Minutes 05/08/1979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

216 M~v 8. 1979 Motion of Mr. Barnes and seconded by Mr. Holley, that authorization be granted to abate and refund $1,724.54 to the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad for taxes paid on property conveyed to the City, and was adopted by unanimous vote. 79-175 - "Consideration of a motion to transfer $2,040 from the Grants Contingency Accoun~ for a Personnel Management Study Grant. The City of Portsmouth has received a $30,000 IFA Grant for the purpose of conducting a Personnel Management Study within the City. The funds included in this motion represents the City's cash match for the grant. The remaining $27,960 will be paid by the State on a direct basis to the contractor. The City Manager recommends adoption." Motion of M-r. Barnes and seconded by Mr. Oast, that authorization be granted to transfer $2,040 from the Grants Contingency Account, and was adopted by unanimous vote. NEW BUSINESS 79-178 - The following letters were received from the City of Chesapeake and Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce relative to restrictions to opening and closing the Jordan Bridge for pleasure crafts: "City of Chesapeake - The City of Chesapeake has been attempting to alleviate some of the traffic congestion associated with the Jordan Bridge and its approaches. In a study conducted £or the South- eastern Virginia Planning District Commission, the consultant firm identified the numerous openings of the draw span as the major obstacle to~-smooth flow of traffic. The report entitled "Jordan Bridge Intermodal Conflict Analysis" stated that "By requiring pleasure craft to wait and pass with commercial craft between 6 A.M. and 9 A.M and between 3 P.M. and 6 P.M., traffic delay could be reduced by more than 44 vehicle hours per day. Such a restric- tion would require pleasure craft to delay no more than 10 to 15 minutes." After reviewing this information, the Chesapeake City Council instructed the administra- tion to forward a letter to the Coast Guard requesting implementation of restricted bridge openings (copy attached). The City of Chesapeake would welcome the support of the City of Portsmouth in our efforts to restrict these bridge openings, as such would be mutually benefi- cial to citizens of both cities." "Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce As requested by your letter of 19 March the Highways and Mass Transit Committee of the Chamber has considered the letter from-~the City Manager's Office in Chesapeake regarding cbn- trol of openings of the Jordan Bridge. O~r committee met on 12 April. Mr. Wayne Creed represen$.ed the U. S. Coast Guard. Captain A1 Kurzenhauser, U.S. Navy, represented the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. Mr. Creed presented copies of Public Notice 5-416 of 9 April which proposes to limit openings of the J~rdan Bridge for pleasure craft during the hours of 0630 and 0730 and 1530 and 1650 Monday through Friday, holidays excepted. Th~ Chamber supports this action on the pa of the U. S. Coast Guard. The Chamber considers that this action is bnt one of many actions that should be taken £m~move ~A~ ~£ traffic across this important,_highway link. The other actions which the Chamber recommends the City of Chesapeake consider for early implementation include the f6~owing:" (other matters not considered at the Council meeting) tO ~6tion of Mr. Oast and seconded by Mr. Gray, to concur in the restrictions requested and support the City of Chesapeake, and was adopted by unanimous vote. 7g-179 The following letter received from the Department of Highways and Transportation "Route 264 City of Portsmouth, Project 0264-124-102, C501, B601-B605, B607-B614; R264-124-701, M400 of This is to acknowledge your letter concerning Route 264 in thelCi~y of Portsmouth. I will;zanswer the specific items in the order the p~o~ress, or lack of it, given in your letter. on the widenin _(1) Construction began on ~pril 25, 1977 (Notice to Proceed - April 20, 1977). (2) The contract completion date was for 420 days contract to June 13, 1978 with no bad weather in construction items. which would have taken the considerations or an increase (3) An extension of time of 218 days has been granted for temporary and partial shutdowns and adverse weather; also an additional 68 days has been approved for work orders indicating additional work. [.4) The ex~ended time limit at the present time is March 29, 1979, and our best estimate now for completion is July 1, 1979. Throughout the duration of the project, the bridge construction has been the major proble~ and we have spent a considerable period of time with the prime contractor attempting to ~mprow the progress. We feel that the prime contractor, who is handling most of the grading, has don~ an outstanding job with that facet; hawever, the bridge contractor perform~.ng ~the widening