Now that we have established the basic concepts that the City should follow, lets look at specifics. First, everybody should know that according to VA law, a crosswalk can be marked or unmarked at any intersection or marked at any other place on a roadway. Additionally, drivers must stop for pedestrians crossing at any marked or unmarked crosswalk when the speed of the road is greater than 35 MPH. Since most drivers in Virginia seem to be completely ignorant of these laws, marked crosswalks are the best choice Downtown, since they can be easily recognized. Regular use of the “State Law: Yield to Pedestrians” signage would also be helpful. Next, as I said before, sidewalks should flow through crosswalks at logical places to make the pedestrian grid as effective as the street grid. Overall, Norfolk has done a decent job. Unfortunately, the city has taken the cheap way out on multiple occasions. Take the intersection of Main St. and Martins Ln. Its a simple ‘T’ intersection, but the city only gave it 2/3 of its crossings.

Main St. & Martins Ln.: an incomplete crosswalk block. (c) Google

It may not seem like a big deal. A person walking north on the west side of Martins Ln. could, conceivably, cross Martins Ln. and then cross Main St. (red lines). That isn’t human nature, though. Human nature dictates that one would take the least complex route (green lines), which would, of course, be more dangerous, since drivers are not watching unmarked crosswalks. Norfolk needs to show city pedestrians that they are important by going the extra mile to include them to the same extent as they include motor vehicles. There are a number of intersections that need full crosswalk blocks:

• Main St. & Martins Ln.
• York St. & Dunmore St.
• York St. & Yarmouth St.
• Brambleton Blvd. & Yarmouth St.
• Bute St. & Yarmouth St.
• York St. & Duke St. *
• Brambleton Blvd. & Boush St. *
• Granby St. & Bute St. *
• Charlotte St. & Bute St.
• Charlotte St. & Monticello Ave.
• Charlotte St. & Bank St.
• Bute St. & Monticello Ave.
• Bute St. & St. Pauls Blvd.
• Freemason St. & St. Pauls Blvd.
• Market St. & St. Pauls Blvd.
• Cumberland St. & Market St.
• Cumberland St. & City Hall Ave.
• Atlantic St. & Waterside Dr.
• Waterside Dr. & Martins Ln.
• Plume St. & Boush St.
• Brooke Ave. & Boush St.
• Brooke Ave. & Granby St.
• Tazewell St. & Granby St.
• Tazewell St. & Monticello Ave.
• Market St. & Granby St.
• Freemason St. & Monticello Ave.
• Main St. & Union St.
• Main St. & East St.

Think that’s alot? That’s just the regular intersections. There are an additional number of mid-block crosswalks that would complete the pedestrian grid. The crosswalks, especially on narrow streets such as Granby, should be raised to the level of the sidewalk. This would serve to keep vehicles from speeding as well as increase the ease of mobility for people in wheelchairs. Looking past the crosswalks, however, there are a number of other items on the list to make the Downtown district more pedestrian friendly.

While normally I would loath what a shopping mall stands for, take a minute and think about the amenities a mall provides for its customers. Take MacArthur Center, which I consider the best of the area’s malls, and the customer comforts it offers. First and foremost, a good, knowledgeable customer service desk sits at a convenient, central location. A good building services company takes care to make sure the building looks clean day in and day out. Security maintains a safe atmosphere and compliments customer service. As for direct amenities, there are safe, clean public restrooms, water fountains, and plentiful seating areas. All of these elements should be modeled in the general Downtown area.For all intents and purposes, Downtown should be looked at as a single unit, just like a mall looks at itself. Downtown’s users should be considered ‘customers’ and each should be treated as such.

The DNC does offer some of these services, but they need to be expanded. The number of ambassadors should increase and they should be branded as a customer and security services group. This fact should be advertised so that pedestrians feel safe in life and property as well as safe in the fact that they don’t have to worry about getting lost. Their cleaning crew should also be expanded to make sure the district looks good. The city should also work to identify at least two public restroom sites Downtown. One should be in the vicinity of TCC and the other should be in the Bank of America vicinity. These facilities could be shared with or sponsored by a third party group, which would help cover the costs of cleaning and maintenance. Public water fountains should be located every couple of blocks for pedestrian convenience. Privately-owned, publicly-accessible vending machines should be encouraged. Benches and garbage/recycling receptacles should be placed very liberally.

That concludes the design factors that contribute to a friendly pedestrian district. Next topic will be regarding larger projects that increase the quantity of pedestrians in addition to enhancing their experience.

Currently, the city has made some effort to increase Downtown’s ease-of-use for pedestrians. Unfortunately, most of this is done with an effort to keep the flow of traffic at a brisk pace. I say unfortunately because pedestrian ease-of-use and high traffic flow are completely contradictory. Pedestrian use increases when people feel safe. This perception of safety depends on slow moving cars, frequent crosswalks,  and barriers between people and vehicle. Free-flowing vehicular traffic depends on complete separation between cars and people along with giving vehicle traffic priority. Despite the new light rail, Downtown Norfolk’s mobility system is still geared toward vehicle traffic.

First, think about the light rail itself. The Tide should not have to stop at traffic signals. It should always have priority. This stopping really makes no sense at rush hour, when vehicle traffic is stopped anyway. Second, the pedestrian transportation network (i.e. the sidewalks and crosswalks) should be given the same consideration as the vehicular transportation network (i.e. roads). A road would never be allowed to simply end with no signage or alternatives. A road would never be allowed to have obstacles in the middle. You would never approach a busy intersection in you car only to find that there was no intersection. No traffic lights, markings, or even roadway. For some reason, however, Norfolk allows similar problems to exist within the pedestrian network. Sidewalks throughout the city end at seemingly random places. Even in places where they spend more time and money, there are problems. On my last visit, I noticed that, at the Monticello Ave LRT station, the crosswalk did not connect from the station to the east side of Monticello. In fact, it could not connect: the accessible ramp to the sidewalk by the WF building did not line up with the crosswalk from the station to the west side of the street. Furthermore, there was no crosswalk across Freemason from WF to the mall. This is supposed to be the New Norfolk, full of pedestrian friendly amenities. Where are the basics?

Every sidewalk should flow in a logical way. They should not perplex their users or hinder their movement. That is the foundation for a high quality pedestrian network. Follow it up with adequate benches and public restrooms and Norfolk will be on its way to a world-class pedestrian-oriented Downtown.

The city was laid out in a grid of standard-sized blocks of alternating one-way streets. As long as you knew in which direction the river was located, you could orient yourself and easily find your destination. They also had two light rail lines and a streetcar line running through Downtown. Best of all, they were free within the limits of Downtown. (Explanation: Both street car and light rail use the same trains. Light Rail uses two trains put together. Light Rail utilizes dedicated ROW and changes traffic signals so that it does not stop. Street car stops at signals and shares a lane with cars.) Due to high parking costs and the abundance of bicycles, the light rail systems were crowded for most of the day. The stations appeared to be designed with the rider in mind with seats, protection from the elements, and a system called TransitTracker, which allows you to accurately know when the next train will get to your stop.

The city seemed to be designed for pedestrians and bicyclists, which I am sure also contributed to the high transit ridership. There were abundant crosswalks and bike lanes. Traffic at non-signalized crosswalks knew that they had to stop for pedestrians. The business mix Downtown was good as well. There were grocery stores, an abundance and variety of restaurants for all budgets, and a mix of retail shops. Instead of tearing down the city to build a suburban mall, they used the existing buildings to utilize Downtown as a town-center-style shopping area. They had stores that the average Hampton Roads resident has only seen inside a shopping center in storefront locations. For example, Macy’s, Nordstrom, Banana Republic, Williams-Sonoma, Billabong, etc all had stores downtown.

Overall, the city gave the appearance that the residents were proud to be from Portland and that they city actually cared about what the residents thought. Everybody was nice and helpful. Random people would come up and ask if you needed help.

A couple of final notes: First, you could tell they put transit ahead of highways. The highway surfaces were great but the design had changed little in years. There were no acceleration/deceleration lanes. You just had to hit the gas and go. They did not waste money on things that we would consider necessary. For example, barricades to keep traffic from colliding with the wall were the exit splits off the highway.  Second note: The transit facilities were surprisingly clean and un-vandalized. How could this be? I though that they sold bus/transit shelters pre-vandalized. Apparently, in Oregon, it is a felony to deface transit property in any form or fashion. Excellent idea.

Downtown Portland Transit

For example, think about how you would go to Harbor Park. Water St., Park Ave., and Union St./E. Main St. are the main entry points. Now think about the surrounding area. Both Tidewater Drive and E. City Hall Ave. both point directly at the Park but the no longer connect, thanks to the Interstate. Also, there is a rarely used exit ramp from I-264 that exits onto Claiborne Ave. that has the potential to assist in getting people to the Park without further clogging E. Brambleton Ave. Unfortunately, Claiborne Ave. has to go through residential-sized roads only to have to merge back into Park Ave. The MMTC plan would fix these issues. Tidewater Drive and E. City Hall Ave. would connect directly to Park Ave. There would also be a new road built to connect Claiborne to additional parking on that side of the railroad tracks.

On the  SPQ side, there are also a number of new connections. The roadways that go through the public housing were designed to not connect. This may be good for keeping poor people from getting out (which doesn’t actually help anybody) but it is bad for a pedestrian-friendly, mixed use development. The SPQ plan would fix this. It would restore a grid system of roads and reconnect the SPQ area to Brambleton Ave. and to Tidewater Drive.

These projects are big news for Norfolk. Both will feed off of each other and off of Downtown. These two projects will nearly double the size of Downtown. Now we just need to get them built. The MMTC has a good chance of getting started if Norfolk gets award the federal grant they applied for.  The SPQ, however, appears to still be in limbo. When the project was released, the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority decided they wanted to slow things down. Despite their successes in Broad Creek, they seem to still think that they can better serve their clients by containing them in poverty rather than allowing them to mingle with the middle class.

Regardless, since most people don’t read the studies and plans that the city releases, I wanted to make it easy. I have created a map below that shows the major points of both the SPQ and the MMTC combined.  Let me know what you think. Click on something and it should tell you what it is.

If you want to read the actual plans from the City, you can view the MMTC plan here and the SPQ plan here.

Multi-Modal Transportation Center Full Build Out Concept and Development Sites along Connecting Routes

Norfolk is moving forward with planning and financing a new multi-modal transportation center Downtown. Excellent idea. The plan is to have it ready to open once Amtrak rolls in in three years. It is very exciting. Combining the news of Virginia Beach’s move toward urbanism and I get the idea that our area is actually maturing as a metropolitan area. The one thing that scared me for a minute, though, was where it said,

“In addition, a new bus transfer facility would be developed, moving about two-thirds of buses from the current location at Cedar Grove north of downtown on Monticello Avenue.”

I was worried that might mean that Norfolk was going to keep 1/3 of the buses at Cedar Grove. Fear not. According to the full report by the City,

At present, 17 routes on the HRT network serve the Cedar Grove site, and be-tween 6,000 – 7,000 passengers board or alight daily at the facility. The general conditions of the Cedar Grove site combined with its lack of amenities, poor pedestrian link-ages and connections, and also its remoteness from downtown activity centers combine to make the restructuring of the primary bus transfer operation in Norfolk a high priority. Its lack of a direct connection to the light rail corridor is also another detriment of the current site. … It is planned that the new bus transfer operation at the Multi-Modal Transportation Center will serve 9 current HRT bus routes operating to the Downtown Norfolk area generally from areas to the south and east. Concurrent to this restructuring of the transit network, 6 other bus routes to the downtown area from the west and north would also be realigned to serve other light rail stations which will help to further deemphasize and limit congestion at the Cedar Grove site and thereby improving passenger service and convenience across the entire bus transit network.

That mean 15 out of 17 buses will no longer serve Cedar Grove. I hope the other two will only serve it by driving by. Thinking about it, this actually shows some intelligence on the part of Norfolk city officials. They publicly recognize that Cedar Grove  is a terrible place for a bus transfer point. Ignoring the fact that the city is solely responsible for Cedar Grove, I have to give someone credit on this one. One problem. In the build-out image above, the nice, new bus transfer location has been built over with a parking garage. Check it out yourself:

Where did our bus transfer point go?

Despite the negative comments on PilotOnline, light rail will be a benefit to Virginia Beach. However, it will not reduce the number of cars currently on the road. That is not the point of the light rail. The congestion reduction aspect comes into play when Virginia Beach’s “Strategic Growth Areas” begin to expand. Six of VB’s eight SGAs center around the proposed light rail stops. The most important one so far is the Pembroke SGA, which includes Town Center. The residents of Town Center did not move there because they wanted to continue a highway-oriented, suburbanite lifestyle. They moved there for the urban feel. With light rail, that urban feel will grow around each station. Urban residents don’t mind public transit. That is why they are urban residents. Even reformed suburbanites re-evaluate their position on public transit once it becomes convenient for them. People, regardless of where they live, chose what their mode of transportation based on what is cheapest and most convenient. In a mostly suburban area like HR, cars fit this description. While public transportation is definitely cheaper than car use, the convenience of the car far out weighs the cost-effectiveness of the transit. As transit in HR gets more reliable, efficient, and convenient, ridership will increase.

The next Homerama will take place in East Ocean View for the second time. The East Beach development was designed as an urban neighborhood when it was built, rather than a suburban subdivision. If you have never been to East Beach, it is certainly worth a drive. The houses sit close together. They sit close to the curb. Parallel parking is encouraged. No garage is allowed to face the street but rather made to face the rear of the house, where access is permitted by alley. To keep the back alleys (lanes) safe, the houses have plentiful rear-facing windows and guest houses. Sidewalks and parks are plentiful. Contrary to the popular belief of Virginia Beach suburbanites, the sidewalks have not led to an increase in crime. My only hope is that they stick to the plan for the new Homerama and for future development. There is plenty of room for future development. Hopefully after all of the empty land is take up with this style of development, someone can do something about the suburb at the end of East Beach. I love driving through the area, but when I get to places like the suburb part, it really makes me cringe.

Proposed Nelson's Grant - York County

York County is in the works to get its first mixed use development. Called Nelson’s Grant, the development would include 66 town houses, 46 condos, and nearly 14,000 square feet of commercial space. The new development is designed to create a sense of place for those that will live there. It incorporates many of the concepts that real urban planners support, such as sidewalks, alleyways to support rear-entry garages, community spaces, parallel parking, and a mixed use area. If this development is successful, it should be a model for future development all around Hampton Roads. It is more efficient on city services and therefore less expensive to serve than the segregated-use, ‘traditional’ suburban sprawl.

Proposed Nelson's Grant - York County

Read the story from the Daily Press

jfr says:

Build something then make it impossible for locals to use it because they can’t drive down there and park. WAKE UP TAXPAYERS!!

This comment in and of itself demonstrates perfectly the failure of the current system. This is an admission that without a car, the Oceanfront is currently inaccessible, which is of course, all the more reason that it should be changed. I love the last part though. “Wake up taxpayers!” Really? The city is not spending tax dollars to build their own buildings or tear up parking lots. The city is simply making it easier for developers to build more urban-oriented, pedestrian-friendly projects. In the long run, even if you can’t get to it without a car, the property values will increase and revenue from sales will increase. Both of these increase the city’s tax-base. This said, I agree: Wake up taxpayers! To finish that statement, I would also add: Virginia Beach is going to make more money without raising taxes! Isn’t that what the residents want to happen? Ok, next comment.

William Bailey says:

At the oceanfront parking is always in short supply. Now it seems we want to create or allow less right from the begining (sic). It is not the city’s responciblity (sic) to dumb down the reguklations (sic) to put more money in the builder’s pocket. Stop the catering to these folks and hold them to the same standards that have made this city a wonderful place to live.

Frankly it seems that the city council comes closer and closer everyday to looking like they have been hired as employees of the developers in the city. The Planning Commission members are already builders so where is the checks & balance on city council?

This one is good too. Once again, typical suburbanite. Lets clarify: ”At the oceanfront [next-to-the-door]  parking is always in short supply.” I bet if these people had their way, every store would be a drive-through. The next part is good too: “Stop the catering to these folks and hold them to the same standards that have made this city a wonderful place to live.” I think Mr. Bailey needs to be reminded that ‘these folks’ are the same ones that built Virginia Beach. Unless, of course, he and his neighbors built their own houses with their bare hands…. Yeah, I didn’t think so either. Furthermore, the ‘same standards’ that built Virginia Beach have let it to be the most traffic-filled, congested city in South Hampton Roads. Every time someone complains about the VB traffic, they should be reminded that the traffic is entirely attributable to the segregated zoning codes of the past.  If you lived within walking distance to the stores that you need to visit on a daily basis, there would be no traffic.

These people that complain about these new codes are ignorant of the nature of the way zoning works. The purpose of this code is to bring mixed-use development to the Oceanfront. The people living there would not need to drive around down there. They could walk. Good job Virginia Beach for moving out of the realm of 1950s-style zoning code. I cannot wait to see the rest of these comments as the day progresses.