|
December 10, 1963
<br />
<br />* (page 11) "We, the undersig~ned, who w~re. appointed viewers by ~ou a~ the'City Council meeting heZd on
<br />November 26, 1963, to view ~he portion ~f the s,Zreet situate in the City_of Pdr~S~a~u~h, Virginia, known as Leonard
<br />A, venue, lying between the southern· r%ght?of-way, line of Portsmouth· BouLevard_ ~show~. . on the Plans.of PorTsmouth
<br />Boulevsrd.,~Rout~.#337, Project 0337-124~101C, and a line~135 feet south the~ee~, land-report whether.or not in
<br />respectfullyour opinion, report'that any, and if any, what ........ incongenience would_ resul~from.... the.closing, of said~portion, of-Leonard Avenue,
<br /> in our o~inion no inconvenience WOul~ ~esult in the closing; Of ~aid street either to the
<br />public or to any adjacent property owners or to any other interested par~ies. We recommend tha~ the street be
<br />closed.
<br />
<br /> R. A. Craig, Jr~
<br /> Frank N. Bilisoly
<br /> Belvin W. Blachman"
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Dillon, %he ,-~otlo~ing ordinance was aPProved on first reading, without dissenting
<br />vo~e; and the following report of the viewers,'r~eGived:
<br />
<br /> '!AN ORDINANCE TOCLOSE THAT PORTIO~OF WESTMORELAND AVENUE LYING SOUTH OF.
<br /> THE SOUTHEASTERN BOUNDA~Y~©~ BARTSTREET'~ ·
<br />
<br /> '~e have examined that portiontol Westmorel~nd~-Av~uue lying, b~twee~ the, sou~h line of Bart Street
<br />end a line t0~5 feet,.~so~th~!ther, eof~s~anz to you~ r~solu2ion at a meeting hel~ November 1~, 1963.
<br /> It is our opinion that the seid pdr$io~ of Westmoreland.Avenue, if ~&osed, would cause no
<br />inconvenience whatsoever ~o theci~izens of Por.ts~outh residing in tha.t are~ nor tothose persons that would have
<br />an occasion to use sa~d pbrtion of:~es~moreland Avenue .
<br />
<br />John W. Frankos
<br />Jack Friedman
<br />
<br /> · 63r284 - '~t: submi~ the attached erdinance: andrecommend it be plmced ~n f~r's~ reading,, This
<br />appropriates funds ~ rsplac~-the~oof ~nd wa$~rpro~Fire Headq~erters'on'EffinghmmS~e~t,., The building has
<br />been i~ected"by rooi~i~ng concerns and Gl~mlYates, Jrt; Architec~, and it was recommended ~hmt the only way to
<br />e~i~ina~e the~leak~ng of thisqbui~ding'~ss_by replacing th~'roof~snd~ repairing the walls.thet~have cracked due
<br />~o the se~ling of the building,
<br /> Bids wer~ recei~ Zor this ~'rk ,as follows:,
<br /> Crado~ Sheet:.Metal ~ Roofing Company $ 10,89~47
<br /> Roof E~ine~rlng Corpo~at~on~,., 14,672.00
<br /> .~tevens_~King Roof~i~C~poraZion 14,940~.00
<br /> The amchitect~hms furtke~ reco~nded that the ~o~f be,insulated to e}imina~e:condensatiou.
<br /> I r~o~e~t~st the'.~i~ be~r~e~ to the tow bi~der and the ins~t~tion be'~'inst~lled.''
<br />
<br /> Mo2io~ of Mr;(Bar~¢~s ~mt the contract be aw~{ded to the Cradock Sheet Metal and Hoofing Comp~n~-,
<br />the l~w bidder, and t~tU}~he ~foi~owing ordinance be approved on fir2~t reading, was a~P%ed, without dissentiRg
<br />
<br /> "~ O~IN~CE ~cA~PROPaIATE $13,;009'~; FROM T~ GE~RAEfFU~ F~ T~ P~ROSE:OF
<br /> R~A~ING ~ R~gF OF.T~ FIRE~DQUA~TERg-~I~ING '
<br />
<br /> . 63~5 r At a ,pre~l~Us.,Cou~cl~ meet~g ~ theme~ ~_referred ~o me the question of ~adopt~on of an
<br />ordlnan~ p~sD~lbl~,,~ ~cep~able,,ma~er~Of e~terl~ a~pa~I~ p~rklng space. .
<br /> ~ U~ .inves{~gat~ok, ~'~'a'm ad~is~ the'~'iS':lnO~S~t~ ~aWr~garding'thi~ and the city's motor vehicle
<br />ordinances n~rmai-~;[p's~a~llei~the'State LaWs. F~the~, ~hePe2are ~ny varLables in how ohe can or should park
<br />due re the ty~ a, nd Loc~tion ai~,parkingkspaces~ :!
<br /> For ~mp~e, the so call~ tandem patging ~kich we use ia some areas calls for backing into o~
<br />sp~ce and heading into tke other. It is my ~i~on that a proper ordinance cannoE be written ~d that this
<br />must be a matter of. cour~esy bel~een citize~s~'
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr.%Barnes that ,the nepor~ he-received as information_was adopted, withomt dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> . ~63~r28-6 ~ /'I auhmit,~herewith :t'he ~Bienaiat >Bu~ge~ estimates for the_~depart~nt of~ pab~lc welfare for
<br />fisc~l-~ears e~di~g June 30,~ 19~?and J~e 30, ~966. This is being s~mitt~ as re.quired by Sec~ti0n 63-69.1 of
<br />the C~e of Virg~i~ in ord~ .t~,t 'the st~e can prepa~ ,its budge t to be ~su~ilted~ 5o the General Assembly.
<br /> Th$ a~nual:.~get,~for ~e ~elf~re Department, of the ,City will be. submitted at, a. la,er date for
<br />apprdval by the City Council alqDg ~wlth the clt~
<br />
<br /> ~Metion:of~r~'. K~i~ht ~ ~he' Council concur ~n the biennial' budget~ estimates' of ~e Welfare
<br />Depar~e~t was adopted, without,*~d~ssenti~.v~te.
<br />
<br />NEW BUSINESS
<br />
<br /> 63-287 - The followTug letter from the West Side Civic League, Louis H. Keller, Corresponding
<br />Secretary, was resd~, e~d on ~otion of Mr. Esstes, received and filed:
<br />
<br /> "The members of this leegue voted to express their appreciation to Mr. B. S. T~sn~, his depertmen~
<br />and others, for the eliminstionI of's traffic hazard' and b~ttleneck st the ~ntersection of Airline and Victory
<br />Boulevard.
<br /> Now with the jugha~udte overhead s~gns direction traffic to the proper lane, and the two lenes
<br />for traffic on eeeh side or'this iut~ms~c~ion on t~e ~rline'~ulevar~, we are of the opinion that once the public
<br />becomes accustomed to t~e j'ugha~dte, whick is some~thi~g e~tirely new-to t~is' ~rea, that traffic wi}~ flow smoothly
<br />through'this intersection."
<br />
<br />
<br />
|