|
September 12, 1922
<br />
<br /> i3th.' Sin 1.919, the City Councii of Portsmouth entered into a contract with theN. Y. P.
<br />& N. R~ilroad whereby the City, for the privilege of emptying ~ewage into the culvert run-
<br />ninE under the mmbankment of ~he said railroad south of Third St. in Port Norfolk, ~greed to
<br />maintai~ the said culvert, even to the extent of reconstructing it, if necessary. This con-
<br />tract imposed very g~ave responsibilities upon the City, which, in my opinion, were extreme,
<br />but the contract was duly authorized and signed and of oottrse is binding,
<br />
<br /> At present, this sewer, either through breakage or other causes has become stopped,
<br />causing flooding~of property on the west side of the enbankment, and resulting probably in
<br />SUits against ~he-Oity for damages. Under the contract, the City is required to~ remedy this
<br />trouble~at its own expense.
<br />
<br /> tam satisfied, however, that the old culvert is insufficient in size and that an
<br />opening at least five feet in diameter will be required under this enbanlunent. The ~.Y~P. & N.
<br />Railroad has o~fered to cons.t~uct this oulvert~and share equally with the City .in the expense,
<br />which will not be more than. $5,O00~00. I have objected to this proposition and have agreed
<br />with the Railroad Compamy, subj eot of course to the approval of ~he Council, that the Company
<br />shall proceed immediat~l~ to construct the culvert and that the question of the division of
<br />expense shalI be left to an i~Pa~rtial Bomrd of arbitration, one member to be selected by the
<br />City Manager, one member by the Railroad Company and these two to choose a third.
<br />
<br /> As it is eseent£a~ that this work pro~eedimmediately, the approval by the Council
<br />of my action is requested. The question of the &ppropri&tion can be taken up later, ms soon
<br />as it is known what the expense to the ~ity will be. It w~ll certainly not be more than
<br />$2,500.00, which-will ~e chargeable of course ~o Eighth Ward funds."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Smith, the recommendation of the Manager was concurred in.
<br />
<br /> t4th. "The lo, est bid fo~ tbs drainage ~system on west High St. is that of MrL JohnS.
<br />Rapelye, which is $~3,210.10, 'or $~,210.10 in excess of funds available, It is r~commended
<br />that an additional appropriation of $8,000.00 be made to cover th~ ex, ess of bid over esti-
<br />mate and that it be divided between the old City and the Eighth and ~inth Wa~ds, in
<br />· o the acreage drained as follows: the old City, $63~.00; Eighth Ward, $1,953.00; Ninth
<br />Wa~d, $5,39~.$0- total $S,OOG. O0.
<br />
<br />· "I deem it essential that this work ~e done promptly and do not believe we will
<br />get any ~etter ~lgu~es by re advertising. Five bids were received ranging from the low one
<br />already given 'to ~.high of
<br />
<br /> On motion, the recommendation of the Manager was referred to FinanceCommittee.
<br />
<br />UNFINISHED BUSINESS
<br />
<br />The following ordinance, placed on its first r'eading August 22nd, was taken up and read~
<br />
<br /> AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND' AND RE-ORDAIN SECTION 3 OF AN GqDINANC~ ENTITLED,
<br />PROVIDI~NG LICENSE FE~S, RULES AND R~GULAT~ONS FOR THN OPERATION OF 'JITNEYS'
<br />POR TSNOUTH."
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE
<br />IN TH~ CTTY OF
<br />
<br /> In this connection, a commumication was read from the Commissioner of Insurance, stating
<br />that it has been brought to his attention that certain parties in the City cf Portsmouth are
<br />issuing bonds and receiving compensation therefor on jitneums operating in Portsmouth. He
<br />asked that same be investigated and if such is found to be the case, it is in v~olation of
<br />Chapter 17~ of our Insurance Laws, unless these parties are duly authorized agents of a li-
<br />censed surety company.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mm. Oast, the privilege of the floor was granted to Mr. Markel~ who spoke
<br />in favor of'the adoption of such an Ordinance.
<br />
<br />Then on motion of Mr. Esleeck, the ordina~ce was adopted, mhd by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> Ayes-- Brooks, Esleeck, Hutchins, Cast, ~mith, Stewart, 6.
<br />
<br /> The reports of the City Collector, City Treasurer, and the City Clerk & Auditor for the
<br />month of August, 1~22, were presented and were referred to Finance Committee.
<br />
<br />NEW BUSINESS
<br />
<br /> Request was r?ad from the City Cgllector that the fgllowlng refunds be made. same having
<br />been paid in error. Maurice Archer, $1.07; H.~B. Eu~e, $1.S5; W. P. Andrews, $$.57.
<br /> On motion, the request was referred to Finance Committee.
<br />
<br /> The following report was read from the City Atto:ney, and same was referred to Finance
<br />Committee:
<br /> "Portsmouth, Va., September 12, 1922.
<br /> "Hon. City Council,
<br /> Portsmouth, Va.
<br />
<br /> "Gentlemen:--
<br /> The Commissioners appointed by the Court of Hustings for the condemnation
<br />of' land wanted by the City has made the following awards:
<br />
<br /> For the extensi~n of Washington Street into Dale Street, Madora W. Ho!laday
<br />was awarded the sum of Forty-two Eund~ed DolIars.
<br />
<br /> F?r the cotton factory ~property wanted for a city stables, the Portsmouth
<br />Cotton Manufacturing Company was awar'ded the sum of Forty-two Thoussm~ and Fifty Dollars,
<br />and Parker-and Mulvey~ Incorporated, the sum of Thirty-one Eundred and Eight~ Dollars.
<br /> The Oommissioners-reports were filed on September ~th, and are required
<br />
<br />
<br />
|