THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, October 6, 1995 TAG: 9510060497
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY ALEX MARSHALL, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: NORFOLK LENGTH: Long : 113 lines
In explaining why it is a national leader in losing population, the city has opened a debate about whether its redevelopment policies are intended to drive poor people out of Norfolk.
The soul searching started this week, after the Census Bureau released figures showing that Norfolk had lost 20,000 people in five years. The city's population, the report said, had dropped from 261,250 to 241,426 since 1990, making Norfolk one of the top 10 ``declining cities'' around the country.
The city blamed most of the loss on military downsizing, a trend which, officials said, could be reversed in coming years with scheduled ship reassignments.
But it was the rest of the city's explanation that set off the discussions and caused some to wonder about the propriety of Norfolk policy.
The city administration explained that part of the population loss was deliberate and due to the city's practice of tearing down crowded, lower-income, higher-crime areas of the city.
``Norfolk's strong redevelopment record is another reason why total population is down,'' said city officials in a statement. ``This city has made a concentrated effort to decrease density in many areas, such as Ocean View and Park Place. Much of the housing that has been removed has been multifamily units.''
Councilman Mason C. Andrews said that tearing down poorer neighborhoods made sense for everyone when such communities are no longer viable.
``Wherever there is a neighborhood that can be saved, it should be saved,'' Andrews said. ``But where you don't have any hope of building a neighborhood that is complementary to the human spirit, it's appropriate'' to tear it down and build something else.
``I don't concede that less is worse,'' Andrews said. The people removed ``went to a lot of places. I would think a lot of them went to the suburbs. Whether it's good or bad, if you have density, and replace it with less density, you'll have less population.''
Councilman W. Randy Wright, who represents the Ocean View section where much of this relocation has happened, defended the actions.
``We've made a conscious decision that the city is somewhat overpopulated,'' Wright said from the council dais. ``We've cut down on quantity and gone for quality.''
But Councilman Paul R. Riddick, who has long maintained that the city has slighted poorer communities, said officials were admitting what he had long charged: that Norfolk was trying to rid itself of its less fortunate citizens.
``Our city manager has said that Norfolk has enough poor people, which is something I totally disagree with,'' Riddick said. ``Because who says any city has a quota of poor people?''
The city has the attitude that Virginia Beach or Chesapeake should take some of Norfolk's poor, Riddick said. But, he said, a city should not regard any of its citizens as expendable.
``Norfolk needs to realize that these people are here, aren't going anywhere, and that what we need to do is to make the climate right to make these people productive.''
Although Norfolk has not generally tracked displaced residents, Hampton Roads as a whole continues to grow in population, according to the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission. In fact, the same census study showed that Chesapeake was one of the nation's fastest-growing communities, growing from 152,000 in 1990 to 181,000 in 1994.
Norfolk City Manager James B. Oliver repeated Wednesday that the city believes reducing density is beneficial.
He acknowledged, though, that the city was being selective in which dense areas to eliminate. He said the city has no plans to redevelop Ghent - the highest density area in the city, with as many as 30 homes to an acre, but also one of the more prosperous.
Norfolk is one of the few cities in the country still pursuing old-style redevelopment efforts, where a city tears down entire neighborhoods and builds something else. Now, most communities rebuild by pruning bad buildings instead of entire blocks.
In the past decade, the city has torn down or supported the demolition of all or parts of a number of neighborhoods, including: Ocean View, East Ocean View, Lafayette Shores and Robin Hood Apartments. In previous decades, it tore down East Ghent, Atlantic City and several other neighborhoods surrounding downtown.
In virtually every case, poorer people living in apartments were replaced with middle-class people living in single-family homes. The poorer citizens were left to find homes elsewhere, whether in Norfolk or somewhere else.
In East Ocean View, the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority has begun an effort to tear down more than 1,500 homes, mostly working-class, and replace them with about 500 homes for the middle and upper-class.
In the beginning of this decade in Lafayette Shores, the city helped a private developer tear down about 700 homes and replace them with 220 suburban-style lots for suburban-style homes, Oliver said.
City Planning Director John Dugan said the city had long had a policy of eliminating neighborhoods that it considered having high crime rates or too many social problems.
In justifying the East Ocean View project, for example, the city relied on an economic report that said up to a third of displaced residents would leave the city, which would save the city on police and social costs. ILLUSTRATION: Photos
In Lafayette Shores, the city helped a private developer tear down
700 homes and replace them with 220 luxury homes on suburban-style
lots.
A Lafayette Shores home under construction for mid- to upper-income
buyers.
FILE COLOR PHOTO
Norfolk's Middletown Arch, a Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing
Authority project, is a 113-acre development that includes two
parks, a man-made lake and curving streets.
KEYWORDS: HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT POPULATION STATISTICS by CNB