|
394
<br />
<br />FebYuary 14~, 1~22
<br />
<br /> ~th. Recommendatio~n of the Manager that an appropriation of $1500. be made by the Council
<br />for one more policeman for the Eighth Ward, the Eighth Ward agreeing that said Ward wilt pro-
<br />vide funds for an additional policeman to work under the direction of the City Msmager and
<br />Chief of Police, on condition that the City furl~ish it mnothe=
<br /> On motion, the communication wms ~efe~ed to the Fin~ee C~mittee.
<br /> 10th. "The President of the Eighth Ward Civic Lem~e, under ~uthority of the Board off
<br />rectors of that Le~e, hms ~reed to pay one-h~ff off the cost of ~ combined fire and police C
<br /> station ~d community h~ll In the Eighth N~rd, provided the i ~y p~ys the other half.
<br /> The e~ection of this buil~ng will s~e ~ expenditure of about $~00~O0, now paid
<br /> flor rent fo~ police ~nd fire stations. ~h~s c~[t~[zed at 5~ would be $8000.00. I believe
<br /> that the p~oposed bu~ng ~ be e~cted xo~
<br /> If, ~he=efo~e, we find mhat it is possible Zo p~ovide ffuuds flor ~his ~pr0vement
<br /> during the year, ~ter m careful investigation of ou~ lingoes, it is ~sco~ended that the
<br /> City mpproprtmte $15,OOO. for this ~po~e. The bulling Will be plmced on lot belonging to
<br /> the City on B~omd St."
<br /> ~ motion of Mr. Brooks, the privilege of the floo~ w~s g=mnted to N~. Hm~per, ~resident
<br /> of the Eighth Wm~d Civic Le~e, who sp~ke concerning the m~tte~.
<br /> ~en the communication was referred to zhe Finance Co~ittee.
<br /> llth. ~e M~ge~ forwarded ~ recommendation off the Dizecto~ o~ ~biic Welfaz~ that mn
<br /> mpp=op=iation of $~6.18 be mmde xor ~he purcnmse of m Ford runabout fo~ the City Home.
<br /> ~ motion~ the =eoo~en~tion was =efe~red to Finmuce Co~lttee.
<br /> 12th. Enclosing ~ co~unioation from"N~s. Madorm W. Hallod~y, in which she offers to sell
<br /> her ~ope=ty mt the co=net of C~roll and Dale Sts., oo~isting of m lot 30x75 ft. fron~$~
<br /> on C~oll St., m house fronting on the same street and m double house in the ~e~ ~dr $$,5OO.
<br /> The assessed v~ue of this property is $2,250. As it is necessary that Dale St.
<br /> wi:dened in order to gi~e the proper extension of Washington Street north, I ~eoo~end thmt I
<br /> be authorized to offer ~s. H~lodmy $2,~O. for this property mhd if this is not
<br /> that conduction proceedings be ~dertmken."
<br /> On motiong the recommen~tion of the Manmger wms concurred In, ~d by the fol'lowing
<br /> vote: Ayes--Brooks, Esleeok, Hall, Hutchins, Omst, ~ith, White,
<br />
<br /> 13th. "As ~cted by the Co, oil, in ~esolution adopted on Decembe~ 31, 1~21, I beg to
<br /> ~bmit the ffollowi~ ~epor~ on the installation of gmsoline tanks, ezc., in the City of
<br /> mouth: Fi~st- I ~ info,ed by the Underwriters' Inspection B~e~ that ~ i0,0~ gmllon
<br /> gasoline tmnk mmy be installed wi'thout increase of fi~e in~ance zmtes, provi~d the s~e
<br /> · e~t ~om any
<br /> installed ~der the supervision c~ the Fire ~ief mhd not l~ss Zhmn thirty ~ ~
<br /> building; the ta~ to bear the Underwriters~ approved label.
<br /> Seco~d- The City o~ Ric~ond p~o~bits the inst~llation of mny tank containing
<br /> more than 1,0OO. allons, within one hunted feet o~ b~il~ngs,.b~ t~ks~co~ta~n~_~?ss ~h~
<br /> 1,000 gmllons, z~ properly bu~ied underg~o~d may ce ~Oc~ad w~tnin ten zeBm o~ ou~&~ngs
<br /> buried ffive fsst below zhe s~fmce of the smith within the buildi~.
<br /> Thf~d- The City of Newport News prohibits the bu~ing off ~Y t~nk h~ving ~ c~p~city
<br /> greater th~ 1,OO0 gallons, ~de~ sidewalks. They also seem ~o have ~ re~l~tion, inconsimtefit
<br /> with this, which states that no tank o= receptacle cont~ni~ more th~ 150 gals. sh~l be
<br /> permitted within 100 ft. of ~ildings.
<br />
<br /> Fo~h- The Norffolk o~dim~nce provide, if the cmp~city of m ~mnk is 250 ~ls.
<br /> less, the ~stmnce from-the line of ~y buil~ o= of any lot belongi~ to mn~ther ps, son,
<br /> or ffrom the opposite side of th~ street or alleF s~ll be 25 ft.; iff ~ate~ th~ ~0
<br /> and not more th~ i,000 ~ls.- 50 ft., if ~eater than 1,000 ~lons ~d not more ~au
<br /> gals.- 15 ~t.; if E~ea~er th~ 1,500 gals- lO0 ~t. P=cvided~ thmt wh~e ~here ~e two or
<br /> more tanks, their inclosed pits shall be at lemst 6 fit. ~stant ff~om cash other.
<br /> The Norfolk Or~nmnc~ ~so ~squires that such zmnks off ~em~er cmp~oity than 50
<br /> gmls. shmll be plmced in unde~gro~d ~wmter-tight, brick or concrete pits; p~ovided, however,
<br /> that tmnks not ~excesding 100 gals. in capacity mmy be buried in earth.
<br /> Fifth- The ~ity of Roanoke hms no general ordnance covering the ' '~ '
<br /> application is considered.by the Co~cll on its merits. No ~anks ~e ~lowed ~der the side-
<br /> walks mhd the City do~s not ~rmit the installation off p~ps on the ~rb lines.
<br /> In view off zhe fact ~t no other City permits l~ge ~mnks within ~5 or 100
<br /> of buil~ngs, I ~ of the opinion that Portsm~th should adopt
<br />
<br /> It would be very ~sirabl~ to ~rohzbi~ the inst~lmtion off t~nks under the side-
<br /> walks mhd off pumps on the ~rb lines ms is the case in Ro~oke, but so much capitml hms
<br /> ready been~i-n~ested in the City in struc~res off this kind, that c~side~able h~dship would
<br /> be inflicted by such an ordinance.
<br /> If the Co, oil desires to do so, it might give considermtion to forbidding ffuzure
<br /> permits for sm~uc~res ~de= sidewalks ~d p~ps at c~rb lines mhd ~e~est that all such
<br /> st~uc$~res should be ~emoved befoze J~ry 1, 1~2~. This course, ~ do not however recommend
<br /> for th~ p~esent.
<br />
<br /> I ~ attaching m d=~t of ~ o~n~ce, which embodies my views and recommend its
<br /> The ffollowi~ is the title off said
<br />
<br />
<br />
|