Minutes 09/13/1960 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

for security? It is my conteniion that each housing unit built and filled is anaet of repression whether or not the occupancy was voluntary. It is aiding and abetting in the decline of free man into voluntary .servitude. When considered as a by-product of urban renewal it ie doubly repugnant. It is repressing those who, by thor own efforts have become freeholders~, by taking their homes ss well.,as their 'land away from them. It is repress- . ing those s~.um, dwelle~s no~ y~t':fo~tunate eno~ olr~illin~ .e~o~gh .to ova~ a. ~omel, by establishing them in pub- lic quarters thereby relieving them of that necessity and responsibility. Since there _is no visible end or goal 5o the housing program, we must in our de- liberations consider both extremes. If we continue 5o build them at the present rate we will soon have provided quarters for all of one class of society, the lower working class. The cost of such a human subsidy will serl - ously challenge the solvency of the City and outstrip the ability of.the City go retrieve the fleeing 5axpayers by annexation. If We st~p this slow death, as I have faith that we will, if and when sufficient knowledge trickles out to the paying part of the citizenry, each additional unit built will be ~ major problem for us and for the ones who later inherit the quarters s~d the results of our shortsightedness. The premeditated msnner 'in which they are being consgructed - in circular co--unities and in multi-units preclude future sale to private .Mr. President, I wis~ the record to show that I ha~e voted against this resolu- tion because it approves the construction of 340 additional housing units which we do not need and can not af - ford, because it will approve the expenditure of $3,800~000.00 of our great-grandchildren's inheritance, already sadly depleted, because it wi:ll place multi-housing housing in an area which, by reason of its location, both st the tunnel entrance and at the first entrance or indusnria~ uses. It is nothing short of hypocrisy ~o profess a belief in and a desire ~o protect the downtown business area and out of the same mouth condone the construction of pe.r~anent multi-family dwelliug~ in that area." 60-287 -~ "I submit the attached resolution and recommend its adoption. This resolution reques~s.~the State ~ighway Department to proceed with surveying, planning and cons~rucnion of a new bridge betweenPor~ Norfolk and Wes~ Norfolk. .The resolution has bee~ requestedby the Elizabeth River Tun- riel Commission and the other political subdivisions in the area are~dopting simmlar resolutions. Onmotiou of Mr. Breedlove, the following resolution was adopted, without dissemlt- ing vote: '~HEREAS, it is apparen~ to theCouncil of the City of Portsmouth that the growth of .eastern Virginia~ and especially the area in and surrotuld- ing the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth, has and will in the future pro- duce ever in creasing traffic problems which will require the developmen~ of new and more adequate traffic arteries such as the second Elizabeth River Tunnel now being constructed AN/)WHEREA_S, the construction of said second Elizabeth River T~nnsl will in ;.itself develop new traffic in the area of t~e Western Branch of said Elizabeth River to the end that, in the opiqion of this Council, a re - placemen~ of the now old and inadequaEe bridte across said Elizabeth River from Port Norfolk to West Norfolk wilt be urgently ~eeded a% or shortly fqllowing the opening of Said second tunnel facility; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL~rED, that in the opiIzion of this Council~ a concerted effort should be made by it and the governing bodies of the Elizabeth River Community and by the Virginia Department of Highways for the prompt surveying, planning and constructing of an improved, modern bridge pa the S~a~e Route #6~4 at or near the mouth of the Western branch of the Elizabeth River to the end that ever increasing vehicular traffic in t~is area be properly s~ved, wit~;.the resulting beneficial developmen5 and economic well being of t~e w~ole community and its environs; ~ESOLVED FURTHER that a copy of this Resolution be ~ransmitted forthwith to the State Highway Commission~ the Board of Supervisors of the County of Norfolk and the City Council of the City of Portsmouth with the request that they likewise consider the course of action here presented." 6G~288 - "I recommend that I be authorized to make application for a Federal Gra~ for ,sewage treatment werks. These funds are available under Public Law 660 and the State Water Control Board ha approyed our request ~or a grant in the amouut of $126,600.00. ~ These funds are made available~to cities on the following criteria: To control pollution of coastal waners. Federal installations contributing to the tota~ mun%cipal waste loadings._ If this application fo~'a g~ant is approved, these funds will be used for con - struction of collection and trunk line, force and sucnion mains and intercepter sewers in the annexed area." Mo{ion of Mr. B ames that the City Manager be authorized ro make application fca- , Federal Grant for sewage treatment works, as recommended. On motion of Mr. Breedlove, the rules 'were suspended to hear from Mr. Harry Simp- son, of Simonsdale. Mr. Simpson request, ed relief from drainage condition in Simonsdale and askedthat it b~ considered concurrently with the se~mge treatmen~ work. Vote being taken, Mr. Barnes motion was adopted, without dissenting vo~e. " ~ b 't 60-289 - Isu m~ the attached petition from residenats of the Simonsdale area, concerning bus transpertatio~. I have referred this matter ~o the Portsmouth Transit Company but have no~ re- ceived a reply as yet, This is for your mnformatmo . Motion of Mr. Weiseman that the petition be received as information and referred to the City Manager to follow th~ough~ was adopted, without dissenting vote. 6G-290 - '~r. Jolm C. Lewin a former policemen has requested a refund of monies paid into the old Police and Fire Pension fund. Mr. Lewis is entitled to a refund of $43.65. I recommend that the refund be granted."