Letters to Editor - bLetters

We welcome your opinion on public issues, in either of two ways. You can submit a letter to the editor for possible publication in the printed edition. The Virginian-Pilot welcomes letters to the editor on all topics, although concise letters (150 words or less) on public issues will receive priority. Letters may be edited for length, style and clarity and writers are limited to one published letter every month. Please add your name, city, street address and daytime telephone number for confirmation.

The other way is to comment on the published letters in this blog. In this online forum, you can comment as much as you want by using the comment box at the end of each entry.

By e-mail: letters@pilotonline.com

By mail: Letters to the editor - P.O. Box 449 - Norfolk, VA 23501-0449

By fax: (757) 446-2051

Category: Readers' Opinions

■ 07 March 2009 | 5:00 AM

questioning a hotel

THE SECOND HALF of Kerry Dougherty's column 'Councilman's oversight on landscaping job is worrisome' (Hampton Roads, March 3) contained an error of fact and one of assumption when she discussed Virginia Beach's quest for a 180-foot-tall convention center hotel.

First, the error of fact: The Navy does not object to the hotel's height. The hotel would not interfere with radar surveillance of jets from NAS Oceana; in fact, we have an agreement with the Navy regarding height restrictions at the resort. If approved by the city, this hotel would fit within Navy specifications, as does the Hilton at 31st Street. The objection comes from the Federal Aviation Administration for reasons unrelated to Oceana's jets.

Second, she assumes we can have only national security or a hotel. We can have both. The radar facility, which happens to be at Oceana, could be moved anywhere with an unobstructed view of the ocean. There are many suitable locations.

A 110-foot height restriction at the resort is simply unrealistic. It would prevent virtually any new, modern hotels at the Oceanfront. A 10-story hotel at the convention center would be economically unfeasible. It would be too small for the thousands of visitors the convention center attracts. Many existing buildings, include the convention center, already exceed the height provision.

The choice is unnecessary. The FAA can have functional radar and Virginia Beach taxpayers can get a measure of relief with a new tax-generating hotel.

Robert S. Herbert

Virginia Beach

View 3 comment(s) Link to post

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Also...

Submitted by batgeek on Sat, 03/07/2009 at 8:11 pm.

no mention of who would be paying to MOVE the radar center. Yes, we know there are many suitable places, but the DoD/FAA or VB taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for a private enterprise claims on an area of land that is currently occupied.

But wait...this IS VB were talking about here. Yeah, city govt will let the taxpayers foot part of the bill, just like Towncenter.

What was I thinking...*sigh*

Because....

Submitted by C.B. on Sat, 03/07/2009 at 3:32 pm.

Because I won't go into the many falsehoods of this letter, I would still like to ask one question. Could you please show me anywhere where a hotel or any other public private partnership has added "a measure of relief" for taxpayers? I dare you to even try to spin that one!!!!