Minutes 03/28/1967 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

42O ~ar,ch 28, 1967 Motion of Mr, Hastes that the letter be acknowledged and received as information, was adopted, without dissenting vote. 67-78 - The following letter from the Director of Planning was read: "At its regular monthly meeting on March 7, 1967~ the City Planning Commission resolved to endorse with enthusiasm and to recommend to you for action the "PP~NTIS PARK" phase of our sysuematlc-coo~dlnated codes enforcement program as developed by the City Manager and his ~fforkable Program Coordination Committee. It is suggested that at your public meeting on March 28~ 1967, you consider adontion of a resolution p~!ic!y authorizing and directing the Codes Enforcement Administrator to oroceed with this program in "P~E~IS PARK" as identified on the attached mao document and outlined ~y the City Manager in his administrative procedures memorandum of June !966." Motion of Mr. Da~les to endorse the proposal as recommended by the ~lanning Commission, was adopted, without dissenting vote, ~ 67-79 - The followin~ letter from Mrs. ~ary McDaniel, 312 Saunders Dr~ve, was read: "I read the account of Tuesday night's meeting in the Wednesday evening newspaper and I must say that it was sad to learn that our ELECTED municipal body was behaving in such a c~ildish manner. ~[hile you gentlemen are sitting in your conncil chambers squabbling over parliamentary .procedure, I am sitting in my home in Pine Acres wondering how many more times~I will have to have my septic tahk ¢~ained before you will have city sewer lines lain in my sedtion of Portsmouth How many more times gentlemen, how many?" Motion of ~.~ .k. f~ight that the letter be received as ~nformation was adopted, without dissenting VOte. 67-80 - The following letter from Mrs. Frank Warwick and others relative to conditions on Bart and South Streets, was read: "We would like this letter to be oart of any discussion on the curb and gutter nrogram at the next council-meeting~ ~a~eh 28, 1967. We three homeowners and mothers from Bart and South Streets, between Airline and Rodman Avenues, went to the Municipal Building and Police Department fffednesday, March 15, to see what could be done to make the streets in our a~ea safe for our children and walking pedestrians. This is what we were told: These two streets are the most traveled by automobiles because of the shopping center, Portsmouth Gas Co., ~otor Vehicle Bureau~ motel, doctors, dentists, insurance and real estate offices because they are the only cross streets. In soite of our objections, you have allowed all of these to move in our area. Yet, we will not get any curbs or ~utters this year and most likely not next year. The money must be now used ~or sewage for the newly annexed area. Open ditches are mor~ obnoxious th~l bathtubs that cannot be drained. We were annexed in~'~.948 and promised all these things. This new area was annexed in 1960 and has already received what we have ne~. ~e were assured when the Gas Co. moved in that adequate parking for customers would be p~ovided and that no trucks would use the cross streets. They would all go over to Airline Blvd. The pakkin~ lot seems to be for employees only. Every car and truck comes do~.~ South Street at the exact t{me the children leave for school~ and not one of the businesses in this ares has adequate off street earking as required in your code. We were told by your city employees that the need or the promise has not~ing to do with it. It is who you know that gets your curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Open ditches do not get covered unless yoU"gel curbs and g~tters. Stop sig~s do no% stop traffic~. ' t'~e would like to know why when a taxpayer goes to his city to ask for some halo te pro~ect his children he is treated like a beggar asking for ~ handout? We have paid the utility tax fo~ many more years than the annexed area and have received very little improvemen~ in this forgotten triangle. We would like to know two things: Who do we have to know to get what is so badly needed in this area? i%%y don~t city department officials treat their taxpayers with due resmect and common courtesy when serious problems are brought to their attention? Enclosed you will find s photograph. You can mlainly see exactly how much space is afforded a pedestrian in this area with the traffic and the open ditches.. Assuming this matter will receive your pro~iot attention, we remsin~ very truly yours," Motion of Mr. Hastes that the matter be referred to the.City ~anaKer with the re&uest that he investigate and report back to the Council and the complainants was a~opted, without ~issenting vote. 67-81 - The following letter from the West Side Civic League was read: "If the City Hanager's recommendation to amend the curb, gutter and drainage ordinance is removed from the table for action by the Counci2 it is'respectfully requested that Council instruct the City Clerk to notify this league of such action. Should the Manager's recommendation be adopted by the Council oo the first reading, it is requested that this league be given the date set for second reading, it is also requested: that opponents of this'proposed amendment to the curb, gutter and drainage ordinance ~e permitted to be heard at the second reading of the Manager's amendment." Motion of Mr. Johnson to r~ceive as information and that the City ~lerk notify the Lea~ae of the date of the second reading of the ordinance, was adopted, without dissenting vote. 67-82 - The follq~ing letter from Stanley M. Moore, Sr., $15 Thelmar Lane, was read: "I am taking this means to register protest against cutting back or materially changing the present annual ai~otment for curbs and gutters. There is such a 'grea~ need in the outlying areas of the city for curbs ~ld gutters yet. The Olive Branch Elementary School on Mimosa Road is one area in particular that is in desperate need of this improvement. The fact that there are no sidewalks on this street makes it extremely hazardous for little children who have to walk to ~md from school. If they had gutters to walk in where deep drainage ditches now exist, it would afford them a little additional safe%y. The traffic no~ma~ly utilizes all the paved surface on this narrow street. I am not in fa~or of allowing our City Manager to use any of this already inadequate fund for any pu~ose he may deem more worthy. I suspect that the do~nto~m area would get the bulk of any money diverted from this fund. Too much has been spent there already. The people in the recently annexed areas are payinR a large share of taxes and are getting least in return." On motion of Mr. Leery, received as information, without dissenting vote.