|
'
<br />
<br />Februar~ ~, 1965
<br />
<br /> 65-33 - "I submit the attached letter from the City Assessor and concur in his request that the
<br />refund be granted in-the amount of $20.60 for taxes paid erroneously." (Attachment; 'Due to an error, for which
<br />this office will assume responsibility,~the building located on parcel lis of Map 38 was erroneously assessed,
<br />(with taxes being pai~ by owner) for the 5rd. and 4th. quarters of 1964. Tax Bill #19545; Page 984 Line 5.
<br /> I therefore, respectfully request that the aforementioned property owner be rebated $20.60, upon
<br />approval of the City Council.'")
<br />
<br /> Motion 6f Mr. Dillon that the refund be granted was adopted without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> 65-34 - "As a matter of information, I would like to report to the City Council the status of the
<br />Weaver Urban Renewal Project.
<br /> I am advised by the Portsmouth Redevelopment andHousing Authority that this project is ahead of
<br />schedule, and that there has been ho holdup by the Planning Commission or any other agency.
<br /> I am further advised that the next step requires the submission of a letter by the H~us~hg Authority
<br />to the Planning Commission requesting concurrence that the property will be rezoned in ~onforma~ce with the olan as
<br />submitted by Harland Bartholomew Associates. It will not be necessary to formally rezone thi§ property unti~ such
<br />time as the l~nd has been acquired and is ready for resale.
<br /> As soon as the Housing Authority has submitted its letter to the Planning Commission and received
<br />concurrence, the final documents will be submitted to the Housing and Home Finance Agency for final approval. It is
<br />my understanding that it is anticipated that the final plans will be submitted to the Housing and Home Finmace
<br />Agency by the middle of March.
<br /> Itrecommend that the Housing Authority be requested to proceed with this project as planned."
<br />
<br /> Motion of ~r. Knight to concur in the reoommendation of the City Manager was adopted, without
<br />dissenting vote.
<br />
<br />UNFINISHED BUSINESS
<br />
<br />65-20 - The following ordinance, approved on first reading at last meeting, was taken up and read:
<br />
<br />".~ ORDINkNCE TO CLOSE PORTIONS OF ATLANTA AVE~JE, CA~,4DEN AVENUE, CHARLESTON AVENUE,
<br /> CHESTNUT ST~T, CLIFFORD STREET, GREEN STREET, GRIFFIN STREET, LANSING AVENUE, LAUREL AVENUE,
<br /> MAPLE ~VENUE, PARKER AVENUE, PRENTIS AVENqJE, RACE STREET AND RICHMOND AVENrOE."
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Eastes, the ordinance was adopted and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Smith, Dillon, Hastes, Johnson, Knight, LearY
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />NEW BUSINESS
<br />
<br />65-35 - The following communication from Kenneth D, Tetlow, 6 PenningtOn Boulevard, was read:
<br />
<br /> "On January 13, 1965, I purchased two city tags for our two cars. On January 50, I sold one of the
<br />cars. Previous to the sale; January 26, I called the Revenue Office and was advised that it is illegal t6 transfer
<br />city tags to the purchaser of my car. I took the unused city tag to this office today and was shocked when one of
<br />your city employees advised that my $10.00 was not refundable. This tag is new, has never been on the car. The
<br />surrounding cities of Chesapeake, Norfolk and Virginia Beach make refunds. Why not Portsmouth?
<br /> I have Called my attorney and have been informed that in,all probability this is an illegal practice
<br />but to prove it in court would cost me two or three hundred dollars, Now I don't think a citizen should have to
<br />defend himself against his city. This is a matter of principal; I purchased this tag in good faith and I sincerely
<br />hope you will see your way clear to refund my $10.00,"
<br />
<br />vote.
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Knight the refund of $10.00 for city license tag was authorized without dissenting
<br />
<br /> 65-36 - The following communication from George A. Etheridge, Jr., Safety Chairman, Cradock High
<br />School P. T. ~. was read:
<br />
<br /> "The Cradock High School Parent Teacher's Association wants to bring to your attention a safety
<br />problem which involves the coming and going of the high school to and from school.
<br /> The problem is that there are no sidewalks on Bellehaven Street which ~xtends from Deep Creek
<br />Boulevard to the rear entrance of the school.
<br /> There are about 500 students using this entrance twice a day, and the~e is much traffic on the street
<br />at the same time.
<br /> The P. T. A. is most anxious to have sidewalks installed on this street to eliminate this problem.
<br /> Please let us know if the P. T. A. can be of any assistance."
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Knight to refer to the City Manager was adopted without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br />On motion adjourned.
<br />
<br />Approved -
<br />
<br />President.
<br />
<br />City Clerk.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|