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.

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- 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 it.