|
13©
<br />
<br />property owners,['for permission to construct a road connecting the City Park property with
<br />property adjoining it to the-South, which you referred to me February 13th, and find the fol-
<br />lowing conditions affecting this rec. uest.
<br /> If the permission i's granted and the road constructed it woutd make a public
<br />thoroughfare for through traffic out of the principal roads in the C~ty Park. In my opinion,
<br />roads in a park or cemetery should not be used as public thoroughfares f~r through traffiC. To
<br />do so, endangers the lives of children and others using the park for recreational purposes. The
<br />roads in the park are narrow and circuitous and not designed or constructed for highway traffic.
<br />If the road is constructed :and the. property developed as proposed, another road would-no doubt
<br />be constructed to connect' this prxvate pr?perry with the old State highway to Suffolk, and traf-~
<br />fic would then' take this short cut through the Park to the State High, ay. This, and the devel-
<br />opment of the property would greatly increase traffic through the Park and over the present
<br />bridge connecting the Park with Westhaven.
<br /> The bridge to the Park from Westhaven has only a 15 foot roadway and a single
<br />lane roadway over the draw, used by pedestrians and vehicles. It was not constructed for com-
<br />mercial tra~Tic, and if so used would create a traffic hazard dangerous to our people who walk
<br />and drive over the bridge.
<br /> For all intents and purposes, the Park' is closed after ll:OO o'clock at night,
<br /> at which time the lights are turned off. It may be desirable in the future to construct a gate
<br /> and close the Park after a certain time at night to prevent destruction of property in the Park
<br /> and cemetery and to maintain order. We have in the past had considerable trouble with destruc-
<br /> tion of the skrubbery, trees, playground equipment and other city property during hours w. he.n -
<br /> the property was not u~der supervision by. cmty representatives. If this request is gran~ea ama
<br /> the road constructed, it would be impossmble thereafter to close the park at'night. We have
<br /> difficulty in enforcing traffic or other regulations as the City hess no police power in the pa~k
<br /> on account cf it being located outside of the City.
<br /> If the road is constructed, the City would have to pay for future maintenance cost
<br /> of that part of it on 0ity property. The road would occupy about one-fourth acre of land if
<br /> constructed at the south end of the area now used for park pu~pomes and which adjoins the ceme-
<br /> tery. No compensation is offered for the land which would be used and no offer is made to de-
<br /> fray maintenance of the road or bridge to be constructed, or the increased maintenance cost of
<br /> the present roads amd bridge.
<br /> The citizens of Portsmouth now own a beautiful piece of l~d which at present is
<br /> dedicated for use as a cemetery and a park; it is now suitable and safe for such use, but if
<br /> ~this permission is granted, ~he suitability of the location as a cemetery and park will be ser-
<br /> iously impaired.
<br /> In view of the above, I recommend that the request be not granted. If, however,
<br /> the Council does grant the request, I suggest that the City require the owners of the land to
<br /> be developed to construct the road with a dirt fill across the marsh with adequate concrete
<br /> drainage culvert, the plans for same te be approved by the City Engineer, and compensation to
<br /> be made to the 0ity for the ~ used as roads, dud for the increased cost of maintenance to the
<br /> park roads and bridge."
<br />
<br /> Motion o~ Mr. Hutchins to grant ~r. Vincent Parker privilege of the floor, was
<br />adopted. Mr. parker spoke in favor of his request of February 13th to build a bridge from the
<br />City Park to the property on the south.
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Brooks to grant said request with the following clause added "That
<br />the Council reserve the right to terminate the said permit upon thirty days notice, and that
<br />the 0ounty Beard of Supervisors be requested to adopt an ordinance for the protection of the
<br />Park, similar to the City's ordinance for same, was adopted, amd by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Brooks, Fox~ Hutehins, Moore,
<br />Nays: Mayo,~Oast, Parrish.
<br />
<br />The City Attorney presented the following ordinance:
<br />
<br /> "AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL 'AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING A BOND OF OWNER~
<br />OR DRI1~mRS OF PUBLIC AUTOMOBILE~, TAXI-OABS, AND JITNEYS, OONDITIONED
<br />UPON THE FAITHFUL OBSERVANCE OF STATE AND ~TY LAWS, AND PROVIDING FOR
<br />A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF."
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Brooks to place same on first reading was adopted.
<br />
<br />- ~NFINISHED BUSINESS -
<br />
<br />The ~icense Tax Ordinance continued on table from last meeting, was taken up..
<br />
<br />In this connection, the following letters were read:
<br />
<br /> "Portsmouth, Va., April 23rd, 193~.
<br />
<br />From - Portsmouth Central Labor Union.
<br />To: ._The Honorable City. Council of Portsmouth, Va.
<br />
<br />Subject - Protest on cost of Oity Automobile License.
<br />
<br /> At the last regular meetiug of the undersigned body, this committee was empowered
<br />to register a protest on the subject of City Automobile Licenses. ~
<br />
<br /> ~hereas a satisfactory reduction in rates are contemplated being granted to plea-
<br />sure car owners driving vehicles in excess of 3,000 pounds in weight, said reduction does not
<br />benefit the owners of lighter cars, who must pay the old rate of $10.O0 per car.
<br /> We contend that the average type of automobiles oper~te~ by the work,nE man in
<br />this City weigh about 2,?00 pounds (paying $10.00 license) and thms is true of 70~ of all Oity
<br />
<br />
<br />
|