VDOT got pretty burned last time and might not want to look VBs direction for light rail soon.

Oh no believe me, I didn't miss anything. Your ubiquitous posting in this thread is difficult to miss.

It would be pretty surprising if the tribe actually had experience operating gaming, seeing how they were only federally recognized a few years ago.

There's a 5th image on the allinnorfolk site that hasn't been posted much which shows it a bit better: So with my eye I'd say that it looks like they would keep a 2 lane road intact (reference image below) with a roundabout towards the water. One thing I am worried about and hope to get some clarification on is it doesn't look like there's much access to the station from the parking garage. Is that garage meant to still be usable by Amtrak patrons or will they have to use the surrounding lots?

That Arkansas design has less height than this, and is much more suburban. I honestly don't know why you keep bringing it up. If this was proposed for downtown proper or where Waterside is right now then yeah I'd be absolutely furious. But guys look at where it is right now. It's 500 feet from an electric power transfer station for goodness sake. It's taking over an area that is a parking lot, dilapidated pier, and is a brownfield site. It's not what any of us wanted architecturally, but it will help spur development in a part of a city that is formerly industrial and is hemmed in by the intersate, bring traffic to our amtrak and light rail stations, and will improve pedestrian and environmental conditions in the area. If it can do all of that, then this design is fine.

It's a bit disappointing to have the shorter building, but all in all I'd say it's fine. Height in that area is less of a concern for me, and it looks like it's at least a well planned out building with quality materials. Much better than what they were trying to feed us with the new renders of the Gateway Tower. I think it fits the area pretty well and if the casino is helping fund the pedestrian improvements between the river and stadium then that's even better. The infinity pool overlooking the stadium is a nice touch too. I will say it looks a bit blander than the other design, which I think had a very striking design, but all in all I think it looks fine.

Walked around campus this past weekend, got some pics of the new Chemistry building and Owens residential hall. Both of them are actually very nice looking in person. I'd highly recommend taking a look if you're ever on campus. I got a shot of the building itself and then a comparison shot to buildings it was near, to give a bit of context to each building.

Nah man, the different between us is that one wants a discussion on genuine improvements for folks and the other wants to call people commies for doing the former.

I just hope that they reinvest that into the Norfolk one. Pump it up to be a bigger project than whatever richmond will cook up, and looking at the projects that did make it through, I honestly don't think that'd be too difficult.

I would say it is less a failure of public housing, and more a failure of the society. How is it the housings fault if the people living there are prevented from moving upward? So the thing is about gentrification is that there is no one *line*. It is an incredibly grey issue. I think we can all agree it's awful when people are forced out of their homes not for any fault of their own.

You seem to want to argue more about communism/capitalism than have a good faith argument about how to best serve the underprivileged in our society. Which, neat, but the issue is a lot more complex than just saying "let laissez-faire capitalism do all the work". Creating communities and delivering services that work, especially for those that cannot afford to buy solutions, requires careful planning and years long foresight. This isn't about capitalism, it's about planning. (Weird seeing how we're on an urban planning message board right?) Private companies are not some big evil boogeyman, but they are around to do exactly one thing: make money. There is nothing that a company will do if it does not in some way make them more money. So when we cities are planning about how to help people who do not have money to give, they need to be wary of how they can be taken advantage of or else they end up in a situation where they pay more money to put their citizens in a worse situation than if they had just built the damn housing themselves.

This is a bad take, in my opinion. You're pulling a couple of different issues together to throw up a straw-man progressive that I don't think really exists. The issue with public housing is not that public housing is inherently bad, it is that it is not supported or utilized correctly. Public housing, especially in Norfolk, is under funded, concentrated, and segregated. Why aren't the public housing communities better integrated into the fabric of the city, and why don't they receive better services? Why has it taken 60 years for Tidewater Gardens to be replaced? Why aren't there already new units for the current residents to move into? Like seriously, it's not like there's a dearth of demand for public housing, it's almost impossible to get on the waiting list there are so many that need it. Why didn't the city build more public housing, move the current residents there, and then redevelop St. Pauls to add more public housing stock for the city? They would have been able to avoid a lot of their current criticisms if they took that route. I would also say that private led Section 8 housing is not the end-all-be-all solution that will fix all of our problems. Private apartment complexes are there to make a buck, and that clashes with public housing since most that need it don't have a ton of money. It is a useful tool in the public housing belt, but cities need to be careful in how they utilize and regulate private section 8 housing or else the residents are actually going to be in a much worse situation. Right now in Richmond they're having issues because Leasers have way too much control. They are able to jack up rents on poorly maintained properties with the threat of eviction if residents don't comply, and they face little if any repercussions whatsoever. And the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority has shown very little desire to help. And to be clear, yes gentrification is something that we need to be careful of. It forces out longtime residents and breaks up communities. And, as we all enough of urban development enthusiasts to frequent this site, we should be much more concerned with the development and protection of communities rather than ignore their potential erosion.

Depends on how quickly the city can gain leverage or control on the parcel. Since MacArthur mall was used as collateral, it could very well be heading to the bank very soon, and I think the City would be quick to try and grab it. The fact that the City owns the land probably will dissuade a lot of people trying to grab it for a quick buck since the City probably has a lot of control on what can and can't happen with the property.

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.

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.

Hey y'all I wanted to let ya know I actually bought a plot and got some site plans drawn up for a development on one the last prime pieces of property in downtown. It features a strip mall and a 2 story "tower". Please don't say anything mean about it it's a great development and besides this is the best the city can do anyways. Sure maybe I promised an architecturally and visually distinctive building that would have a huge presence in the city and region but this is totally good too please stop being mean.

So this view keeps coming up and is said to be a refreshingly nice, if not the nicest of the city, from the city. Unfortunately, what occupies this space right now is a parking garage and a part of the mall that has zero visibility of this area. I personally hope that the city demolishes the mall, reinstate a grid, and build with creating a better center city space in mind (especially in incorporating this park). You've got the Selden and Monticello Arcade, the downtown Library, the light rail and the MacArthur Museum/Memorial on one end, the Norva, Wells Theater, and Granby a block away on another side, and Apartments/Chrysler/Scope on the other end. Placemaking in this area should be pretty easy to encourage and invision.

EVMS has always had a stick up its butt when it comes to ODU. I still think an EVMS - ODU merger is the best thing for both institutions, and the area as a whole, and reading the article it looks like it will probably happen in one form or another.

So, I see this less as a "Peninsula vs SHR" issue but more as "this does not maximize the areas potential" thing. Cause I disagree with your second point. I don't think that W&M would be as engaged as would an ODU/Sentera merger. While ODU has a health sciences college (undergrad through doctorate degrees), a nursing program, bioengineering, and is investing in a new health sciences building, W&M has a "Kinesiology & Health Sciences" undergraduate degree and Pre-Nursing. I honestly feel like the proposed merger was just a prestige piece for W&M. Whereas ODU (and Sentera and NSU) would make it a priority, as they've already made a commitment to health sciences.

I don't think Richmond had it on the ballot this year. There's a couple proposals up there now so that might have to come at a later date.

How would it change their thoughts on SPQ? They're two different projects with two different goals and incentives around them. The lack of flow might also be due to the fact that there's an interstate and sea of parking between the two.