U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Virginia > Hampton Roads area
 [Register]
Hampton Roads area Chesapeake - Hampton - Newport News - Norfolk - Portsmouth - Suffolk - Virginia Beach
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-27-2013, 12:13 PM
 
Location: newport blues
10 posts, read 12,079 times
Reputation: 47

Advertisements

The OP was joking, right ?

//www.city-data.com/forum/hampt...cals-hr-2.html
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-28-2013, 12:39 AM
 
58 posts, read 96,622 times
Reputation: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
I have to say, I just saw a photo of the VB city center yesterday and I was impressed. I grew up in VB and moved away right when they cut the trees down for the town center and had that dumb idea to build an ugly twin tower that thankfully never happened. I think if VB holds itself to its urban plan for Pembroke, it could become that city that people wish it would have been.

Norfolk shot itself in the foot when it mowed down its own city rather than revive its urban density. If it had done that, downtown would be much bigger and would have seen a true urban revival by now and people like me would have never moved away. Now they are struggling to stay relevant in a region that has outgrown them and no longer needs Norfolk for an urban center.

The new tower going up in VB city center is a building that should have gone up in Norfolk, but Norfolk screwed themselves over trying to go with a tired idea. Norfolk doesn't think like an urban center, nor a big city.

The major thing that holds Hampton Roads back is the lack of a regional government that is in control of regional things like mass transit, airports, and so on. The region needs to build a real airport in the region. The region will never get a pro team until it works together or VB figures out how to do it alone.

I have a degree in architecture and minored in Urban Planning and I have seen Hampton Roads have the chance to be more like LA. A metro that has several urban centers and functions on a decentralized format. Though with VB having the tallest building and plenty of room to grow, it will be the new downtown from here on out, something I have lost faith in Norfolk ever doing.
You're the boss applesauce. This.

Althought its kinda impressive what has been done, its nuts what hasn't. The airport situation is crazy, three regional airports (counting Richmond, which I guess I shouldn't) means that you can't even leave or come to the area if you wanted to. How fun is it being in a top 20 MSA with regional airports. Living in Denver now, which is the exact opposite of HR. The Denver MSA isn't that much bigger than HR, but at least they decide to agree to build ONE airport... competition... hur hur hur... derp...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2013, 06:24 PM
 
1 posts, read 1,954 times
Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudlander View Post
As I read more about this area, I don't understand why this region never became more of a metropolis.
Not that HR is not developed, it is, but it's not a major US market like a Philadelphia/Baltimore/Pittsburgh and it doesn't add up.

Consider that HR is located on perhaps the best harbor on the East Coast. It's ice free, large, sheltered, and has easier access to the Northeast and Southeast than Baltimore.

HR is on relatively level, fertile grounds. It also was one of the first U.S. mainland areas discovered.
So given all of these factors, how come HR never developed a major CBD or Financial District nor grew to be a metropolis like Baltimore or Pittsburgh?
Because it is too conservative and is run by a bunch of good ole boy crooks.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,503 posts, read 6,866,110 times
Reputation: 3748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geork View Post
You're the boss applesauce. This.

Althought its kinda impressive what has been done, its nuts what hasn't. The airport situation is crazy, three regional airports (counting Richmond, which I guess I shouldn't) means that you can't even leave or come to the area if you wanted to. How fun is it being in a top 20 MSA with regional airports. Living in Denver now, which is the exact opposite of HR. The Denver MSA isn't that much bigger than HR, but at least they decide to agree to build ONE airport... competition... hur hur hur... derp...
What's wrong with multiple airports a lot of cities including NYC is served by more than one airport. A lot of MSA have more than one airport. I wouldn't want everyone from the Peninsula coming to the Norfolk International Airport, or vice versa. And I don't know many that make the drive all the way out to Richmond.

In fact, Richmond is its own MSA has nothing to do with HR. Why would you want everyone to go through one regional airport, just to deal with subways built into the airport, because the other side of the airport is 10 miles away, etc. At least we can just walk to the other side of our airport and catch the plane without having to get on a tram to connect a disjointed airport. I wouldn't want the situation here to be like Chicago, Atlanta, etc.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2013, 06:16 PM
 
3,848 posts, read 8,381,142 times
Reputation: 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328 View Post
What's wrong with multiple airports a lot of cities including NYC is served by more than one airport. A lot of MSA have more than one airport. I wouldn't want everyone from the Peninsula coming to the Norfolk International Airport, or vice versa. And I don't know many that make the drive all the way out to Richmond.
They have a population to demand multiple large airports, though. What Geork is getting at I'm sure is that since our population is not large enough to sustain multiple large airports, it would be nice to have one large airport thus giving us better access to destinations throughout the country and possibly world.

It's incredibly annoying to have to constantly connect to get to other places, or be able to only deal with one airline in getting to a place non-stop.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2013, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Charlottesville, VA
18 posts, read 26,054 times
Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328 View Post
What's wrong with multiple airports a lot of cities including NYC is served by more than one airport. A lot of MSA have more than one airport. I wouldn't want everyone from the Peninsula coming to the Norfolk International Airport, or vice versa. And I don't know many that make the drive all the way out to Richmond.

In fact, Richmond is its own MSA has nothing to do with HR. Why would you want everyone to go through one regional airport, just to deal with subways built into the airport, because the other side of the airport is 10 miles away, etc. At least we can just walk to the other side of our airport and catch the plane without having to get on a tram to connect a disjointed airport. I wouldn't want the situation here to be like Chicago, Atlanta, etc.
goofy328, you're right about Richmond being it's own MSA. If we had one airport for Hampton Roads, people from RVA wouldn't be coming down here to use it and vice versa.

However, I don't know why you are against having people on the peninsula come to Norfolk International. Most of them do anyways when flying out of the country and to regions other than the East Coast. For example, there may be one flight every two days to Chicago from Williamsburg/Newport News International, while Norfolk has five per day. Flights coming into and departing Williamsburg/Newport News International do not encompass as large of a service area as Norfolk within the same time frame.

If the cities opted to invest in one airport that everyone in the seven cities would use, it would be larger and have the resource capacity to handle more flights and more flyers. Newer airports do not have the issues you speak of in your comment. You wouldn't notice a negative effect upon the service you receive as a flyer. The situation wouldn't be like the one you describe in Chicago.

The issues you speak of are manifestations of improper planning by airport developers/architects from many decades ago. Those lessons have been learned nowadays. Take Denver for example: the investments made by the cities (Denver, Aurora, Lakewood, etc) that use that airport allowed for the construction of a parking garage right there outside the baggage claim, just like Norfolk has.

In order to do this, however, people like you need to stop throwing their hands up and trash-talking regional investments out of unfounded fear. Local governments would be more inclined to act on the desires of the public and we would realize a more cohesive region that offers better infrastructure and amenities for us all.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2013, 10:17 PM
 
58 posts, read 96,622 times
Reputation: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain07 View Post
goofy328, you're right about Richmond being it's own MSA. If we had one airport for Hampton Roads, people from RVA wouldn't be coming down here to use it and vice versa.

However, I don't know why you are against having people on the peninsula come to Norfolk International. Most of them do anyways when flying out of the country and to regions other than the East Coast. For example, there may be one flight every two days to Chicago from Williamsburg/Newport News International, while Norfolk has five per day. Flights coming into and departing Williamsburg/Newport News International do not encompass as large of a service area as Norfolk within the same time frame.

If the cities opted to invest in one airport that everyone in the seven cities would use, it would be larger and have the resource capacity to handle more flights and more flyers. Newer airports do not have the issues you speak of in your comment. You wouldn't notice a negative effect upon the service you receive as a flyer. The situation wouldn't be like the one you describe in Chicago.

The issues you speak of are manifestations of improper planning by airport developers/architects from many decades ago. Those lessons have been learned nowadays. Take Denver for example: the investments made by the cities (Denver, Aurora, Lakewood, etc) that use that airport allowed for the construction of a parking garage right there outside the baggage claim, just like Norfolk has.

In order to do this, however, people like you need to stop throwing their hands up and trash-talking regional investments out of unfounded fear. Local governments would be more inclined to act on the desires of the public and we would realize a more cohesive region that offers better infrastructure and amenities for us all.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. I think the airport situation is a good example of what the OP was asking "why this area never developed into a metro area".

The HR MSA is somewhere around 25th biggest (I think) so comparing it to Atlanta, NYC, etc. won't work. Compare HR to other 20-30 MSAs and you begin to see quite how big the problem in HR is with respect to urban planning and poor local politics.

Most times it comes down to making this better for the community vs. making things better for YOU. This is why the airport situation is a good thing to look at. Having multiple airports is more convenient to drive to for locals, but the problem is that EVERYONE then wants one nearby, and you build more than one. What do carriers do? Instead of us all agreeing to drive a bit farther we split our population, so instead of being a top 25 MSA we are now two top 50 MSAs. Carriers will then treat us a such, layovers to get anywhere and more expensive tickets.

As a right leaning person, I find it absolutely befuddling how the local politicians don't seem to understand how regional development works. It seems like the local politicians conflate being republican with ignoring urban planning (people go to school for the stuff, what?!? experts in designing communities, yeah they exist). Having two airports "compete" doesn't do bunk.

Now look around the area. This is happening with everything. Although HR is a BIG place, leadership in the area is uninterested in ever giving up their tax proceeds to develop anything that isn't immediately adjacent to where they are. This thinking is what leads to upscale trailer parks, everyone buys their own playgrounds, but doesn't fund parks, everyone drives their kids to school, but doesn't fund busing (or GASP transit oriented development, but honestly, that will take 100 years to reach HR), no one pays for sidewalks, underground drainage. Everyone wants to live in a cul-de-sac. I could go on forever.

The end result is that you can never build anything that takes a significant amount of capital investment, despite actually having the resources.

You may think "who cares, I LIKE my playground in my backyard", the main problem is that it is an incredibly inefficient way to spend money. We end up duplicating expenses all over the place.

Now there is a natural give and take here, if you take my thinking to its natural conclusion we would centralize everything in the US in the dense cities and leave people in less dense areas behind, this is obviously not ideal, but HR is almost a test case in things swinging way to far into the individual versus community camp.

The REAL problem that I see is that people in HR care. If you want to go completely individual, that is actually easy to do, you just can't complain about it! Large chunk of the southeast and southwest US are exactly that, you don't have to look far for examples. If you look at other countries things are even more clear (look at Chile, Mexico, etc.). Many communities in the south east (Mississippi springs to mind, I have a friend outside Hattiesburg) where is you want to fly you SAVE money until you can afford a plane and then you have no problem. Of course that leads to most people not really being able to fly, but well... that's what thats community decided.

Thats what I never got about HR, is that people seem to actually WANT to be a community/city. At some point you guys are gonna have to decide, work together and start building (its gonna take alot of time and money, other MSAs have a LONG head start) or just go full on Mississippi, focus on your own and ignore what happens outside your property line.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2013, 09:24 AM
 
12 posts, read 26,688 times
Reputation: 17
It is because Hampton Roads is culturally dead. I lived there for five years. It was boredomville. Soon as my children became teens, I split out of there to Boston ie. Cape Cod to get my fine arts fix. Cape Cod offered great schools and was very beautiful. It offered quick access to Boston, Providence, and NYC for my cultural exploits. Hampton Roads is a aesthetically beautiful however it is truly for those who prefer a simple quiet life. If you seek the fine arts prepare to spend 3-4 hours on the road going to Washington DC as I did.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2013, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,503 posts, read 6,866,110 times
Reputation: 3748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coconut1 View Post
They have a population to demand multiple large airports, though. What Geork is getting at I'm sure is that since our population is not large enough to sustain multiple large airports, it would be nice to have one large airport thus giving us better access to destinations throughout the country and possibly world.

It's incredibly annoying to have to constantly connect to get to other places, or be able to only deal with one airline in getting to a place non-stop.
That isn't entirely true. Those airports would be unsustainable if that weren't the case. I like the fact of being able to go to the airport, and no one is there. Go to the airport in Orlando, or O Hare or Atlanta where you cannot even see the other side of the airport. Even Cleveland is a huge airport, and their metro only has an additional 700,000 people than what we have here in Hampton Roads.

I understand where Geork is coming from, but it is nice to have options. When I first moved here, I complained because Hampton Roads did not have four floor shopping malls, or 3 million square foot shopping malls, etc. The only exception being MacArthur when it was built. But now I have grown to like it. It is nice to go the mall, and not have everyone in your county shopping there.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2013, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,503 posts, read 6,866,110 times
Reputation: 3748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geork View Post
Yes, this is what I was getting at. I think the airport situation is a good example of what the OP was asking "why this area never developed into a metro area".

The HR MSA is somewhere around 25th biggest (I think) so comparing it to Atlanta, NYC, etc. won't work. Compare HR to other 20-30 MSAs and you begin to see quite how big the problem in HR is with respect to urban planning and poor local politics.

Most times it comes down to making this better for the community vs. making things better for YOU. This is why the airport situation is a good thing to look at. Having multiple airports is more convenient to drive to for locals, but the problem is that EVERYONE then wants one nearby, and you build more than one. What do carriers do? Instead of us all agreeing to drive a bit farther we split our population, so instead of being a top 25 MSA we are now two top 50 MSAs. Carriers will then treat us a such, layovers to get anywhere and more expensive tickets.

As a right leaning person, I find it absolutely befuddling how the local politicians don't seem to understand how regional development works. It seems like the local politicians conflate being republican with ignoring urban planning (people go to school for the stuff, what?!? experts in designing communities, yeah they exist). Having two airports "compete" doesn't do bunk.

Now look around the area. This is happening with everything. Although HR is a BIG place, leadership in the area is uninterested in ever giving up their tax proceeds to develop anything that isn't immediately adjacent to where they are. This thinking is what leads to upscale trailer parks, everyone buys their own playgrounds, but doesn't fund parks, everyone drives their kids to school, but doesn't fund busing (or GASP transit oriented development, but honestly, that will take 100 years to reach HR), no one pays for sidewalks, underground drainage. Everyone wants to live in a cul-de-sac. I could go on forever.

The end result is that you can never build anything that takes a significant amount of capital investment, despite actually having the resources.

You may think "who cares, I LIKE my playground in my backyard", the main problem is that it is an incredibly inefficient way to spend money. We end up duplicating expenses all over the place.

Now there is a natural give and take here, if you take my thinking to its natural conclusion we would centralize everything in the US in the dense cities and leave people in less dense areas behind, this is obviously not ideal, but HR is almost a test case in things swinging way to far into the individual versus community camp.

The REAL problem that I see is that people in HR care. If you want to go completely individual, that is actually easy to do, you just can't complain about it! Large chunk of the southeast and southwest US are exactly that, you don't have to look far for examples. If you look at other countries things are even more clear (look at Chile, Mexico, etc.). Many communities in the south east (Mississippi springs to mind, I have a friend outside Hattiesburg) where is you want to fly you SAVE money until you can afford a plane and then you have no problem. Of course that leads to most people not really being able to fly, but well... that's what thats community decided.

Thats what I never got about HR, is that people seem to actually WANT to be a community/city. At some point you guys are gonna have to decide, work together and start building (its gonna take alot of time and money, other MSAs have a LONG head start) or just go full on Mississippi, focus on your own and ignore what happens outside your property line.
I really don't see it happening. I would like to see it happen, but I am doubtful.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Virginia > Hampton Roads area

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top