THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, July 14, 1996 TAG: 9607120183
SECTION: SUFFOLK SUN PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: 117 lines
There has been much concern and controversy surrounding the Navy transmitter station re-use plan pertaining to Regent/YES. At the Planning Commission meeting on June 18, the facts were made clear:
1. The land would not be given to YES. It would be given to Regent University.
2. Regent is a private, religious-based university with very close ties to CBN.
3. None of the land or facilities would belong to YES. It would all be owned by Regent alone.
4. Regent will use the facility year round. It will only work with YES or a similar organization during the summer months.
5. Regent University students are not kids in trouble who need help. They are college graduates, most of whom are in their 30s, looking for a career change.
6. Regent University already has lots of money and land. They have land available in Virginia Beach, but they said building the facilities there would spoil their architecture!
Do you feel sorry for these people? Does it sound like a needy organization? I don't think so.
The City Council wisely sent back the first re-use plan to see if we could help a youth-oriented needy organization. Regent University is not youth-oriented or needy. The City Council tried to help, but it is clear that this would not work out the way it was intended.
When the Planning Commission heard all the facts, they voted to recommend the original plan, without Regent. They also added a provision to work with YES to find them a more suitable home. City Council should follow these sensible recommendations.
The city will get a beautiful park, and YES will find a suitable home in Suffolk.
Daniel Cimmino
River Breeze Road
Suffolk Regent causes concern
Here are my questions concerning Regent/YES:
Why does YES ask for more than 620 parking places?
How can Regent, with at least 200 students using the campus daily and 200 living there, be considered low-impact usage?
What will happen to Sleepy Hole area - the roads, utilities, etc.?
We, the taxpayers, will pay for the widening of Sleepy Hole's narrow, two-lane road. It definitely will change the landscape, and there will be much more traffic in a quiet rural area.
The YES budget will be $15 million over three years. Where does all that money come from? Hard to believe from a capital campaign. I am sure, in some way, Regent will be definitely doing its share!
Why this site? Why not build nearer the present campus, which would be more convenient for their students?
I ask citizens of Suffolk, who were supposed to be the major source of input for this land use, to think this through.
This is really not about a project just for a few students to have the opportunity to better themselves. This is really about a tax-exempt Regent University developing a very substantial toehold in a rural community that will not have a say in whatever Regent wants to do with the land. But, we will be paying for it in one way or another.
Barbara W. Hunt
River Breeze Road
Suffolk Say no to Regent
I do not believe that the City of Suffolk should give a private entity like Regent University the free use of the land at the former Naval Radio Transmitting Facility.
The people of Suffolk supported four workshops and fought to have low-intensity activity in this area. A Regent University/YES Media Center campus with dormitories for 200 students, 620 parking spaces, back lots and studios is not low intensity.
I support the present re-use plan as proposed. The inclusion of Regent University/YES Media Center would be a travesty to the people of Sleepy Hole, Driver and Nansemond Borough, which have twice rejected efforts to have Regent included.
The youth-oriented YES seems to be a front for Regent to obtain a strong presence in the area without the public scrutiny that would normally accompany such actions.
Attending the City Council meeting at 7 p.m. July 17, is the only way to be sure the facility is used in accordance with your wishes!
Ralph S. Hunt Jr.
River Breeze Road
Suffolk Stick with first plan
Regent University has put little thought into the former Navy transmitter site re-use plan. Its attitude seems to be ``just give us free land, and we will figure out what to do with it later.''
For seven months, it was absent from all meetings pertaining to the re-use plan. The representative they sent to answer questions at the last Planning Commission meeting knew almost nothing about the plan.
The Regent representative was unaware of the sewer line required for the proposed facilities. He was unaware who would use dormitories 46 weeks out of the year, and he had absolutely no idea who would use the 250 parking spaces outside the dormitory.
When the Planning Commission proposed that Regent use the empty Atlantic studio on Route 10, this rep claimed it was unsuitable. He said it would cost $1 million to purchase and another million to renovate it. The facilities he wants to build in Driver will cost $15 million. If he purchased and renovated the Atlantic studio, he could save $13 million, plus make use of a vacant building in Suffolk.
If Regent were serious about the land, they would have been actively involved from the start, or at the very least they would have sent a representative who knew something about the project. What does this say about how they will follow through on their promises?
Why don't we give land to people who want and need it? Let's stick with the original plan to develop the Driver Naval transmitter site as parkland, wildlife refuge and an environmental research center without Regent University. This will best benefit all Suffolk citizens.
Gordon Iiams
Sleepy Point Way
Suffolk by CNB