|
dissenting vote.
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Knigh't to concur in the City Manager's recommendation was adopted, without
<br />
<br /> 62-305 - ~'I submit the a~tached letter from the City Attorney.
<br /> This concerns the marking of school buses and ~me qulrements of traffic having ro
<br /> stop when school buses are loading and unloading."
<br />
<br /> :
<br /> Attached - "At the last meeting of the City Council, the City Attorney was requested to
<br />give a written opinion regarding whether motorists are required to stop for certain buses operated by the
<br />Community Motor Bus Company which bear signs identifying them as school buses.
<br /> State law requires motorists to stop for a school bus that is stopped for the
<br />purpose of taking on or discharging pupils provided that such buses are marked or identified as provided in the
<br />regulations of the State Board of Education. This provision of State law has been adopted by the City es one of
<br />its ordinances regulating the operation of motor vehicles.
<br />
<br /> The State Board of Education devotes 24 pages of its regulations to the
<br />specifications required of school buses. Among those specifications is the requirement that the exterior of the
<br />body of each school bus must be painted a particular color. This is the familiar yellow color seen on county
<br />school buses. The bus must be further identified with the words SCHOOL BUS - STOP - STATE LAW in black letters
<br />of specified height and in specified locations. Furthermore, each bus must be equipped with s flashing red
<br />school bus traffic light mounted on the front and rear of the bus ~n specified locations. Any variation from
<br />these and other specifications is-expressedly ~prohibited. Furthermore, these regulations staze that transit or
<br />metropolitan type vehicles designed and used for other transportation purposes will not meet the requirements
<br />for a school bus.
<br /> In the regulation of traffic and motor vehicles, the City is bound within the
<br />limits of State law. Since ii is not s violation Of State law for a motorist to drive past e Community Motor
<br />Bus operated as a school bus, the City is without power to pass an ordinance prohibiting such conduct."
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Barnes that the Council request the City's Representatives st the next
<br />session of Legislature to study the State law regarding the marking of school buses for the protection of
<br />students from passing vehicles, was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> 62-306 - "This is to advise the Council that Mr. Charles R. Lively's term on the Portsmoutt
<br />Port Commission expires December 31, 1962."
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Barnes to go into the election of a member to the Portsmouth Port Commission
<br />
<br />was adopted.
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Knighi that Mr. Lively be re-elected a member of the Portsmouth Porz
<br />Commission for a term of four years was adopted, without dissenting vo~e.
<br />
<br /> 62-307 - The Manager presented the following letter and resolution from the Portsmouth
<br />Redevelopment and Housing Authority:
<br />
<br /> "At a regular meeting of the Commissioners on December 18, 1962, the Authority passed
<br />resolution amending the Eedevetopmenr Plan for- our Urban Renewal Project VA R-6 end recommending that it be
<br />approved by City Council.
<br /> We are enclosing the following items:
<br /> 1. Amendment No. 2 to the Redevelopment Plan.
<br /> 2. Certified Resolution by the Commissmoners.
<br /> 3. Draft of suggested Resolution for Council.
<br /> It will be very much appreciated if City Council will act on:this at the very first
<br />opportunity in order that we may send it on to Philadelphia."
<br />
<br /> Attached - "WHEREAS, the Council, by Ordinance adopted on December 3, 1959, approved the
<br />Redevelopment Plan of the Lincolnsville Redevelopment Project VA R-6, Portsmouth, Virginia, of the Portsmouth
<br />Redevelopment and Housing Authority; and
<br /> WHEREAS, the Council, by Resolution adopted November 13, 1962, approved
<br />Amendmen~ No. 1 to the said Redevelopment Plan; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, by Resolution duly adopted, the said Portsmouth Redevelopmen5 and
<br />Housing Authority has adopted Amendment No. 2 to the said Redevelopment Plan and has requested the Council to
<br />approve said Amendment; and
<br /> WHEREAS, in the judgment of the Council, it is to the interest of the City and
<br />its inhabitants that said Amendment be approved.
<br />
<br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the.Council of the City of Portsmouth that
<br />the attached Amendment No. 2 to the Redevelopment Plan, Lincolnsville Redevelopment Projec~ VA R-6, Portsmouth,
<br />Virginia, having been duly reviewed and considered, is hereby approved."
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Dillon, the resolution was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br />and read:
<br />
<br />and read:
<br />
<br /> ~ UNFINISHED BUSINESS -
<br />
<br /> 62-283 - The following ordinance, approved on first reading at last meeting, was taken up
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF EMPLOYMENT ~AND ~
<br /> COMPENSATION PLAN FOR FIREMEN AR~ POLICEMEN OF THE CITY."
<br />
<br /> ~On motio5 of Mr. Dillon, the ordinanC'e was adopted, and-by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes: Smith, Atkinson, Barnes, Dillon, Eastes, Knight
<br /> Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 62-284 - The following ordi-nance, epproged on first'reading at last meeting, was taken up
<br />
<br />
<br />
|