Minutes 05/22/1923 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~th. Tin accordance with instructions of the Council, given at its meeting of April beg~to report as follows on resolution of the Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce d~ted April relative to planning and zoning engineer. This resolution includes two recommendations- let, that the Council take under serious consideration the advisability of securing a planning and zoning engineer or corpora- tion to conduct a preliminary survey of the Sootts Creek ~ea to determine the advisability and practicability of the development o£ this area either as a residential or industrial section; End, that the~Council mfter this,preliminary survey seriously consider the advisability of a permanent survey for the entire City. With reference to the first recommendation, I beg~to state that in my opinion a partial survey is objectio~ble for two reasons; namely- by reason of its pattie1 character it would be impossible to make a really proper decision rel~tiye to the limited area under consideration as it could not be separated from the r~st of the City in a problem of this kind. Zoning and planning to be of any value mus~ take the City as a whole; for example to determine whether any pmrticula~v a~ea should be a residentia~or industrial ~ection we must know its relation to other areme, the chs~racter of these o~hsr areas, the p~obable growth of the City and the other innumermble details which go to m~ke up a complete study of City zoning and pla~- ming. Again, I am of the opinion that a partial zoning or planning law is invalid- I believe that this opinion hms been and will be sustained by the courts. The remaining question to be answered is that either the entire City shall be studied by an expert for proper zoning and planning or them the question be d%vopped altogether fo~ the present. It is to be noted that the problem is in two parts, (a) zoning, (b) planning. ing ~mply divides the City into smeas depending on use, height of buildings, etc. wherems plmnning gives a complete study for the future growth of the City. Eon- I am smtisfied thst the City is no~ now financially able to carry out the entire p~oject but the zoning alone may be very properly undertaken and would give sufficient authority to prRvent abuses in the building line which mre now so evid~n~ to all of us. In the last few months, we have had examples of garmges~ stores and factories built in residential 'districts with the consequent injury to the owners of these residences and the incidential injury to business or industrial sections in which these activities should properly have been located. The cost of zoning alone will not be excessive aCd I am of the opinion that we might well undertake paying for it after the 14th of July~ 1923. The expense of it should be paid for by the entire City including the Eighth and Ninth ~a=ds and as it is a work of per- m~nent-nature, pmyment from a bond is~u~ would be proper. So far ss I can learn efforts to effect zoning and planning by volunteer commissions who are not skilled in the s~udy of the problem have been ~niformly unsuccessful. I therefore recommend that the zoning of the City be undertaken at once with the undertMtanding that palunent therefor is to be made from the proceeds of a bond issue made after July l~th, 19qE3, and that I be authorized to employ an expert individuml or firm in an mdvisory ~ap~clty ~oth.to the City ~anager and to the Zoning Commission whigh has already been authorized y the Council. The estimated cost of the work is $Y,500.00 of which $6,?oo.00 will be ned~d to cover the ~ervioes of an expert and the remainder fo~ incidential expenses." On motion, the recommendation of the Man~ger was referred to the Finance Committee. 9th. Recommendation that the following emergency ordinance be adopted, regulating the location of garages and business and industrial establishments in the City, pending the com- plete zoning of the City: An Ordinance Prohibiting the Erection of Business Plmoes, Pubtio Garages a~d Indust~iml Estmblis~ments in Residential Sections. On motion of Mr, Brooks, the ordinmnce wms placed on its first reading. loth. Recommendation that N. C. Eokert be refunded $10.25 for~ jitney license, as Mm. stopped operating his jitney on January 9th, 1923, aad purchmsed license Nay 1st, 1922. On ~otion, the recommendation was referred to the Finmnoe Committee. Emkert llth. "Under the State law, approved by the Governor April 3rd, 1923, concerning motor v~hicle carriers, a change hms been m~d~ in the method of licensing inter-urban motor vehicles used fsr ~the pnrpose of ca~ryingpaseengers or f~eight for hire. Under this lmw the State tax is one fortieth of a cent per seat for each mile which it is estimated that the vehicle will travel, during.the year. Cities are prohibited from imposing a tax gram%er thmn the State lioenme fee or tax computed upon-the mileage basis, that is upon the proportion that %he route over such streets within the corporate limits of such City bears in length to t~e entire route of such carrier. Our license ts~x ordinance requires a tax of ~51.00 flat, not pro-rated. As this will be illegal after the State-law goes into effect on June =Sth, 1923, I would suggest that after the ~igure $51.O0, the following words be added: ~to be pro-rated after ~he State law goes into effect June 28th.~- An emergency existing, it is recommended that this amendment go into effect from its passmge." On motion, the communication was referred to the Finance Commietee.