ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, July 7, 1996 TAG: 9607080018
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
As Bethel community parents, we have many concerns regarding the construction of the new elementary school, which ironically will be located in Riner.
During the two years of planning, only two meetings were held for the proposed plans of the new schools- in October 1994 (scheduled the second day of school) and March 1996.
We attended the March meeting to obtain "the facts" regarding the potential closure of Bethel Elementary School. Much to our dismay, the topic of conversation was not based on the need of an actual junior high school but the need for recreational facilities such as soccer fields that will also serve the Riner community.
The facts for closing Bethel School were presented as follows. The school was:
Too close to a four-lane highway (so are the newly constructed Falling Branch and Kipps Elementary).
Too close to Interstate 81 (so is Falling Branch).
Too small for a baseball field (good reason to close a school).
Occupying six mobile units, two of which were purchased in the fall of 1995. (If there is room for six mobile units, there is room for new construction including recreational facilities.)
Here are the concerns of Bethel Backers:
Student-teacher ratio: smaller classes are always better; if not, children are herded through the system and the student-teacher relationship is lost.
Exchanging access to Bethel School by a four-lane road to access in Riner by an already congested Virginia 8 and country back roads.
The busing schedule to Riner Elementary. (No 10- minute "Pizza Hut guarantee" about the length of a bus ride to Riner.)
Is Bethel School a pawn on the Riner/Auburn chess board?
Bethel School either has too many or not enough students to keep the school open. Which is it?
Tracy and Kim Tiller
Radford
Not everyone supports skybridge
Thank you for the June 30 Current feature ("At Tech, they are spacing out") on the new complex of edifices at Virginia Tech. The article did not address the fact that there is not universal acceptance of the skybridge project over The Mall.
The official line that the skybridge will "frame" the War Memorial depends upon the viewpoint of the observer. When proceeding from Main Street down The Mall, at eye level, it becomes obvious that the view of the memorial would be obstructed. As an alumnus and veteran, I think that walling in the end of The Mall and forcing the viewer to peek under the bridge, like looking under the flap of a circus tent, is an affront to what the memorial and The Mall symbolize.
The other criticism is aesthetic. The bridge would block the existing view. As one turns from Main Street onto campus one cannot help but be drawn into the drama of the view. To destroy this effect would be ill-advised, to say the least.
Bill Claussen
Blacksburg
Montgomery citizens winners and losers
We, the people, won one and lost one last week. We won when the Montgomery County Supervisors had the courage and foresight to vote for the future by supporting the development of the "smart" road. We lost when the once respected Forest Service caved in to the clamor and wild accusations of a few "back-to-nature tree-huggers" and denied right-of-way for a needed power line across a remote section of the national forest. If wiser judicial heads do not reverse this tunnel-vision position, the uproar following the guaranteed brownouts in the not-too-distant future will make the protests of the naysayers seem like the distant hum of a bull gnat.
Richard K. Culbertson
Blacksburg
LENGTH: Medium: 83 linesby CNB