|
June 14. lQ71
<br />
<br />At a regular City Council Public Hearing on Zoning, there were present:
<br />
<br />Jack P. Barnes, James W. Holley, Burrell R. Johnson, Isaac W. King, R. Irvine S~ith,
<br />Raymond B. Smith, Raymond Turner, A. P. Johnson, Jr., City Manager, and M. A. Kerb,
<br />Jr., City Attorney.
<br />
<br />P~ayer was offered by Mr. King.
<br />
<br />Mayor Barnes extended a word of Welcome to the citizen visitors.
<br />
<br />71-270 The following on zoning and use permits was held:
<br />
<br />Zoning Petition Z 71-14 R. B. Realty, Inc.
<br />
<br />Dr. Paul Crum, 5022 Sterling Point Drive spoke and presented a
<br />Mr. J. D. SBanagel, 3~16 Verne Avenue, spoke against.
<br />Mr. J. P. Donlan, 2912 Sterling Point Drive, spoke against.
<br />Mr. A. J. Sobieski, 4424 Gannon Road, spoke against.
<br />
<br /> See below
<br />petition~in opposition.
<br />
<br />* "We, the undersigned residents of Sterling Point Section of Portsmouth, Virginia, hereby
<br />express to the City Council of the City of Portsmouth our opposition to the zoning application
<br />of R. B. Realty Company designated Z 71-14 changing the zoning of the tract along Sterling
<br />Point Drive between St. Andrews Lutheran Church and Gomley Chesed Synagogue from R 150 to
<br />R 75. Signed by Mr. ~ Mrs. F. G. Abrams, 2932 Replica Lane, and others"
<br />
<br />of
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Raymond Smith and seconded by Mr. King to concur with the recommendation
<br />the Planning Commission, ro~rejeZ~.~ke~R~pifc~%~Q{~iwas~a4opted.~ ahd by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Johnson,-King, lrvine Smitb, Raymond Smith, ~rn~
<br />Nays: Holley, Turner
<br />
<br />Zoning Petition Z 71-15 Jean M. Davis
<br />
<br />Mr. C. Raeford Eure, Agent, spoke in favor.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. King and seconded by Mr. Turner to concur with the recommendation of
<br />the Planning Commission, the following ordinance was approved on first reading, and by the
<br />following vote:
<br />
<br />"Z~N1NGYAM~NDIMENT ORDINANCE Z 71-15"
<br />
<br />Ayes:~ Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Turner, Barnes
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />Zoning Petition Z 71-16 Foundation Boys Academy, Inc.
<br />
<br />C. Raeford Eure, Agent, spoke in support.
<br />
<br /> On'motion of Mr. Turner and seconded
<br />of the Planning Commission, the following
<br />following vote:
<br />
<br />by Mr. Johnson to concur with the recommendation
<br />ordinance was approved on first reading, and by the
<br />
<br />"ZONING AMENDMENT ORDINANCE Z 71-16"
<br />
<br />Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, [rvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Turner, Barnes
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />Zoning Petition Z 71-17 Ronald D. Maxson
<br />
<br />Attorney Benjamin J. Levy spoke in support.
<br />
<br />In opposition were the following:
<br />
<br />Mr. Jack Gillespie, 314 Thelmar Lane p~ented
<br />Mr. Harry Keith Vann, 216 Tareyton Lane
<br />C~ S. Narrell, 315 Thelmar Lane
<br />
<br />a petition**- see below
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Turner and seconded by Mr. King to concur with the recommendation of
<br />the Planning Commission, to reject the application, was adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Holley, J~hnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Turner, Barmes
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />** "We, the undersigned proprty owners and/gr residents of the Park Manor area of the City
<br />of Portsmouth, at the addresses shown opposite our names, respectfully petition the Planning
<br />Commission and City Council of the City of Portsmo~'th, Virginia to deny the pending zoning
<br />application of Ronald D. Maxson, of property locate& in Park Manor area of the City of Ports-
<br />mouth, near Windsor and Park Manor Road, from its present zoning classification of R-75-S to
<br />R-75. It is our belief that such rezoning would materially affect property values in the ad-
<br />joining area and would not be compatible with the pses of existing property in the area. The
<br />roads and streets servingthe suggested area of rezoning are, in our opinion, inadequate to
<br />handle double ~d multiple family dwellings. Uso of the area in question for oth~r than singl
<br />dwellings would tax the existing road use to the detriment of existing property owners. It
<br />sould be ealled to the municipal authorities' attention that the great majority of surroundin
<br />property is presently restricted to single family residential use by deed restrictions and any
<br />change of this use classification would be inequitable to the property owners in~e immediate
<br />8~ea. Signed C. C. Gillespie and others"
<br />
<br />
<br />
|