bulldog
New Member
That looks to be Point Patience on the left of the picture. If so, that is the property of the Navy Rec Center. I don't see that happening.
Cruise Ship Terminal in Solomons?
- Thread starter awpitt
- Start date
That looks to be Point Patience on the left of the picture. If so, that is the property of the Navy Rec Center. I don't see that happening.
C
czygvtwkr
Guest
So someone came up with the plan "if the Navy just lets us use their property"
I saw a cruise ship stuck in a river in CT one time, the thing was there for a month they said.
I saw a cruise ship stuck in a river in CT one time, the thing was there for a month they said.
awpitt
Main Streeter
No.
If you read the article, you see that this plan is depending the Navy agreeing to LEASE 50 acres of the Rec Center to this developer. Wether or not the Navy would agree to that is anyone's guess.
C
czygvtwkr
Guest
That is what I said
Beta
Smile!
Lease 50 acres, either provide everyone access to the Navy facility or build a fence, and then go on a hope and a prayer that people would actually bother coming down to Solomons Island to take a cruise when most people are closer to Baltimore. That's a lot of changes the Navy has to make, which costs money, and if they have a concern that it might fail (which would be pretty reasonable given the circumstances) and the lease falling through, I don't see any reason why they'd entertain this offer.
Beta
Smile!
Even without the cart, I thought that's what you were known for anyway after that one incident. :shrug:
Misfit
Lawful neutral
Last edited:
somdfunguy
not impressed
The money is in waste removal
awpitt
Main Streeter
No, you said, "if the Navy just lets us use their property" which is different then a lease.
somdfunguy
not impressed
Most people look at cost and then schedule. If they can save a little or the schedule is better they will come the first time. Then they will realize how ####ty the road system is the lack of things to do the night before and never make the mistake again.
It looks like most if not all of the proposed cruise terminal is not in the actual recreational areas; last I knew there were some small operations in the old Davis buildings and whatnot there that reconditioned equipment, built plastic targets, etc. And there was the range support group (M/V "Hugo, for example) that used the pier but the existing pier is now toast, of course.
bulldog
New Member
The pier is owned by DynCorp, so I'm told. Everything there that is land based is behind the fences of NRC. NAVAIR has a support equipment rework facility there and the traffic from that activity already has to go through the camp grounds to enter / exit the base each day. I can't begin to imagine what the additional traffic would cause and you can bet that the Navy will NOT give up its camping facilities.
I just don't see how this every plays out.
We supported the interior refit of the Hugo while the ship was moored there some years back..so I'm generally familiar with all that you mentioned. I wonder if the proposal (and proposers) are counting on the NRC being mostly closed down by Navy in order to become available for their project.
Beta
Smile!
That's true, and maybe it would be cheaper to get business, but honestly I'd expect the cost to be higher since they have to catch up on expenses of building the damn thing
bulldog
New Member
If so, I think they are sadly mistaken. That rec facility is used by a lot of folks, from all over. Many of which are high ranking officers and civilian employees. I doubt they would stand by and let it be swallowed up.
It certainly does happen though...sometimes with little warning. The budget process is pretty ugly and often arbitrary too. I recall hearing some scuttlebutt a decade or so ago about closing/eliminating the NRC...but of course no idea how real of a threat that was.
In any event, there are a ton of reasons why that terminal idea is not a good idea and would be difficult to pull off...even if the Navy up and gave them the property tomorrow.
blazinlow89
Big Poppa
The NAVY was considering lease options several years ago, do not remember hearing much else about it though.
http://ww2.somdnews.com/stories/09012010/entetop161608_32328.shtml
They could separate the cruise parking from the base and still have access to RT 4.
http://ww2.somdnews.com/stories/09012010/entetop161608_32328.shtml
They could separate the cruise parking from the base and still have access to RT 4.
C
czygvtwkr
Guest
I think they would have to build a parking garage simply to accommodate all of the cars that would be involved.
blazinlow89
Big Poppa
Agree, the parking lot pictured is no where near large enough to accommodate cars for passengers, crew, maintenance personal and others required to maintain operations.