Editor, News-Register:

I would like to respond to the Aug. 3 editorial “Creating Fair and Level Playing Field” concerning the proposed carwash on Mt. DeChantal Road. The author states that all requirements had preliminarily been met and it should be approved by the Planning Commission. The process took several weeks to gain clarity as the WashRite owners did not want to reveal their traffic numbers which are potentially 75-100 cars an hour. The traffic study resulted and passage occurred.

This process was ridiculed by the editor and the single dissenting voter was trotted out for public flogging for not getting in line. This harangue contained seven paragraphs accusing bias and animus and a necessary trip to a re-education camp for the offending miscreant. The business owner, the city, and the paper got what they wanted for the carwash (due to the existing zoning code of the area) yet the editor seemed to only want “Yes Men” when voting. A board filled with these types is rather useless. So this was not just a criticism for the dissenter but to all commission members who might dare to ask questions. Volunteer your time but don’t disagree or err on the side of caution or you will face the lash in this forum. This is your reward for public service?

Now a traffic study is a useful resource but not a perfect document. I don’t believe these come with a money-back guarantee. As traffic is the main bone of contention in the matter, I believe the commission member took this into consideration with his protest vote, as well as the concerns of the residents, realizing how it affects those in the neighborhood who have to live with these decisions now and in the future, with other possible businesses wanting to locate in the indicated area.

I would also like to point out that simply fulfilling the requirements of the code is not an open and shut case. The city has at least several avenues to deny this. One is concern for public welfare, i.e., traffic congestion leading to the area’s only major hospital at an already congested intersection. Another is if the proposal goes against the city’s master plan for the area in question. Is there a plan? Would it be prudent to have one? If one exists, it may have been locked up and no one remembers the combination.

Our story should serve as a cautionary tale to all residents of other Wheeling neighborhoods. The quality of your living space, home values, traffic, noise, possible crime, etc. mean nothing when zoning code reinforcement must trump all concerns. The city is not going to erect any barrier for your well being and this newspaper is not going to advocate for quality neighborhoods and lifestyle for the residents when opposing businesses. Be vigilant and guard against zone changes, etc. in your community. I am not against progress or business and would love to see the city and the area prosper. I hope this all works out for everyone but the law of unintended consequences has a strong foothold in this instance.

Mike Witt

Wheeling