From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 25 Jul 2005 16:21:15 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-irf |
Subject: | [CPEO-IRF] Oceana (VA) - "quick retreat" vs. "attrition" |
The editorial excerpted and linked below is a welcome variance from the
knee-jerk reactions that usually accompany base closure proposals. In
most cases, host communities are better off with closures or
realignments that make property available for civilian reuse, rather
than retention decisions that convert bustling bases into military ghost
towns. The opportunity cost of mothballing bases are obvious. However, the underutilization option has another downside: the slow deterioration of facilities and infrastructure. This is what happened at San Francisco's Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, which was formally closed more than 15 years after it had lost most of its missions. By the time closure occurred, many buildings were unusable. Not only did normal property maintenance stop, but in some cases wiring and piping had been removed. It's relatively easy to maintain and secure a base with hundreds or thousands of active-duty military personnel, or even with a comparable level of civilian employment. But once the major missions are gone, it's difficult to continue even routine activities. That's a lose-lose proposition for both the military and the community that will eventual gain control of the property. Lenny Siegel *** On Oceana, time to face reality Editorial The Virginian-Pilot July 25, 2005 If Oceana Naval Air Station’s mission can’t be saved, if the next generation of thunderous fighters must indeed take off from runways someplace else, Virginia Beach would be arguably better off with a quick military retreat instead of a prolonged campaign of attrition. According to a letter and to testimony before the Base Realignment and Closure Commission, the Pentagon sees decades of commercial and residential encroachment as eventually making the base’s mission impossible in the Beach. Though it could survive this BRAC go-round, this may well be Oceana’s last reprieve. The Navy hopes to eventually replace the 6,000-acre master jet base with a new, bigger facility elsewhere, one on a plot so large that surrounding development will never be an issue. ... For the entire editorial, see http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=89652&ran=143430
_______________________________________________ Installation_Reuse_Forum mailing list Installation_Reuse_Forum@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/installation_reuse_forum | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Virginia governor proposes aid Next by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Guard generals urge separate process | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-IRF] Virginia governor proposes aid Next by Thread: [CPEO-IRF] Guard generals urge separate process |