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.
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.
Because it does not always work. I know that Tidewater thinks that Northerners have their own prejudices and their own cynicism. But that does not address the issue that regionalism does not always work. Cities like to be independent and like to do their own thing. In most cases cities and counties cannot even get along with each other, and they are technically covering the same geographical space.
Regionalism is not going to solve anything in Hampton Roads. Neither is light rail. These ideas are good on the surface, but unless it is implemented early on, as it was in New York while the city was still coming into its own, it is an uphill battle. I am not necessarily against regionalism, and maybe the issues are a bit different because I am from the Midwest, but while you can technically join cities like Cincinnati and Dayton, or Cleveland and Akron, it isn't necessarily a good thing. First Hampton Roads would become its own city; Richmond would essentially be an exurb of Hampton Roads. Then we would be looking at joining forces with Richmond, and before you know it half the state would be under some form of consolidated governance/administration. If the individual cities can get things accomplished on their own let them. If they can work with each other let them. But the failure of Hampton Roads, which is often touted heavily on C-D, is not entirely due to the lack of regional cooperation. Regionalism is but one aspect of what ails Hampton Roads. Regionalism may allow Hampton Roads to petition for more money from the federal government, but this area has been through a lot of money in the past, in particular with respect to transportation, and it doesn't seem to have changed anything.
I don't want to have one of everything. I want to have like 12, if possible. If one doesn't work out, then I can go to the other 11. That is why I am not gung ho about having a singular airport serve the entire region. That is just more government, more corruption, and more incentive for someone to steal from a larger pot. Look at New York; you have five boroughs but what do we think of when we say New York? Manhattan and Brooklyn. Technically the other three boroughs, which, if they were their own cities would be notable, are forgotten to most people because of the success of the other two. Hampton Roads would just be Virginia Beach and Norfolk, to people that did not live here, though technically Hampton Roads would consist of seven boroughs.
Because it does not always work. I know that Tidewater thinks that Northerners have their own prejudices and their own cynicism. But that does not address the issue that regionalism does not always work. Cities like to be independent and like to do their own thing. In most cases cities and counties cannot even get along with each other, and they are technically covering the same geographical space.
Regionalism is not going to solve anything in Hampton Roads. Neither is light rail. These ideas are good on the surface, but unless it is implemented early on, as it was in New York while the city was still coming into its own, it is an uphill battle. I am not necessarily against regionalism, and maybe the issues are a bit different because I am from the Midwest, but while you can technically join cities like Cincinnati and Dayton, or Cleveland and Akron, it isn't necessarily a good thing. First Hampton Roads would become its own city; Richmond would essentially be an exurb of Hampton Roads. Then we would be looking at joining forces with Richmond, and before you know it half the state would be under some form of consolidated governance/administration. If the individual cities can get things accomplished on their own let them. If they can work with each other let them. But the failure of Hampton Roads, which is often touted heavily on C-D, is not entirely due to the lack of regional cooperation. Regionalism is but one aspect of what ails Hampton Roads. Regionalism may allow Hampton Roads to petition for more money from the federal government, but this area has been through a lot of money in the past, in particular with respect to transportation, and it doesn't seem to have changed anything.
I don't want to have one of everything. I want to have like 12, if possible. If one doesn't work out, then I can go to the other 11. That is why I am not gung ho about having a singular airport serve the entire region. That is just more government, more corruption, and more incentive for someone to steal from a larger pot. Look at New York; you have five boroughs but what do we think of when we say New York? Manhattan and Brooklyn. Technically the other three boroughs, which, if they were their own cities would be notable, are forgotten to most people because of the success of the other two. Hampton Roads would just be Virginia Beach and Norfolk, to people that did not live here, though technically Hampton Roads would consist of seven boroughs.
I agree. I guess this discussion (partly my fault) has diverged into discussing regionalism and parochialism only. You're right it is only one of the problems facing this region.
Furthermore, I also agree that regionalism in of itself isn't the real problem, as in reversing it and adopting a consolidated government structure, wouldn't really do much of anything. Its just a very simple and quick thing to point to.
I think there are deeper and more fundamental problems that don't have much of a "quick fix" like restructuring gov't, light rail, airports, etc. (even if any one of those things may be a good idea in the proper context). I think the problems here are mostly demographic and have been ignored for so long that I really can't see a good way out.
At some point you have to convince younger folks to not move away and to give back to the community. Thats really tough to do since HR has built itself into a place catering almost exclusively to two demographics, transient military and the retired. Neither has any interest in putting a single dollar into the area.
Oh boy and the money, oh gosh, I can't imagine how much money was wasted on developing this region that basically was used to subsidize someone's lower local taxes so they can build a huge house for themselves while ignoring the infrastructure in their very own communities, or just move away in 2 years.
At this point I swear its easier just to start at square zero, try to pull a United Arab Emirates strategy to undo decades of extreme privatization (trailer park-ization?). Spend an insane amount of money building schools (post secondary), parks, etc. do anything to attract though leaders to the area and wait for 50 years.
But boy... who would pay? Certainly not me. And would that even work? It's not like other MSAs wouldn't be doing the same thing. At this point I mostly fear that if there is even a small decrease in the massive amounts of federal (read other people's) money stops flowing into this area, what would be left?
This is truly an interesting, semi-unique, and difficult problem.
I agree. I guess this discussion (partly my fault) has diverged into discussing regionalism and parochialism only. You're right it is only one of the problems facing this region.
Furthermore, I also agree that regionalism in of itself isn't the real problem, as in reversing it and adopting a consolidated government structure, wouldn't really do much of anything. Its just a very simple and quick thing to point to.
I think there are deeper and more fundamental problems that don't have much of a "quick fix" like restructuring gov't, light rail, airports, etc. (even if any one of those things may be a good idea in the proper context). I think the problems here are mostly demographic and have been ignored for so long that I really can't see a good way out.
At some point you have to convince younger folks to not move away and to give back to the community. Thats really tough to do since HR has built itself into a place catering almost exclusively to two demographics, transient military and the retired. Neither has any interest in putting a single dollar into the area.
Oh boy and the money, oh gosh, I can't imagine how much money was wasted on developing this region that basically was used to subsidize someone's lower local taxes so they can build a huge house for themselves while ignoring the infrastructure in their very own communities, or just move away in 2 years.
At this point I swear its easier just to start at square zero, try to pull a United Arab Emirates strategy to undo decades of extreme privatization (trailer park-ization?). Spend an insane amount of money building schools (post secondary), parks, etc. do anything to attract though leaders to the area and wait for 50 years.
But boy... who would pay? Certainly not me. And would that even work? It's not like other MSAs wouldn't be doing the same thing. At this point I mostly fear that if there is even a small decrease in the massive amounts of federal (read other people's) money stops flowing into this area, what would be left?
This is truly an interesting, semi-unique, and difficult problem.
Good points. I haven't been here long, only since 2005. But what I've gathered, is that arguments in favor of regionalism, whatever shape that takes, whether making the entire area into one city, or having a professional sports team for the entire region or even public transportation infrastructure arguments only seem to be the symptoms of a deeper conversation we need to have in HR. Other MSA and CSA has tried regionalism before, and sometimes it just amplifies issues. Plus people are all in favor for regionalism, until their taxes go to pay for the entire region, and that is not the same as your taxes going to pay for the entire state, which is an entirely different issue altogether.
Another issue could be the restructuring that has already occurred due to the "Independent City" thing. In most areas, you are only paying for your city, or your suburb, whatever it may be. Suburbs usually do not have anything to do with the city, so you do not have bus service in the suburbs, no train service, in some cases the suburbs do not even have any sidewalks. When there is an Independent City, and the county and city exists in the same space, this increases the size of the city tremendously. It is similar to what has happened in cities like Columbus, OH, where pretty much all of the suburbs were annexed into the city. There may be multiple counties, but that city tax is now supporting 800,000, instead of 500,000.
Cities that have developed in this way have an enormous underclass. Sure the city may be 8 million, but 2 million might be poor, another 1 million underemployed, etc. The next thing you know you're paying taxes, living food to mouth and someone else isn't working and drives a better car than you and lives in a Section 8 low-income house that is better than where you live. So say a city like Norfolk has 50,000 in this situation. If you glue the city together, you have to deal with the other 300,000 in the region that are in the same shape, and have to pay for all of those people. I doubt the independent, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, NIMBY crowd that fights light rail vehemently would be in favor of this at all.
I live in Norfolk, but I like the fact that Virginia Beach now has its own performing arts facilities, even if I never go there. I would rather go to Virginia Beach to see Town Center, than to have to drive to Richmond, etc. Would I prefer to see more in Norfolk? Sure. But I'm not going to complain because of what some other city is doing, when I can take a short drive to that city. Norfolk has this infatuation with mid-rise housing complexes right now. It is better than nothing, but I honestly question what the city can attract to give all of these people to spend their money on.
To be completely honest I don't think that HR knows how to appeal to young people, particular when said people are not in charge, and probably never will be. It can educate young people, but will it put them in charge of the companies in this region that can make a difference? Do we have younger business leaders in this area, over some of these companies, that are under 50? Or are younger people working at smaller companies of a 100 people or less, where they can make more of an impact?
None of the cities seem to have a real plan for moving forward. Norfolk, Portsmouth, Newport News, and now Hampton, all have huge slums. Some larger than the smaller cities out in the Southwest portion of Virginia. In Portsmouth, you have a lot of Section 8, but those are still essentially the same areas, just not as dense. Norfolk still has a number of housing projects. Even Chesapeake has problems out in South Norfolk. With all of the money that runs through these areas, the cities are hard pressed to do basic infrastructure upgrades in some of the neighborhoods. There is piecemeal progress around here, and I think that is a big part of the frustration. There is no reason we could not have attracted that basketball team to the region a year ago. No reason at all. We had the money. I did not expect the cities to come together on this, but still, more could have been done.
Now if Virginia Beach puts their money together and builds a stadium on their own, more of a "build it and they will come" thing or actually give us our own team, rather than relocate one from the West Coast, and can pull that off I am all for it. Why hate Virginia Beach, when no one else is doing it? We really need to think outside of the box, and let go of our hangups about what this region should look like and stop trying to emulate other cities, because what worked for those cities won't work here. HR will not be another NYC, Chicago, or even an Atlanta or LA. Those days have passed. But HR can become a unique, different, type of metro area that you do not find anywhere else. But I do agree that it has to embrace not just the young, but those of different ethnicity and cultural persuasion, for this to occur. The xenophobia of some in this area is keeping us in the dark ages.
We're also basically in a crappy location transportation wise. You don't pass through HR. If you come here it's because you want too. We're the cul-de-sac of the east coast.
^This.^
I'm a native of the area, who has lived all over the world, and now lives in a metropolis. All things considered, the problem is that the area is a geographical dead end. In all the other places mentioned, one has multiple routes of access to and from. HR is isolated.
The bible-belt mentality argument doesn't quite wash; Charlotte and Atlanta are cut from the same cloth, and boomed beyond all expectation. Norfolk was far more ethnically diverse than both of those places 100 years ago.
To remedy the problem would require two things that have always proven difficult.
1. Overcome the traditional bias against all of Virginia's cities that has always been held by the rurally-dominated General Assembly. This has hampered all transportation development in the Commonwealth for generations.
2. Convince one state (North Carolina) to spend billions of dollars in order to connect the metro region of another state (Virginia) to its main transportation arteries. North Carolina has little incentive to do that, because it already has excellent cross-state arteries, and also because an artery using HR as a throughway is not and can never be the most direct route to anywhere except hurricane country. It's a great idea to have arteries to everywhere along the coast, but no one is ever going to put the money into it.
Yellow fever in Norfolk July 8, 1855 I guess or it would have happened a long time ago. Plus, the
good ol' boys are making money hand over fist the way it already is. They don't want to screw
that up, just to be a broke metropolis full of people stepping on each other to appear rich.
If I had a boat-load of money to throw around I'd get a bunch of urban planners together, draw up plans to completely remodel and revitalize the region, then lobby as many people as possible into adopting those plans. I love Hampton Roads, if not for any other reason than I've lived here all my life, yet it consistently disappoints me in how mediocre and dysfunctional it is. I hate to see the last interesting parts of the region, the farms and natural areas like swamps and forests, get bulldozed and turned into yet more housing developments while practically everything else remains as bland and lifeless as ever.
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 *kThe biggest issue that I can see prevented this area from becoming a major is the fact the area never developed an alpha city, and didn't develop a cohesive, progressive, forward-thinking relationship between that city and its surrounding suburbs...
So the way forward for Hampton Roads is to market Virginia Beach and Norfolk as one city, and champion the contrasts and similarities of the duality. This works for Minneapolis-St. Paul, why can't it work in Southeast Virginia? *It can*.....there are a variety of other factors at play too, but this is a starting point...
When I tell people about the Southside, I always tell them VB and Nfk are essentially two sides if the same city. Hundreds of thousands of people work in one but live in the other; take advantage of the amenities the other one has though they live in the other; and/or have friends and relatives in the other city. These two are the same city more than it seems natives want to realize it...so I start there...
We're the 37th-largest MSA, with below average growth rates. Economic and population growth won't accelerate here until we develop and cultivate reasons to bring people and businesses here at a higher rate. Geography really isn't much of a factor here. The Twin Cities are isolated. So is Denver, Seattle, Kansas City, etc. You can be a major city in the middle of nowhere if there is a plan...
Whenever, if ever, that day comes that we market VB/Nfk as the dual, two sides of the same city thing, that will go a long way towards erasing the one-upmanship and diversion tactics. Won't fully eliminate but it will erase a lot of it. Play off of the strengths of both individually and as a package, without minimizing the other, because when we minimize the other, that turns interested parties off...
I think people also have to take into account that because of the geography of waterways cutting through the region, this area really functions as a CSA with two seperate cores (Peninsula, Southside) that just grew together. So we should also market ourselves more on that line...
Compared to like-sized metros, Hampton Roads has higher educational attainment than Cleveland, Providebce, Jacksonville, and OKC metros----->but lower educational attainment than Milwaukee, Nashville, and Indianapolis metros. So there's something to work with here, but lacking a premier university really hurts. One could argue Hampton is the premier university here, but its reach is only largely within a specific culture, and it has little to no influence on the Southside where the biggest cities (VB/Nfk) are...
ODU lacks the integration within the cultural fabric of the city of Norfolk that large cities normally have with their main universities. Ditto for Regent, tucked away in SW VB where most people dont even know it exists. That's a problem, and look no further than Richmond for a positive example of how your university has a cultural and societal footprint within the city that extends beyond its campus borders. I dont know much, but I know that the fact we lack this can't be spun positively...
Downtown Norfolk and Town Center have to be marketed jointly and correctly. DT Nfk has the structure and cache to always be the traditional downtown here, but talk up Town Center as a downtown alternative, kinda in the form of Midtown Atlanta or Downtown Brooklyn; talk it up as an alternative downtown with much of the same appeal as DT Nfk, but different in that it is newer with a different vibe...
Even if people dont believe it to be so currently, you speak the ideas in order to create the plans. And honestly, the two downtowns do feed well off of each other even if it is inorganic right now...
The airport should amend its name. Already when you're in travel nationwide and you see flights to ORF in other airports, the boards say "Norfolk (Virginia Beach)". The fact is that Norfolk doesn't have the name recognizance to stand on it's own. Officially changing the name to Norfolk-Virginia Beach International Airport would raise its profile by word of mouth and increase visibility in the long run...
Richmond International is 11%+ busier and will continue increasing that gap. We're not all that competitive with RIC, but a name change would prove competitive in peer areas outside of Virginia...
Another vote for it's the military... Reminds me of Jacksonville actually.
As a Richmonder I'm always shocked when I go down how little is going on for how many people (and how much traffic!) there is. My brother lives in Ghent, and defends Norfolk as improved, but continues to say it doesn't compare to Richmond.
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.
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.
