|
Octohe] 1967
<br />
<br /> 67-310 - "At a recent meeting of the City Council a petition for the Mt. Herman section of the
<br /> Citer was referred to me for a report. This petition ls requesting street improvement, curbs and
<br /> gutters and sidewalks. -
<br /> The following information was furnished to me by the Public ~orks Department:
<br /> A history of the area indicates that the concrete sidewalks on Mt. Vernon Avenue
<br />were laid prior to the installation of concrete curbs and gutters. ~en the concrete curbs and gutters
<br />were installed in the 1500 and I400 blocks, it was necessary to run the water to a low point
<br />approximately 400 feet south of High Street. The grade of the curb and gutter was such that
<br />neither matched the existing street nor the concrete sidewalk. Both the cro~n of the street
<br />and sidewalk, in this area, are approximately 6" above the too of the concrete curb and gutter.
<br />Approximately S years ago, in response to complaints from the"residents, caused by the excessive
<br />crown in Mt. Vernon Avenue, the Public ~orks Department reduced the crown in Mt. Vernon Avenue, by
<br />paving into the gutters. At the time, this was deemed more advisable than expending approximately
<br />ten {10) times as much to cut out the existing high ~zo~wn, renew the base and replace the paving.
<br /> There is no economical method of rehabilitating the sidewalks in the 1500 and
<br />1400 blocks of Mt. Vernon Avenue. Personnel from the Public Works_ Department have met with a
<br />group led by Mr. Austin of 1426 Mt. Vernon Avenue, off and on during a five(S) year period. Each
<br />time it was explained to these people that the city would participate towards the cost
<br />of the new concrete sidewalk, if they could reach an agreement among themselves. This they have never been
<br />able to do.
<br /> The estimated cost of improvements requested in this petition amount to $122,S69.00. Tkese
<br />figures are based on using existing curb wherever possible, and lowering the. sidewalk and crown of the
<br />street to conform with the grade of the existing curb. The Public Works Department further
<br />advises that soil in this area does not lend itself to the lowering of the excessive street crowns
<br />on Mt. Vernon and Wool Avenuei but if it should be done to drain the streets, this improvement should
<br />not be attempted until summer and even then it would be a long project with accompanying
<br />inconvenience to the adjacent property owners.
<br /> An investigation is continuing to see if the side streets can be drained if Mt.
<br />VernOn Avenue is left at its present elevation or raised some more to meet the average grade of
<br />the existing sidewalk."
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Knight to receive the report as information, pending further developments and that
<br />the petitioners be so advised, was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> 67-511 - "Bids were opened on Friday, October 20, 1967, to sell surplus city owned land on
<br />Ponderosa Street, just west of the new Armory site.
<br /> One bid was received from Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc., in the amount of $24,000.
<br />I recomaend ~hat this property be sold to the above firm."
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. FasCes to concur in the recomnendation of the City Manager was adopted, without
<br />dissenting vote.
<br />
<br />-UNFINISHED BUSINESS-
<br />
<br /> 67-292 - The following zoning ordinance, on which action was delayed at the last meeting
<br />of the Council, was taken up:
<br />
<br />"ZONING AMENDMENT ORDINPuNCE Z 67-18"
<br />
<br /> J. Stanley Livesay, attorney, spoke and requested that this application be referred back to
<br />the planning Commission for recert£fication to R '60~A.
<br />
<br />No one spore against the request.
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Johnson to refer back to the Planning Commission to be considered for classification
<br />R 60-A, was adopted, ~ithout dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> 67-292 - The following zoning ordinance, approved on first reading at last meeting, was taken
<br />up and read:
<br />
<br />"ZONING A~NDMENT ORDINANCE Z 67-19"
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Eastes, the ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Smith, Eastes, Johnson, King, Knight, Leafy
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 67-292 - The following ordinance, approved on first reading at last meeting, was taken up
<br />and read:
<br />
<br />"ZONING AMENDMENT ORDINANCE Z 67-20"
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr, King, the ordinance was adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Smith. Ea~tes, Johnson, King, Knight, Leafy
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 67-292 - The following ordinance approved on first reading at last meeting, was taken u~ and
<br />read:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO A~ND TH~ ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, 1961, BY ADDING THERETO
<br />A NE~ ARTICLE NU~IBERED 9, ESTABLISHING ~A HISTORIC ZONING DISTRICT, CREATING A COMMISSION OF
<br />ARCHITECTURAL REVI~V THEREFOR, ESTABLISHING BUILDING AND PARKING REGULATIONS FOR SAID DISTRICT,
<br />AND REGULATING THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN SUCH A DISTRICT."
<br />
<br />
<br />
|