Minutes 01/13/1959 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. In all cases where the exigencies of the City require a~y labor To be performed on any of the above-mentioned duys BY a per diem employee whose work wo~Id otherwise entitle him to such holidays, ad - diti~nal compensation shall Be made therefor, tx~ such per diem emplOyees at the same rnte as such employees re§- ularly receive, I figured on an hourly* Basis. Ne other holidays will be observed BY either state employees partly engaged on city work er by city employees, except when special occasions are formally authorized by resolution of the Council. (6-24-24; 12-27-32. )" Motion of Mr. Weiseman to refer to the CityManager for investigation and report and that a communication be addressed ~o the representative who signed the letter transmitting the resolution, re - questing him to address any communications, in the future, to the Cit~ Manager, and not to the City Co~ncil, was adopted. 59-~5 - The following communication, addressed to the State Cea-potation Commission by W.L. Redmon, Secretary of the PortsmOuth Central LabOr Union, copy to the NLayor, was read: "The Portsmouth Central Labor;~ien wenron record to protest the exclusion o~ Por~ - mouth from the toll-free calling to Virginia Beach, Va., whereas~¢er~oik and Portsmouth rates were raised at the same time, and Norfolk, Va. wore given r~e privilege.to call Virginia Beach, Va. and Portsmouth Va. wore not. The Portsmouth Central Labor Union request the State Corporation Commission to investi- gate and to advised.why/the City of Portsm0~th has repay long distance rates to Virginia Beach, whereas Norfolk can call Virginia Beach toil free. We feel the City of Portsmouth were misiead whenthequestion arose in 1957 on the toll-free to Virginia Beach, and we were left with the opinion that Portsmouth would Be included as being given the same privilege to call Virginia Beach as Norfolk was at the same rate increase. We might say this was published in the local newspaper. Looking forward t~heari~g from you au your very earlie~st opportunity, I am,with ali good~.wishes. - signed W.L. Redmon." Motion of ~r. Smith that the City Clerk search the records and forward a communication the Secretary of the Central Labor Union advising of former action by the Council, was adopted. 59-16 ,- The following letter from the Planning Commission was read: "The recommendation of Councilman Walker that all property not otherwise zoned be zoned A-1 Residential was referred to the Plarming Commission. By a'.auanimous approval, the Planning Commission deferred this matter for further study. Council The question of selling the property located at 528 Queen St. was referred by City to th~ Planning Commission for investigation and recommendation. By a unanimous approval the Planning Commission deferred this matter until the January 1959 meeting. A letter from Coronet Casuals, Inc..concerning %he sale of a certain parcel of land near Mt.Vel~en Avenue and Glas~owSt. was referred to thePl~uning Commission byCity Council, for investigati0n, The Planning Commission recommendation is as follows: In regardto this parcel of tand,.the Planning Commission has found that part of this land is owned by the City of Portsmouth and part is privately owned p~operry. A proposed preliminary study of the land use was made of this area approximately two years ago and a~ that time it was felt that the best use for the bulk of this land would housed for A Single Family Residential. Concerning the area immediatetyadj~cent to the Aubrey Sweet Lumber Company, this should probably be zoned as Ligkt Industrial. No offi- cial aczion ca any of this area involved has ever been taken, either by the Planning Commission or by City Council. Since this study was made the situation has been complicated by the proposed Pinners Poin~ tunnel road rumning from the proposedturmel perpendicular ~o and intersectingt~With Glasgo~ St. ~nd High St. When this proposed route is constructed, it wo~ld be desirable to widen Glasgow St. ~a~d if this is done a substantial part of the proper~y in question would be required for this future stree~ widening. The Planning Commission advises against a piece-meal sale of this property ct any time; however, if and when the property should be sold, the Planning Commission feels that another .study sh(~lld be made, taking into considera- tion the facts mentioned above and the ultima~¢ land use ~o be stipulated as a condition under which any sale should be made. By a unanimous decision of the Planning Commission, the Acting Planning Director was directed to inform the petitioners concerning reaching parcels ~of .lS~d bY letter of the L~ahli~ Hearing mee~- tags, and to post a notice of rezonin~ on the parcel of land to be rezoned, and Lo inform the public of the meeting by a notice in the aewspapers. On mozien filed. 59--17 - The following fetter from the School Board was read: "The Portsmouth :School Soa~:d at its meeting Thursday, January 8, 1959, instructed me zc request a conference with the portsmouth City Council a~c an early date for the purpose of discussimE the Brightens. School site and school needs of that area. I trust ~his request will Be granted ar an early date. - A.J.Mapp. The Mayor stated that a date for tke conference would be set a~ a conference of the Council immediately following ~his meeting,