Portsmouth City Council Work Session and Regular Meeting – February 10, 2026
Portsmouth City Council Work Session and Regular Meeting – February 10, 2026
The meeting began with a work session covering road and bridge maintenance, a right-of-way crew pilot, and code enforcement and neighborhood quality, followed by a regular council meeting that included three public hearings and non-agenda speakers. All votes were unanimous (7-0) on consent agenda and public hearing items.
Work Session: Road and Bridge Maintenance
- Gerard Roberts (Public Works) presented on pavement projects for FY2026 and FY2027.
- The city has 884 total lane miles: 188 primary (arterial) and 696 collector/local.
- Current Critical Condition Index (CCI) is 48 (out of 100); the regional average is 58, with Hampton leading at 71. Portsmouth ranks lowest among the seven cities.
- Prior to FY2026, annual road spending was $1.6 million. FY2026 budget is $5.4 million, but the department estimates $7 million is needed to be sustainable. FY2027 plans to increase to $7 million.
- FY2026 will pave 41 lane miles (4% of network); FY2027 plans 47 lane miles (5%). At $7 million/year, the CCI could improve from 48 to 52 over two years, aiming for a “path to 70.”
- Major corridors being addressed: Portsmouth Boulevard, Victory Boulevard, Hoffler Creek Parkway, and others. Neighborhood bundling (75% of budget) is prioritized alongside high-volume corridors.
- Bridges: The city manages five locally maintained bridges. The Churchland Bridge project is complete; Paradise Creek Bridge replacement (rating 4/6) is under construction and will start spring 2026 (18-month project); London Bridge steel repairs are in planning. All bridges are in fair condition.
- Council members raised concerns about quality assurance on utility cuts (e.g., Portsmouth Boulevard gas line repairs, Cedar Lane manholes) and the need for better oversight and inter-departmental coordination. Frederick Boulevard’s concrete joints and bumps were discussed; a temporary fix of grinding joints was suggested.
- Councilwoman Bryant noted the department should pursue available VDOT and other grants, though City Manager Carter cautioned about grant compliance timelines.
Work Session: Right-of-Way Crew Pilot
- Roberts proposed a new division for right-of-way maintenance, transitioning from reactive to proactive service.
- Scope includes mowing, herbicide application, litter control on primary and secondary roads (excluding residential tertiary roads and medians, which remain with Parks & Rec).
- Budget estimates: $600,000–$676,000 for staff, equipment, and chemicals.
- Timeline: immediate start, 90-day review, 180-day evaluation, with ongoing community impact assessments.
- Council members expressed strong support, emphasizing communication of schedules to civic leagues and coordinating with VDOT on interstate ramps. Collaboration with the Sheriff’s Office for inmate work crews was suggested.
- Councilman Dodson requested a report on downtown tree maintenance and height restrictions, and highlighted a specific overgrown intersection (Bob White and Portsmouth Boulevard).
Work Session: Code Enforcement and Neighborhood Quality
- Mike Moe (Permits and Inspections) presented on code enforcement operations.
- The city has 14 neighborhood inspectors covering 70 inspection areas patrolled weekly.
- In 2025: over 11,000 violations cited, 13,000 violations corrected; 1,700 complaints received (less than 12% of total violations); 393 were unfounded.
- C-click fix program: 702 cases in 2025, 539 closed, 163 open (down to 129 at time of presentation).
- Enforcement timelines: property maintenance – 30 days + 30 days; grass/weeds – 10 days + 10 days; inoperable vehicles – 10 days + 10 days; derelict structures – 90 days; demolition – 30 days plus legal notice.
- Challenges include identifying property owners, due process requirements, outdated technology (a new cloud-based system is expected later in 2026), and limited owner resources.
- Council discussed distinctions between grass and shrubbery (city can only cite grass over 10 inches; shrubbery cited only if it blocks egress or on vacant properties), parking on grass (zoning issue), outdoor storage (zoning), and code enforcement’s limitations (cannot enter occupied structures, cannot use drones/ladders, cannot regulate aesthetics except in historic districts).
- Councilwoman Thomas emphasized better public communication of expectations and use of social media.
- Councilman Tillis noted the need for cross-departmental collaboration and possibly consolidating inspection roles.
Consent Calendar
- Item A: Ordinance accepting $3,500 from Virginia Department of Social Services for Adult Services, appropriated to FY2026 Social Services Fund. Adopted 7-0.
- Item B: Ordinance accepting $35,073.91 from the Supreme Court of Virginia for specialty dockets grant, appropriated to FY2026 Behavioral Health Care Services Fund for the Adult Recovery Court. Adopted 7-0.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Luis Padilla (301 Chautauqua Ave): Urged council to close a claimed $6.7 million funding gap for Portsmouth Public Schools compensation study, referencing prior reappropriations of $30 million. Councilman Hugo responded that the compensation plan was already fully funded and that carryover funds were largely obligated. The city manager will follow up.
- Sheila Joseph (139 Grand St): Raised concerns about an aging transformer in the Fairville neighborhood that caused electrical issues in her home, and about a delayed neighborhood sign. She requested updates. City manager acknowledged receipt.
- Stephanie Lodi (address not stated): Alleged unfair and overly aggressive code enforcement targeting her property, including a debris notice for porch chairs and a contractor bid initiated before the correction period expired. She stated she was given vague notices and felt singled out. City Manager Carter explained the bidding process is standard to prepare for abatement if needed, but agreed to review the history of her case.
- Angela Parrish (non-resident, mother on Pinewell St): Complained about two 70,000-pound dump trucks and a tractor-trailer cabin parked on a cul-de-sac, causing noise and oil mess. She described intimidation of her 84-year-old mother and stated the issue has persisted for two years. Councilman Tillis noted prior complaints. City manager will investigate.
Public Hearings
UP25-13: Use Permit for Blunt Place (Multifamily Development)
- Applicant Bruce Watts (Woda Cooper Companies) proposed a 48-unit affordable housing complex at 3335 Victory Boulevard, named after the late Rev. Dr. Milton Blunt. Units: 7 one-bedroom, 30 two-bedroom, 11 three-bedroom; rents $855–$1,475; income limits 30–80% AMI. Amenities include elevators, computer lab, community room, universal design. Letters of support from Cavalier Manor Civic League and Church and Community in Action. Multiple public speakers expressed support, including civic league presidents and the widow of Dr. Blunt. Council praised the quality and workforce housing need. Adopted 7-0.
UP25-14: Use Permit for Safe Store Self-Storage Facility
- Applicant Rob Beaman (on behalf of Safe Store Real Estate) sought a use permit for a climate-controlled indoor self-storage facility at 2830 Airline Boulevard – a 2.3-acre vacant parcel (40+ years vacant). Investment: ~$12.5 million; new tax revenue: ~$100,000/year. Planning commission recommended denial citing concerns about need, but council noted the site’s odd shape and decades of vacancy. Applicant offered three free storage units for nonprofits and space for a police substation. Council members expressed support, and the permit was adopted 7-0. Discussion included fencing around a stormwater BMP (Best Management Practice) for safety; applicant agreed to work with staff.
Zoning Amendment: Renaming Innovation District to Link District
- Dr. Rhonda Russell (Planning) presented the ordinance to rename the Innovation Overlay District to the Link District and update permitted uses and design standards. Key changes: prohibit drive-throughs, convenience stores, single-family detached, vehicle sales, and other uses; permit makerspaces, commissary kitchens, and mixed-use development. The amendment aligns with the Innovation District Master Plan adopted a year ago and incorporates lessons from a Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative. Public comments from Tony Goodwin supported the changes and suggested adding e-commerce and food hub uses. Council discussed inclusion of the word “innovation” in the name; Vice Mayor Moody favored keeping “innovation” for marketing. The ordinance was adopted 7-0.
Key Outcomes
- All three public hearing items (Blunt Place, Safe Store, Link District) were adopted by 7-0 votes.
- Consent agenda adopted 7-0.
- Council directed the city manager to follow up on non-agenda speaker concerns: school funding, transformer and sign issues, code enforcement case history, and dump truck parking on Pinewell Street.
- Work session presentations informed council of infrastructure needs and upcoming budget requests; council encouraged proactive public communication and inter-departmental coordination.
Meeting Transcript
Sure. Mr. Green. Mr. Hugo. Present. Is he present? Is Thomas? Mr. Tillers? So seeing as we don't have a presenter, we don't have for there any questions that we have for city manager or anyone else present. Why, yes. You said you got it to get a plan pulled together. Absolutely. Yeah. It's not it's not a complete plan, but it is a story. It gives a list of the buildings or facilities. Um that is put in three phases right now. And they'll give it a list of of what those buildings are and what phase that those buildings will be connected. So that is the the plan stage of what those phases are. First phase schedule to be done in on March thirty first, second phase in July. Yeah so my recollection is that the first phase that you said is supposed to be done by the spring of the 31st yes that's what that's that's the date that I was given. Was contingent on us getting grant funding that I think was reported at the last meeting that we didn't get and so I asked then uh so if we didn't get grant funding is there money in the budget to do what we're talking about doing to complete phase one I think your answer was no. So if there's no money in the budget and there's no grant money then how do we get how do we get phase one done by the springtime when we're inside of the budget year. Well one of the things I'm talking about is is reallocating what phase one is. Phase one is uh some existing buildings for the city so no I don't have money that I can spend connect to other buildings but I can reallocate money that I can connect building the the city buildings you know what I mean. So that's what we're looking at doing kind of modify what phase one actually is because it's moving well maybe we'll say some of the public meeting maybe but it was more important to me that we get our city facilities off of lease lines and onto the networks that we are that's the most important part of this phase to me you know yeah we want to do some other things with some other people and get some other places connected but the thing that's gonna be the the the big bang for me is getting those buildings that we overconnected. Yeah so uh again this is this whole conversation's been stretched out over many meetings but my recollection when we were briefed several months ago about phase one, phase two and phase three of this plan uh that it was all pointed to connecting city buildings there wasn't any part of the plan that was intended to connect to or make our uh make our pipe available to non-city entities so um it sounds like um you think that phase one two and three does have non-city entities as part of the plan. Well what I'm looking at the builds that have listed here for phase one, two and three um some of what I would think is quasi city right what I need is that facility on on Frederick I need my fire stations. Yep. You know there's some there's certain facilities that I bet that I think are that should be at the top of the list. Right. You know what I mean um some of the outline recreation centers some of North Navy Shipyard Security Portsmouth Magistrate those those are important. I'm not saying they're not imported I I they're not as there's not as a priority as I think some of the other places should be I'll say that way. Well yeah because at the end of the day um the whole rationale for spending the money that we spent to invest in the local network was because it was going to save us money to get off of other people's infrastructure and onto our own infrastructure just as a intranet this the city talking to the city. I mean the other things are interesting, but the thing that's going to save us money to pay back the return that we made on the investment and and give you some room to spend that money on other things in the budget is getting the city infrastructure talking to the city infrastructure across our own networks. I think one of the other things that we need to look at also is a philosophy that the network has to be completely done before we start connecting anything to it. So there's a change of philosophy as I look at how we're rolling this out. That needs to happen also. Yeah. Does the plan currently include porcel public schools? Because presumably the schools need the same intra connection as the city does, and there needs to be some interconnection between PPS and the and the city to do some of the business that we do. That looks like phase five of this plan that I have in front of me. That's when the schools start coming on. So maybe we should talk to the schools to find out whether phase five works for them. I don't recall in our liaison meetings that we've had any discussions with the schools about them having any priority to get on to the broadband network. Not since I've been around anyway, I know that discussion haven't happened. I know there were discussions with the schools earlier on, and they were not very interested at that time. I think they get a very good deal on their internet. Okay.
openpublica.com