Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, October 11, 1994 TAG: 9410110127
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAN CASEY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The city offered Entranceway Park, a roughly 3/4-acre triangular plot bordered by Williamson Road and Wells and Commonwealth avenues, to the Roanoke-based National D-Day Memorial Foundation. For tax purposes, the property is valued at $458,000, including an existing fountain.
But a Gainsboro resident said the monument would be too much for her once-quiet neighborhood to absorb, given current and future construction planned for the area.
Several members of the foundation questioned available parking, noise levels at the site, and whether the foundation would have absolute control over the memorial's design.
Roanoke's bid comes only months after Mayor David Bowers snubbed the foundation by saying the memorial was not one of the city's top priorities.
It follows an offer by the city of Bedford for a $250,000 incentive package to locate there, including a choice of 20-acre sites - one with a view of the Peaks of Otter. The Bedford package also includes guaranteed parking, restrooms and room for expansion, three things lacking in the city's proposal.
The Roanoke location is far smaller but much more accessible, city officials argued during a luncheon meeting between City Council and the foundation's board of directors.
Public Works Director William Clark noted that more than 134,000 cars on Williamson Road, Orange Avenue and Interstate 581 pass near the park each day.
It is also only half a block from the Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center, which is scheduled to open in April. A $5.3 million pedestrian bridge will connect the hotel to downtown and assure easy access for people visiting the City Market, Clark said.
"Certainly, from a standpoint of accessibility and visibility, I think there are a large number of people going by this site," Clark said.
Vice Mayor John Edwards argued that the memorial would be complemented by existing tourist draws such as Center in the Square and the City Market. The hotel and a proposed linear park along Norfolk Southern tracks would only add to the draw.
"The whole area is really ripe for a development like this," he said.
Councilwoman Linda Wyatt noted that thousands of children come into the city from outlying areas on school field trips each year. The memorial could be added to their itinerary, she said.
"The site is a beautiful site. It would work very well," said board chairman and D-Day veteran Bob Slaughter. "But it's not 100 percent. We have a few things we do not like about it."
Board member Ham Flanagan called a nearby auto detailing business "an eyesore," and said the memorial would have to be screened from that. Jack Coulter questioned whether it is large enough.
Byron Dixon questioned the availability of parking. City Manager Bob Herbert said he believes it could be arranged on a nearby lot that will also serve the hotel.
Retired Gen. William Rosson said he had recently measured high levels of noise coming from nearby roads. Ideally, the monument should be located in a place that creates an "atmosphere of reverence," he said.
"As attractive as the site is ... there is this incursion into the serenity, the reverence, the solemnity ...," Rosson said.
Slaughter said he does not know when the board will choose a site. It meets monthly, including today.
"We'll deliberate carefully on the site we select," he said.
Helen Davis, a Gainsboro resident who attended the meeting, said she hopes the board chooses Bedford.
"I think the D-Day memorial would be wonderful [by itself]," she said. "But coupled with the [future] Second Street four-lane highway and the Hotel Roanoke reconstruction and the conference center, I don't see how this small area could digest that."
The search committee was stymied at building the memorial in the city before. Years ago, it proposed erecting the monument on Mill Mountain and spent several thousand dollars on preliminary designs. But plans were ultimately rejected because the development violated covenants in the city's deed to the property.
by CNB