Minutes 06/13/1972 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

June 13_ ]97,~ adopted, and by the following vote: Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Turner, Barnes Nays: None 72-196 - The following ordinance, approved at last meeting, was taken up and read: "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1961, BY ADDING SECTION t8-14.1 THERETO PERTAINING TO DESIGNATED THROUGH TRUCK ROUTES AND BY AMENDING SECTION 18-14 THEREOF PERTAINING TO THE PROHIBITION OF MOTOR TRUCKS FROM USING CERTAIN CITY STREETS." On motion of Mr. Turner and seconded by Mr. Irvine Smith, the ordinance was adopted by ~he ~llh~ing vote:Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith Turner Barnes " Nays: None ' ' 72-197 - The following ordinance, approved at last meeting, was taken up and read: "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1961, BY ADDING SECTION 18-46.1 THERETO PERTAINING TO SLOW MOVING VEHICLES ON THE CHURCHLAND BRIDGE." -On motion of Mr. Raymond Smith and seconded by Mr. T~rner, t'he ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote: Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, .Raymond Smith, Turner, Barnes Nays: None 72-204 The following ordinance, approved at last meeting, was ±aken up and read: "AN ORDINANCE TO ~4BND THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, 1961, BY AMENDING SECTION 9-13.1 THEREOF PERTAINING TO ELECTRICAL WIRING IN FIRE DISTRICT." On motion of Mr. Irvine Smith and seconded by Mr. Raymond Smith, the ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote: Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smi'th, Turner, Barnes Nays: None 72-,152~- The following letter received from Mr.:George R. Walker, was read: "This refers to Council agenda item 72-~52 on subject of a public, copy of the Real ~state Assessment Appeal form. Original issue of 1 August, 1971 readdressed from City Assessor to City Council when that office failed to answer and presented to Council at its March 28, 1972 meeting. When no action had been taken as of the April 11 meeting it was disinterred by action of Dr. Holl~ and referred to the C~ity Manager for report. The manager's report was presented to the April 25 meeting, and received for information. When the existence of the alle~ldthird copy of said appeal form was proved beyond question at the May 9 meeting it was referred to Counc! for study. The item was again missing from the agenda of the May 23 meeting of Council and it is assumed that the study of the issue was incomplete at that time. In the event that Council has finished its study of the matter prior to the June 13 - meeting it is requested that my name be placed ontthe agenda of that meeting to reply to whatever decisio~ Council may make in the matter. It is further requested, in line with the new Rules and protocol ~encerning the right of the citizen to address his government, that abovesaid place on'the June 13 agends be immediately after item 72-152~en the agenda." Mr. Walker spoke. Motion of Mr. Holley and seconded by Mr. King, to be received as information, was adopted by the following vote: ~ Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Turner, Barnes Nays: None 72-198 - The following letter received from Mr. Douglas B. Fugate, COmmissioner, Department of Highways, was read: ~ "Thank you for your letter of May $0, 1972, enclosing resolutions pertaining to declar- ing a portion of the proposed Western Freeway to'be limited access and requesting the High- way Department to provide funds to construct additional lanes on the Churchland Bridge. As indicated in my ~eply to you of May 19, 1972, the Churchland Bridge was not in- cluded in the Ten Year Fiscal Plan because of other critical needs in!~he City of Portsmouth, especially the West Norfolk Bridge and Western Freeway, and because our consultants esti- mate that considerable traffic will be diver~ed from the bridge upon completion of the Western FreewFF.