THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, June 23, 1995 TAG: 9506220189
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
SOURCE: Beth Barber
LENGTH: Medium: 59 lines
To the editor of the News-Journal, Daytona Beach:
I have just returned from a weekend at Virginia Beach and the Norfolk oceanfront: They put Daytona Beach to shame. Norfolk Beach has a walled-off shore for bathers; also a pedestrian walk, a bicycle run and a path for skaters, all separated and clearly defined. It's a pleasant place for people to stroll and enjoy the ocean with no cars to mar the scene and the ocean breezes.
Daytona Beach planners should see Virginia Beach.
F.L.M., Deland, May 22, 1995
Dear F.L.M.:
Virginia Beach takes its compliments where it finds them (Sydney Carroll of Arctic Avenue found yours and passed it along). This city has labored to make the Oceanfront ``a pleasant place for people.'' Key, it seems, are the infrastructure, accommodations and, above all, atmosphere to attract pleasant peo-ple.
Apparently no beach has a permanent lock on that. City officials get credit for steps that discourage the rowdies who discourage tourism. Residential parking permits have helped keep cruising troublemakers out of homeowners' houses, hedges and hair. Improved resort parking and events scheduling have helped enhance the police presence there.
But you couldn't have picked a worse time, F.L.M., to confuse Norfolk and the Oceanfront. Norfolk has some nice beaches, but none is Oceanfront. The Oceanfront is in Virginia Beach, and it's about the only H2O the two cities aren't disputing. Suffice for Daytona to know that Norfolk exports potable water, Virginia Beach imports it, and Toyko and Washington have less trouble negotiating their trade.
Of course, it's only a matter of days before the Water War widens onto the advertising front: Oceanfront proprietors are asking City Council to designate a half-percent from local taxes and $1 a roomnight for an enhanced budget to advertise Beach tourism.
On the plus side, this formula means the ad budget goes up only as the ad campaign produces more roomnights and ad revenues - and a projected $3.1 million a year net in city revenues.
On the downside, Norfolk has put several million in a ``Virginia Waterfront'' ad campaign that touts tourist attractions from Duke of Gloucester Street to Atlantic Avenue so travelers nationwide can know what a varied vacation this region has to offer.
``Virginia Beach,'' says its convention and tourism director, Jim Ricketts, ``is the major tourist destination in the state of Virginia.'' Norfolk has potable water but Nauticus, Waterside, etc., need portable tourists. What's the Beach need Norfolk for?
Norfolk earned the attitude. But does the Beach gain or lose by snub-bing the Waterfront ads and further poisoning the regional well? by CNB