Minutes 03/09/1971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Constitution Avenue south of County Street was made one-way south when County Street was made two-way along its entire length. This was necessary due to the fact that County Street, because it was made two-way, would place a lot of traffic at the intersection of County Street and'Constitution Avenue at Turnpike Road. This traffic is very heavy eastbound in the morning, but exactly opposite in the evening. This could he easily handled if an actuated traffic signal which can shift its timing to place the most time on the heavJ direction were installed. At this intersection we have an old-type fixed-time signal which operates the same 24 hours per day regardless of the traffic conditions. This necessitates.timing eastbound County Stre'et for the peak morning flow, and westbou County Street for the peak evening flow as these two phases operate separately. Turnpike Road then has to have enough time to allow for its peak morning flow, and Constitution Ave- nue (from the nor%h), except for a very short turning period, can be included in the Turnpik Road phase. This cannot be done if Constitution Avenue traffic is allowed to enter this intersection from the south. Due to the inadequate signal, approximately twice as much time must be allowed for each cycle as is necessary. Therefore, we have constant backups of traffic on County Street. If Constitution is made two-way south of Turnpike, the backup will be even worse. To provide the proper signals at this intersection would cost approximately $8,000. Constitution can be made two~way with the present signal that is there. However, creating additional backup on County Street and Turnpike will reduce the efficiency of County Street as a two-way street.'~ Motion of Mr, ~rvine Smith that~the City Manager confer:with the Traffic Engineer in reference to a recommendation as to the conversion of Constitution Avenue, south of County ~reet) to a two-way system, was adopted, without dissenting vote. * See correction on page at bottom. 71-54 - On motion of Mr. Irvine Smith to suspend the rules to let Rev. G. Roscoe Fields speak on the subject of a water bill, the order of business was altered~ without dissenting vote. Rev. Fields spoke. On motion of Mr. Holley that the matter of Mr. Field's bill be refered to the City Manager, was adopted~ without dissenting vote. 71-95 - "At the last meeting of City Council, I was requested to obtain a report from the Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority on the progress of the Code Inspection Program in the Park View Conservation Project. For the information of Council, there is attached hereto a copy of the report received from the Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority. At the last Council meeting, the question was also raised as to whether the City's Minimum Housing Code Inspectors can legally inspect in conservation project areas. The City Attorney advises me that they can inspect in these project areas to the degree that the City Code will allow. I am also advised that our inspectors have been in the Park View Conservation area making inspections as well as the Building Official's office making inspec requiring demolition of unsafe structures. I have also obtained further information regarding regulations in conservation projects that I feel should be brought to your attention. We were under the impression that once an inspection of property in a conservation, project Was made by the Housing Authority, and the property owner notified, that th:ey would have one year and 30 days to begin bringing the property up to Code requirements. If this was not done, the Housing Authority would purchase the property, renovate it, and/or resell it to an individual wh,o would bring it up to standard, or the property demolished. I now understand that the Holusing Authority is not legally required to do any of these. Should the Housing Authority take no action on the property, it will then be necessary for the City to enforce its Minimum Housing Code, and if the property deteriorates to the degree that it is unsafe in the opinion of the Build ~ng Official, the City can require the property owner to demolish the building. I further understand that there is no guarantee that a homeowner ca:n obtain a 3% loan for improvements to their property. Not being able toiebtain one of the!se low-interest loans does not relieve the property owner of the responsibility of bringing the property up to the Code standards." On motion of Mr. Holley, the report on Code Inspection Progrmm in the Park View Con- servation Project was received as information, without dissenting vote The motion further stated that City Council write.;a letter to both U. S, Senators and our Congressman for an investigation into Housing AUthoritY problems as to minimum housing in Park View and similar areas under their authority, was adopted, without dissenting vote. 71-94 "I am in receipt of the attached letter from the POrtsmouth Recreation and Parks Commission recommending that a proposal submitted by the Director of Recreation for the use of the Lakeview Elementary School and the William Waters Junior High School be imple: mented and that funds be appropriated to operate this project. This proposal was submitted by the Recreation Director for the use of these two schools for recreational activities as a result of a request received from- the United Civic Leagues for additional indoor recrea tional activities in the Cavalier Manor area of the City. The estimated cost of this program is $$,200 for the balance of the fiscal year. * with two dissenting votes - Holley, Turner. Lion