|
3O
<br />
<br />Earch 8th~ 19&9.
<br />
<br />Nays -
<br />
<br />Fox, Bilisoly, D~ke, Grimes, Henderson~ Houghton,
<br />Howard, Sturtevant, ~ilson
<br />None
<br />
<br /> The following communication of the City Eanager, laid on table on Feb~m-
<br />ary 8th, was continued on table:
<br />
<br /> "The attached is a letter from the T.O. ~¢illiams Company in Portsmouth,
<br />requesting that the city inclose the drain which is Gander Creek, east of First Street extend-
<br />ing from Wythe Street to the spur track of the Seaboard Air Line Railway.
<br /> This as you know, is all private property 'out will be of tre~endous bem
<br />efit to the above-named company ~hich wishes to fill over the inclosed drain and use the pro-
<br />perty.
<br /> The attached is an estimate of the cost prepared by the City Engineer,
<br />Z suggest that City Council give careful thought to this matter because while the T.0. Nilliams
<br />Company will erect a building which will be taxable and the asses¢aent on the real estate will
<br />increase, you might be serving a precedent, by inclosing natural drains through p rivate properb;
<br />which naturally e~hances the value of the proper~y~t public e~oense.~
<br />
<br /> The appropriation of ~6,000.00 bm buy the colored %.E.C.A. Building,
<br />continued on the table from last meeting, was taken up.
<br />
<br /> Notion of Er. Howard to appropriate ¢6,000.00 for said purpose, was
<br />adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes - Fox, Bilisoly, Duke, Grimes, Henderson, Houghton, Howard,
<br /> Sturt ev~nt,~ ~ilson
<br /> Nays - None
<br />
<br /> 'I~e following ordinance, placed on its first reading at'last meeting,
<br />
<br />was taken up:
<br />
<br />I'AN O~qDINANCE PROHIBITING T~ OPERATION OF MOTOR P/~SSENGER
<br />BUSES FOR HiRE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF INTRA-CiTY PASSENGERS
<br />~tTHOUT THE CONSF~T OF THE COUNC~L OF ~HE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH,
<br />AND PROVZDING PEi~ALTY FOR TRE VIOIJ~TION TREREOF"
<br />
<br />fo_lowzng vote:
<br />
<br />On.motion of ~r. Sturt~evant, said ordir~nce was adopted, and by the
<br />
<br /> Ayes - Fox, Bilisoly, Duke, Grimes, Henderson, Houghtoh,
<br /> Howard, Sturtevant, Wilson
<br /> Nays - None
<br />
<br /> An appropriation of ~9,130.00 for the following, laid on table at last
<br />meeting, was taken UP:
<br /> (letter from City Attorney)
<br /> "~%e City of Portsmouth became the purchaser of the following Fmoperty
<br />which was sold at public auction in the suit of City o f Portsmouth vs. Estelle F. Alexander
<br />et al. Lots 6. V. 8. 9. 10. ~l and ~2 and parts of 29 and ~0, Plat of H.L.
<br />
<br />Alexander, located at the south end of Cou~t Street adjoinmng the Cmty playground, for the
<br />s~n of $6,500.00.
<br /> Lot 4, on the same plat, for the stua of ~00o00.
<br /> Lot 61, plat of J.C. Taylor, for the sum of ~8.00.
<br /> Lot at the northeast co~ner of Green and Queen Streets, adjoining the
<br />Health Center, for the so~ of $~,~O8.0~,
<br /> The total cost of the property is ~9.,1~0.00 and it is necessary to ob-
<br /> tain an appropriation for that amount."
<br />
<br /> Notion of ~r. Duke to approPriat~ ~9,150.00 for said purpose, was
<br /> adopted, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes - Fox, Bilisoly, Duke, Grimes, Henderson, Houghton,
<br /> Howard, Sturtevant, ~ilson
<br /> Nays None
<br />
<br /> An appropriation of $6,9~9.~6 from Water funds, for the following, lai¢
<br /> on table a t last meeting, was taken up:
<br />
<br /> ~'Under date of June 7th, 19~8, the City of Port~outh, Virginia entered
<br /> into a contract with the Virginia Smelt&ng CQmpany, in w~ch it agreed to pay the Virginia Smel'
<br /> isg Company the s~ of Thirty-three Hund~.ed and thirty-three dollars and thirty-three cents,
<br /> ($b88b~$~) at the end of each yearly perzod provided the Virginia Smelting Company had paid to
<br /> the City as muchas~ive ~nousand Dollars ($8,000.00) for water furnished by the City during
<br /> the previous ~welve months. At the time the contract was executed, it was anticipated that the
<br /> water line to ~'est Norfolk would cost Forty-five ~aousand Dollars ($~fi,000.O0), and the Virgi-
<br /> nia Smelting Company was to advance one-third of the cost whiahwas to be refunded by the City
<br /> over a period of four and one--half years.
<br /> The extension cost more than $~, 000,00 and ~he City required the Vir-
<br /> ginia SmeltSng Company to advance ~91.00 additional. The water line was placed in operation
<br /> in ~ay, 19~, and for the first one year pe~iod ending-June l, 19~8, the Virginia Smelting
<br /> -~ompany paid the. City the sum of $9~818.79, emd from June l, 19~8 to Peb~mary l, 19~9, it has
<br /> paid the sum of
<br /> i suggest that the additional sum of $891.00 be pro-rated over the
<br />
<br />
<br />
|