Laserfiche WebLink
July 24th, 1962 <br /> <br />At a regular meeting of the City Council, held on,July 24th. 1962, there were present: <br /> <br />R. Irvine Smith, C. S. Atkinson, Jack P. Barnes, John L Dillon, George D. Eastes, <br />L. L Knight, W. T. Leery, A. P. Johnson, Jr., City Manager, _and J. S. Livesay, Jr., <br />City Attorney. <br /> <br />The meeting was opened with prayer by Mr. Barnes. <br /> <br />The following communications from the City Manager were read: <br /> <br /> 62-169 - "It is in order ar this time to open bids for the lease of City owned land on <br />West Road adjacent 5o the water rower, this land re be a Parking ~o£." <br /> <br />The City Manager opened the following bid and recommended its acceptance: <br /> <br /> "Maryview Hospital is hereby submitting its proposal for leasing of land situated on <br />West Road in said City, described as follows: <br /> Begin at a point on the east line of West Road distant 180 feet from its <br />intersection with High Street; thence perpendicular ~o said east line of West Road <br />in an easterly direction To the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad right of way, a <br />distance of 222 feet, more or less; thence in a northeasterly direction along <br />said right of way 285 feet re a point; thence in westerly direction parallel with <br />the first course 380 feet, more or less, 5o the east line of West Road; thence <br />in a southerly direction along said east line o~ West Road 240 feet, more or <br />less, re the point of beginning; said parcel of land being showD outlined in <br />Red on a copy of rag plate 198 on file in the office of the City Manager. <br />We agree re pay the sum of $100.00 per year for lease of above properry~ subject to Terms and conditions as <br />advertised in the Ledger-Star Portsmouth Section on June 26th, July 3rd, 10th and 17th, 1962. <br /> Signed: T. A. Grille, Assistant Administrator." <br /> <br />On motion el Mr Lear~ the bid was accepted, without dissenting vote. <br /> <br /> 62-170 - "After many studies and conferences with the Highway Department concerning a <br />proper interchange on Interstate 264 and Washington Street, the Highway Department eliminated the entire <br />interchange ar Washington Street. <br /> IntersrnLe 264 is now coming in at grade with traffic lights aT this intersect- <br />ion. When this interchange was eliminated, the Planning Commission made n careful study of Interstate 264 with <br />regard 5o local traffic in this area. <br /> A meeting was held with Highway officials concerning the establishment of <br />Effingham S~reer as a major north-south artery, with a reques5 by representntives of the City that this be <br />designated a Primary Highway. This has been tentatively approved by the Highway Department. <br /> With Effingham Street becoming a major nrrery, i~ is felt by the Planning <br />Commission that a complete interchange should be built a~ the intersection of Route 264 and Effingham Street. <br />The Planning Commission study and recommendation was then submitted Eo the City Council for npproval. <br /> After the Planning Commission proposal was approved by the City Council, it <br />was then transmitted re the State ~ighway Department with a request that the interchange be established ar <br />Effingham Street. <br /> Attached hereto is n reply from the Highway Department, as well as a letter <br />from the Plnnning Com/aission showing their action with regard 5o the letter received from the State Highway <br />Department denying the request for the interchange. <br /> I recommend that an appropriate Resolution be adopted incorporating the <br />recommendations of the Planning Commission and that it be forwarded re the Federal and State Representatives <br />as well as the Highway Department. <br /> <br /> On motion of Mr. Dillon, the recommendation of the City Manager was approved and the <br />following resolution was adopted: <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the Preliminary Design Report, dated April, 1958, for the Federal Interstate <br />Route Number 64, from Bowers Hill to the Norfolk-PorTsmouth Bridge Tunnel, now known as Interstate Route 264, <br />provided s complete interchange ar its eastern terminus am Washington Street, and approval of the Council was <br />sought and obtained on the basis of said design report; and <br /> WHEREAS, the federal law under which the said inters~ave highway is being constructed <br />provides: <br /> (a) "That local needs, to the extent practicable, suitable, and feasible, shall be <br />given equal consideration with the needs of interstate commerce"; (23 U.$.C.A. 101) <br />(b) "It shall be so located as to connect by routes, as direct as practicable, the <br />principal metropolitan areas, cities, and industrial centers, %o serve the national defense"; (23 U.S.C.A. 103) <br /> (c) "The Secretary shall not approve plans and specifications for proposed projects <br />on any Federal-aid system if they fail to provide for a facility (1) that will adequately meet the existing <br />and probable future traffic needs and conditions in a manner conductive to safety, durability, and economy of <br />maintenance, (2) that will be designed and constructed in accordance with standards best suited to accomplish <br />the foregoing objectives and to conform to the particular needs of each locality". (23 U.S.C.A. 109) <br /> (d) "Such standards shall be adequate to accomodnte the types and volumes of traffic <br />forecast for the year 1975". (23 U.S.C.A. 109) and <br /> WHEREAS, the public hearing held in accordance with 23 U.S.C.A. 128 was based upon the <br />aforesaid design report, end this Council and the citizens and property owners affected by the proposed con- <br />struction relied upon the said design report in their est%marion of the economic and other effects of the pro- <br />posed highway location and design; and <br /> WPLEREAS, in addition to other departures from the said design report which are detrimental <br />to the City of Portsmouth, the interchange at the terminus of said highway at or near Washington Street, and the <br />proposed substitute therefore st Effingham Street, have been eliminated from proposed construction plans by the <br />Virginia Department of Highways and ~he Federal Bureau of Public Roads; and <br /> %~HEREAS, the City of Portsmouth has adopted officially, pursuant to State law, portions <br />of its master or comprehensive plans showing as a major arterial a system consisting of Effingham Street and <br /> <br /> <br />