THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, December 3, 1995 TAG: 9512010147
SECTION: PORTSMOUTH CURRENTS PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Long : 184 lines
I would like to publicly express my thanks to some good folks in Portsmouth who came to our aid when my auto developed engine trouble. The motor stalled in the middle of an express highway and a stranger helped me to Baucom's Auto Service on Airline Boulevard. They could not do the repair but called for a tow truck and drove my family to Don Comer Ford where my car was being towed.
Bill Canady, service consultant, at Don Comer Ford, was most helpful. As it was late afternoon, the car could not be worked on until the next morning. Mr. Canady called Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Quincy A. Ayscue Jr. delivered a car for us to proceed to a motel for the evening.
The next morning I called Mr. Canady and the car was fixed with a new fuel pump and we were on our way by 10 a.m.
I must express my thanks and appreciation for the service and hospitality to Baucom's Auto Service, Don Comer Ford Inc. (a special thanks to Bill Canady), and Enterprise Rent-A-Car. They are a credit to the Portsmouth community.
George J. Rotelli
South Nyack, N.Y.
Nov. 2, 1995 An apalling question
Herbert Matheis wrote a response in the Nov. 26 Currents. I would like to respond to his question: ``Did you run out of residents of Portsmouth to feature in your close-up section of the Currents?''
First of all, I am a former resident of Portsmouth for 25 years. I also work in Portsmouth and have for four years. If he reads the statistics in the newspaper, it is not a false statement about the crime and financial losses facing Portsmouth. How can I be part of the problem of crime and financial losses? I have never been arrested or committed any type of crime.
I am appalled at this comment. If he knows of particular residents who have done wonderful things to help the community, he should suggest his recommendations to the Currents.
Last, but not least, I will always be a part of Portsmouth and continue to help the communities of Portsmouth promoting health and well-being. Citizens of any city should support any individual who is trying to better themselves and give something worthy back to the community.
Glenda M. Shoulders
Portsmouth
Nov. 28, 1995 No 'vision' for Cradock?
Evidently, the Portsmouth City Council has a grand vision for the city with Vision 2005. I think this is great for the city. Portsmouth has great potential on which it can capitalize. I can't help but believe that not all of Portsmouth is going to benefit. Maybe I've missed something in all the newspaper articles I have read on the ``vision.''
I have seen most neighborhoods mentioned in this new ``vision,'' but not Cradock. Could I have missed something or is Cradock left out of the whole scheme of things? I have thought for some time that Cradock is the sacrificial lamb for the city. Now I am convinced more than ever that City Council is willing to let this area go down the tubes. Cradock has historical value and is systematically being devalued by the City Council and city officials. For as long as I can remember Cradock continues to get bad press. It is always portrayed in the negative and evidently the way the City Council and city officials treat this area, it doesn't surprise me.
Every time I call the city for assistance, I get excuses. I have tried for three years to get the road I live on repaired. The reply I keep getting is ``it's going to cost too much to repair, we can't do it now'' or ``the funding has run out, wait to the next fiscal year.'' Next fiscal year gets here, and another excuse is given. Fortunately, one city official at least made an effort and temporarily repaired the pot holes the day after he said he would. This was Richard Hartman who was willing to assist in this problem. I am very appreciative of his help.
Not only do I live in Cradock, but I also own rental property there. I work hard to keep my property up and maintain it properly. I must comply with the city code requirements and I ensure that my tenants also comply. Yet, when I try to get the city to assist with owners that don't comply with city codes, I get the excuse ``there are too many transients in Cradock, we can't do anything about it.''
Quite frankly, I find this to be a poor excuse. You don't go after the tenant if the house isn't in compliance, you go after the owner. If it's an absentee owner, the city can locate them because their address is on file.
Ever since Bob Gray left the City Council, representation for Cradock seems to have gone with him. I really hope that I'm wrong, and that Cradock isn't being ignored.
For the last 24 years, I have had nothing but positive thoughts for the city of Portsmouth and its potential. I must confess, my resolve is slowly waning and I am beginning to lose my positive attitude.
Chris Vatistas
Connor Place
Nov. 22, 1995 Driving access impeded
I am extremely upset with the city I live in and love. My city is allowing the Waterview community to limit my driving access to public streets.
If the citizens of Waterview want private streets, then let them, alone, pay for the privilege.
Rosetta W. Mann
Eric Street
Nov. 22, 1995 A reason to drive west
The city of Portsmouth has finally succeeded in dividing our city again, by closing streets leading into the Waterview section of Portsmouth, off High Street. The city government is making it harder and harder to patronize our merchants in Portsmouth by putting obstacles such as these dead-end streets in our paths. We must not forget that these roadways were paid for with taxes from all our citizens, not just the few who want this change.
Our decaying, stagnant city has far more serious problems to deal with than to put hardships on its citizens' driving routes. We fear the day will come when we will need maps and rule books in order to traverse our city.
This latest planned blunder gives the Churchland residents, and non-residents as well, one more reason to drive west, out of Portsmouth, for shopping and other services. The citizens of Portsmouth need to work together on ways to attract people to Portsmouth rather than to drive them out with this kind of lunacy.
A.L. ``Pete'' Holland Jr.
Cavalier Forrest
Nov. 21, 1995 Catering to the few
I would like to protest the closing of Waterview streets to through traffic. To those who feel this action was necessary to protect the children who live there, I have two questions to ask:
Why don't the parents teach the children to stay out of the street?
What about other ``through'' streets in our city where hundreds of schoolchildren can be in jeopardy due to traffic? I refer to streets such as Cherokee Road (Hodges Manor Elementary), Hartford Street (John Tyler Elementary), City Park Avenue (Simonsdale Elementary), Rodman Avenue (Westhaven Elementary) and Oregon Avenue (Portsmouth Catholic Elementary).
It would not be right to limit access to these streets simply because children cross them. Neither is it right to limit traffic in Waterview because children live there.
The action that was taken punishes all law-abiding, tax-paying citizens who wish to travel from one side of the city to the other. If speed is a problem and the police cannot enforce the limits, then by all means place speed bumps in strategic locations. I certainly wouldn't mind a few speed bumps.
If our elected officials feel they must cater to the wishes of the few at the expense of many, then maybe it is time the many elected new leaders.
Janet S. Mizelle
Oregon Avenue
Nov. 28, 1995 Selfishness in Waterview
I am responding to the newspaper notice in the Thanksgiving Day issue of Currents. It was too late to help me as I drove to the Wednesday night service at Western Branch Baptist Church. Since I was not aware of the ``new'' traffic pattern, I had to make a right turn out of Waterview and go down High Street far enough to make a left turn and turn my car around, driving out of my way in order to drive in the direction I had planned to go, thus causing me a delay in reaching the 7 p.m. service.
As I read the notice, it stated this was a compromise. I do not agree. The new traffic pattern is for no other reason than to satisfy a few of the residents in Waterview. This, to me, is wrong. Not all of the residents there want this change.
Those of us who are accustomed to using those streets are in larger numbers. We do not, in any way, want to endanger the people who live in Waterview.
The Waterview residents have selfishly sought to close the causeway. It would please these people who live in more expensive homes, if Mrs. Brown's little store did not exist. Shame on them!
For here is a lady who is able to live modestly and independently. Compare her to those who live in finer quarters at the expense of others.
Your new traffic pattern as I saw it, recently, prevented some cars from turning onto High Street from three intersections but others ignored the signs and proceeded left as they had planned to do, thus breaking the law.
Others who refrained from turning right into Waterview at those same three intersections continued on to Western Branch Boulevard, then to Patrick Street and on through Waterview and across the causeway.
If the problem is with speeders, then deal with speeding.
If the problem is in fact too much traffic, consider other streets that are connecting streets.
Your reasons for limiting access through Waterview are very selfish. We should not focus on the desires of a few people, but in my thinking, we need to use what is best for the most people.
If you do this you will remove the barriers and take down the turn signs.
Ella H. Summerlyn
Mohawk Drive
Nov. 23, 1995 by CNB