|
August 13, 1929
<br />
<br /> At a regula~ meeting cf th~ Oity Oou~cil August 13th there were presentl
<br /> Messrs--Vernon Brooks,.J.O. j~anford, E:W. Maupin, J~,
<br /> Arth~ Mayo, J. R. ~a~t, At,ibrd
<br /> Also the 0ity
<br /> The minutes of the =e~ar meeting J'~Y 23~& were re~ ~d were approved.
<br /> The followlug co~ioations wexe ~ead from the Oity
<br /> ' 1st. "I respectf~ly.c~l
<br />your ~te~tlom ~o the fact that the Belt L~e Rmil~oad has removed the safety g~es from the
<br />e=ossi~ at Glasgow St. ~ud the Belt Line. These gmtes ware ins~led on April let, 1911.
<br />Willi~son, Supt. of the Road, i~o~ed me they we=e discontinued on advice of the Belt Line
<br />Attorney because the Road was s~fe~ing heavy losses at this ti~, ~d in~ditio~, he did~
<br />feel they were n$cessa~. I t~ked the matte~ oyez with him twice ~d ~lso talked to the City
<br />Attorney abou~ it. I h~ve h~ complaints from people who use this tho~oughf~e claiming thmt
<br />the o=osslng is d~ge~ous ~d should be p~otected with g~tes.
<br /> I hmve written ~o ~r. ~h~e=, President of the Belt Line, and h~ve had conference
<br />wi~h Mr. Willi~son ~d Mr. Parke~ of the Railroad ~d I told them it was necessary that I
<br />bring the m~tte= to you= attention, as ~de~ Section 394 of the Oi~F 0ode the ~estion of the
<br />operation of s~fety ga~es was placed in the hands of the Oi~y Go, oil. I ~derst~d from
<br />Nilli~eon that when these gates were put in ope=etlon on April 1st, 1911, they were not put
<br />in by ordinate of the 0ity but the R~ilroad ~st~led them for public s~ety. Accordi~ to
<br />my jud~ent, the crossi~ as it is being ope~ated at present, ls not s~e. t believe the
<br />gates should either be=estored at once o~ that something be done to offer better protection
<br />~t this point.
<br />
<br /> Attached you will find copy of ~ letter from Mr. Sh~er on the subject." "No,elk, Virginia, August 1E, 1929.
<br />
<br /> Oity M~age~, Oity of Port.curb,
<br /> Port.curb. Virginia.
<br />
<br />Dear Sir:-
<br /> With reference to conference held in your office on Friday,: August 9th, 1929,
<br />garding the removal of safety gates'from Glasgow St. crossing and Belt Line Railroad.
<br /> Om April 1, 1911, these-gates were put in operation account cf heavy traffic over
<br />the eross~ng, Glasgow St, being theprinciple thorQughfare fromWesternBranoh Magisterial Dis-
<br />trier to the 0ity of Portsmouth, and almost constant use of same ~ry our trains which was oc-
<br />casioned by the operation of our Port Norfolk Joint Yard, which is located just north of Glas-
<br />gow St.
<br /> On September 26, 1913, this Oompany purchased a fifty (50) foot strip of land be-
<br />tween Western Branch Road and High Street, and constructed a road on the extreme west side of
<br />same so as to provide a direct outlet ~or the traffic to and from High Street which was hard
<br />surfaced. As soon as this road was completed, traffic over Glasgow Street started to decrease.
<br />
<br /> On January 6, 1929, ou_r Port Norfolk Joint Yard was abolished, account of the Penn-
<br /> sylvania RAilroad moving their terminals to Little Oreek~ thus causing our movements over this
<br /> crossing to decrease approximately sixty per cent.
<br />
<br /> On February t, 1929, we dispensed with the services of gate tenders at Glasgow
<br /> crossing and removed the gates, after watching the operation and movements over the crossing,
<br /> instructions being issued at that txme, and are still in effect,.:~o all of our trainerews
<br /> requiring them to see that the crossing was fully protected before cars were shoved over same;
<br /> a member of the crew to ~tag c~ossing, aud~./in pulling trains over.smme the engineman must see
<br /> that the crossing is:cIeS~V, bef~re engine obstructs crossing.
<br />
<br /> Since the removal of the gates there has not beem~ singleaccident at that cross-
<br />ing, nor has my attention been called to a nes~-a¢c~dent, being at'the
<br />
<br />head end of our Port Norfolk yard where the-sDs'ed o~--Our
<br />per hour, and the view of the crossing .being unobstructed,
<br />rate over in our present manner.
<br />
<br /> On receipt of your letter dated July 31st, we had
<br />crossing from 12:01 A. M. August 4th, te 12:01 A. M.
<br />
<br />same a sgfe crossing to ope-
<br />
<br />over the
<br /> Aug,
<br />
<br />~th-
<br />
<br />Aug. 5th-
<br />
<br />12:01 A. M. to 8100 A, m. ~ West _E~!h South
<br /> ~:00 a. M. tO 4:00 P.M. ~2 ~ 21 T
<br /> ~:00 P. M. tel2:00 P.M. 5Y 38 15. 17
<br /> lO3 49
<br />
<br />a check made of the traffic moving
<br />Aug"dst ?th, which was as follows:
<br /> TRAINS
<br />
<br />12:01 A. M. to ~:00 A.w. 30 25 19 <~: 38
<br />8:00 'A. =. tO 4:00 P.M. ~% E 2263, S5
<br />l~:00 P. ~. %o12:00 P.m. i S5
<br /> 165 1~ 68 10~
<br />
<br />~ug. 6th-
<br />
<br />12:01 A. m. to 8:00 A.M. 33' 37 19 33
<br />~:00 A. M. to g:O0 P.M. 94 108 11 36
<br />
<br />
<br />
|