Minutes 12/10/1957 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

December lOth, 1957. 57-431 - The £ollowin~ letter from the Commissioner ~f Revenue was read: "Please be advised that W.W. Howard has been assessed for tangible personal property valued for $1,080.00 with taxes amounting re $29.70. Our investigation reveals that the correct assessment should have been $930.00 with taxes amounting to $25.58, representing an over-assessment in taxes amounting re $4.12. The taxpayer has paid the original tax notice #7359 as evidenced his receipted tax bill. As this is definitely an over-payment of $4.12, we sincerely request that a refund in this amount be made ~o the taxpayer." Motion o£ Mr. Smith that refunds be granted, was adopted. 57~32 - The following letter from the Planning CommIssion was read: "At a meeting on December 5th, 1957, the Planning Commission considered the matter of authorizing for sale two small parcels of land fronting on the'north side of High St. in the vicinity of the new , by-pass. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission by the Ci~ Manager pursuant mo a reques~ sub - mitted to him by Ctyde ~. Cooper, requesting that Council. act authorizing this property to be advertised and sold. The Planning Commission, in reviewing this matter, felt that the primary consideratio~ is whether it is desirable and_practicable to extend the by-pass from its present termination a~ High St. re con- tinue north to Glasgow St. The planning Commission is of the opinion that the subject parcels should no~ be of- fered for sale, and by morion recommends re City Council that the City acquire t~e right-of-way necessary to con~ struct a highway from the end of the by-pass ar High St. 5o Glasgow St. near its intersection with Potomac Ave., looking toward the widening of Glasgow St. as a major arterial highway in the overall street plan of the City. The above motion was carried by a six-to-one vote." Motion of Mr. BaKer to suspend the rules ~o.hear from interested parties, was adopted.~ this property. Mr. Clyde Cooper, representing the Tidewate~ Medical Corporation, spoke for the sale Dr. W. E. Terry spoke for the~sale of this property. Motion of Mr. Baker no~.to concur in the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and that the property be advertised for sale, was adopted, and by the following vote: Ayes: Baker, Hinton, Kirby, Scott, Weiseman Nays: Bartlett, Smith for sale, waa adopted. Motion of Mr. Smi~th that the City Manager be authorized to advertise the property 57-433 - The follow~ng letter from the Planning Commission was read: "At a joinz conference of City Council and $he Planning Commission, held on October 16, 1956, a preliminary study of blighted areas was presented, indicating eight possibl~ urban renewal areas. The Council then requested that the Planning Commission continue the studyand make a recommendation setting forth the priority among these eight areas. Qn November 12, I9~8, the Planning Commission forwarded ~o City Council a recommen- dation that the Lincolnsville area be'undertaken first and that the Redevelopment and HQusing Authority be re - quested to submit an application for an advance of planning funds mn order re undertake nenewal planning for that area. At the same time, the P~anning Commiss%on recent, ended that an application be made for a planning advance to survey a large area as designated on a~map submitted with the recommendation. This large area included virtually all of the blighted and deteriorating sections of the City. Subsequently the application for planning funds for Lincolns~ille has been made and has been approved hy the Housiag and Home Finance Agency, On October 8th of this year, City Council acted re r~quest that the Planning Commis- sion 'submit a second priority to be considered for urban renewal £unds - this priority to be broken down into sub-priorities that the Council may consider same'. It is the recommendation of the Planning Commissmon that, to ~ave a sound basis for deciding on further urban renewal priority, the approach should be along the lines indicated below: (1) An overall plan should be made for all portions of the City aubjecm ~o improvemen~ measures (esyentially the'layge area ment toned above). This plan should show suggested new uses where it may be proposed mo clear and rebuild entire blocks of structures. It should show the several arterial highway routes which will necessitate extens~v~ razing o£ buildings and displacemenz of reei dents. It should show those areas where retention and improvement of existing houses is practicable, indicating locationa for future schools and playgrounds to serve those neighborhoods. (2) After this overall plan has been made it can then be divided into section~ and estimates made of th~ cosz of completing the renewal work in each section. (3) It will then be possible ~o comp.$re the ~various possibilities for urban renewal and me make selections for priorities. If this procedure is fol - lowed the selection can he b~se~ on an appraisal of costs and benefits, and the urban renewal program can be girted into the long range capital imprevement program. Obviously, the approach outlined above Will preclude making any immediate decision on further priorities because of the extensive analya~s yet to be done. There is also anomher reason against making a hurried decision. Urban renewal should be correlated both with the federal interstate highway and the approach highways to the second Elizabeth River tunnel. Since final route determinations for these highways projects are still ha~ging fire, there is reason ~o defer decision on urban renewal priorities until these mac,ers have been settled." On motion filed.