THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, April 27, 1995 TAG: 9504260169
SECTION: SUFFOLK SUN PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
SOURCE: John Pruitt
LENGTH: Medium: 74 lines
Several months back, I wrote that the pain being inflicted by the city on downtown property owners to gain parking spaces for the proposed courthouse was a case of the few's suffering for the overall good of the city.
For some time now, I've wondered whether that was a proper assessment. There are nagging questions, including these:
Since when is it the city's role to bring discomfort to people who are trying to be good corporate neighbors, people who - despite tremendous odds - are succeeding in an area that has endured an exodus by even well heeled department stores?
Why would the city raze East Washington Street buildings that are architecturally appealing and that house viable businesses in favor of an asphalt expanse generating nothing but emptiness?
Don't overlook, either, that some of the buildings have apartments, and that Suffolk has a tremendous need for affordable housing.
Isn't it incredulous that, in 1995, any city would be contemplating using so much space for parking - flat surface that, during off-hours, will be as devoid of life as anything downtown now?
As convinced as I am that the courthouse will be good for downtown, I'm just as convinced that it's being planned by a few people who are functioning in a vacuum - acting as if they are the experts; just trust them to make the right decisions.
They'll bring us the whole gift-wrapped package, and we'll be delighted. That's as antiquated a way of city-building as I can imagine, and it flies in the face of the oft-touted wish of City Hall for a partnership of government and citizens.
Ask the merchants who are being displaced how much of a two-way process land acquisition has been. What's two-way about a city offer (although negotiable) that eventually will be resolved - in the city's favor - by condemnation?
Ask downtown merchants how many city officials have come to them to solicit ideas. What have you been asked?
What's the rush for this parking? If you see motorists circling downtown because parking lots are packed, let me know. So what if construction and construction equipment will claim some of the parking areas now available? Downtown has them to spare.
Tearing down more buildings will simply mean fewer reasons for people to come downtown. Surely no one in City Hall thinks a courthouse alone will bring more shoppers. Some of the nearby merchants will tell you they don't.
Shoppers need somewhere to shop. The more choices, the better. I'm convinced that they'd rather have a quaint restaurant - perhaps in one of the doomed East Washington Street buildings - than a few extra squares of asphalt.
Even if the East Washington Street buildings and others are needed eventually, why must they be leveled so soon? What will be the return on parking?
As bothersome to me is the huge area envisioned for parking. Think of your impression of downtown anywhere if all you saw were acres and acres of white-lined blackness. Boring!
Parking garages are expensive, but there are a lot of them around. Somebody, it seems, knows something we don't.
Is there some way to strike a deal with contract-hungry builders to erect a garage at lower cost in return for the courthouse job?
Couldn't the Redevelopment and Housing Authority make it appealing, with low-cost loans, for a private builder to put up a garage and associated office building, perhaps one offering retail services on the street floor?
Surely other people have other ideas about how to make the courthouse building be a positive influence downtown. Find a city official and share them. This isn't their project; it's ours.
Comment? Call 446-2494. by CNB