Minutes 03/22/1955 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

March 22nd, 1955~ read: Ayes: Duke, Baker, Bilisoly, Grimes, Hawks, H~ward, Lawrence, Smith, Sturtevmnt, Warren, Wilson Nay . None 55-49 - The following ordinance, placed on first reading a~ last meeting, was taken up and "AN ORDIKANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF ~dE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH 1951 BY ADDING T~RETO A I~EW SECTION TO BE KNOWN AS SECTION 24-8.1, RELATING TO CHARGES FOR TRUCK HAULED WASTE" On motion ef Mr. Smith, said ordinance was adopted and by the following vote: Ayes: Duke, Baker, Bilisoly, Grimes, Hawks, Howard, Sturtevant, Warren, Wilson Nays: None Lawrence, Smith, NEW BUSINESS - The following letter from P. E. Wnukosky was read: "It is the desire ef the residents of Westhaven Park to make one. final attempt at no,e- rioting a friendly and reasonable solution of the problems concerning the location of the Hamilton~venue by-pass. I have been directed to convey to the City C%m~ciI, by letter, our views, requests end offers of agreement in matters pertinent te tJae entire sabject. It is our earnest desire to no-eperat~ sincerely in any co-operative effer~ founded on logic, fairness and the Deal public i~terest. I have been asked to advise that, all else failing, we will have no choice but to proceed with referendum petitions, court actions ~n~ with ~ny and all other actions that may apply and which are not specifically prohibited by law. We refuse to pave Hamilton Avenue by-pass with the bodies of our chuldren an~ we stand ready ~o do whatevermi~ht be necessary to prevent this from happening. On Mmrch 8th, 1955, the Portsmouth City Council approved by simple voice vo~e, the c~nstruction of a four lane super-hi~h~ay within fifteen feet of inhabited dwellings in Westhaven Park. To be more specific, the Council, purS~mt to the City~na~er's recommendation, disapproved the Westhaven Park Civic League's January 19th request for relocation of Route 17 A, The City M~uager~s recommendation tO disal~Preve was predicated upon the c~mpesite of six objecting factors centair~e~ in NLr. W.A. Woadward~s Febrnary 14th memo te ~r. W.F.~ith, Urban E~iueer. Four of the objecting factors were grossly inconsistent with the intent and the spirit of our re- quest for relocation and served only to cloud and confuse the real issues~ In approving the City Manager's recom- mendation~ the Council i~nored the 481 signature petition requesting a curved relocation of the project. Except for viewing a ridiculously grotesque drawing of the disputed location, the Council took no official action in regard to the 481 signature petition, presented to Council on ~srch 8th, 1955. The drawing, prepared in the City Engineer's Office an~ allegedly portrayed the present and proposed locations, was drawn out of proportion and misleading to the viewers. A fourteen per cent error exists in the compared widths of the present and the proposed right of way locations as well as other inconsistencies which presented the situation in hypercritically incongruous prospectus. After discussing this matter with several Council members and with other members of Portsmouth's officiaI.andsemi-official family, we az~ now convinced that the Council's action was influenced largely by erroneous and ex~raneo~ information. In fairness to the Ceumcil, we ha~e purposely postponed all ex- treme measures in order ~o afford the C6uncil ample opportunity to separate facts from prejudicial distortions and evaluate all of the ramificati~s. A brief review of the pertinent factors follows: 1. Ample city-owned land is available. Relocation involves only resurveying and a nominal expendit~'e from appropriated fun~s. Relocation would no~ create new curves. It w~uld simply widen and join =we existing curves actually improving one existing curve and leaving the other existing curve undisturbed. 4. 98% of the ~emes in Westhaven Park are occupied by the owmers and were constructed on drained semi swamp land about ten years before the highway pro~ect entered the planuing stages. 5. The highway i~.deeiEned for high speed ~ will channel dense traffic, including heavy out of State commercial types, to within about fifteen feet of occupied dwellings, 6. The proximity of this major highway will permanently and c~nstantlydamage structures due re the combination of land characteristics and the ~ontinuous pounding of heavy vehicles~ The value ~f our residentia~ properties will be permanently depreciated by vil~tue of acquiring an undesirable location status. 8. The inherent perils associated with heavy arterial traffic will injure and interfere with e~r constitutional right to enjoy security in our own homes. 9. Our children will be denied a~d unrestricted use of o~r oma y~r~s as play and recreation arena Because ~f the extreme hazard occasioned hy the fact that the traveled lmn~ will be within twelve feet ef the play yards. ~0. Our families will be in constant jeopardy of injury or worse a~ the hands of D~tential highway murderers w~ae ignore common sense, conscience and traffic laws or regulations. In order that these and other hazards and inequities might be at least partly eliminate~ we ask the Council te give favorable c~sideration an~ approve t~e reques~ c~ntaine~ in ear petition as presented to Council on March 8tb, 1955. If the Council directs favorable action, my neigb~ore and I will extend the following agreements and offers: a. We will agree to cease and desist frgm further purs~ait of legal processes, re~fer~ndmm~am~ all other actions which are hosed ~n related events occurring between January ist, 1955 m~d ~rch E~nd, 1955. b. We will agree to enter into competitive bidding for any adjacent residual land re~ulting from an eastward relocation, provided the City desires ~o dispes~ ~f such residu~l la~.