The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06680 ORD - 10/24/1962CLOSING THE HEARING GIVEN TO THE 'REAL AND TRUE OWNERS' OF PROPERTY ABUTTING ON SANTA FE STREET FROM ROSSITER TO ROBERTS DRIVE, AS TO THE SPECIAL BENEFITS TO ACCRUE TO SAID PROPERTY AND THE REAL AND TRUE OWNERS THEREOF BY VIRTUE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS OF SAID STREET WITHIN SAID LIMITS, AND AS TO ANY ERRORS, AND INVALIDITIES OR IRREGULARITIES IN ANY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OR CONTRACT THEREOF; FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PROPERTY ABUTTING UPON SAID STREETS WITHIN THE LIMITS DEFINED WILL BE SPECIALLY BENEFITTED AND ENHANCED IN VALUE IN EXCESS . OF THE AMOUNT OF THE COST OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST SAID PROPERTY ABUTTING UPON SAID STREET WITHIN THE LIMITS DEFINED AND LEVYING AN, ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE PROPERTY AND THE OWNERS THEREOF, ABUTTING UPON SAID STREETS; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, heretofore, an ordinance number 6646 , was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi for the improvement of the following STREET SANTA FE STREET FROM ROSSITER TO ROBERTS DRIVE, as defined and set out in said ordinance, and out of materials named and specified in said ordinance; and, WHEREAS, specifications were duly adopted therefor, and bids accepted, after advertisement having been duly made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council let the contract to HELDENFELS BROTHERS for the improvement Of said SANTA FE STREET , With PAVING TO CONSIST OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 5" STABILIZED LIME AND 4" COMPACTED CALICHE BASE COURSE, A 2 -1/2° HOT ASPHALTIC CONCRETE BASE COURSE AND THE CON- ' STRUCTION THEREON OF A SUBSTANTIAL WEARING SURFACE OF 1-1/2° HOT ASPHALTIC CON- CRETE SURFACE COURSE, SIDEWALKS, CURBS, GUTTERS AND DRIVEWAYS WHERE SPECIFIED, STORM SEWERS AND OTHER NECESSARY APPURTENANCES, as more particularly provided by the terms of said contract; and, WHEREAS, The City Council duly approved said contract, and determined upon the levying of an assessment against the abutting property owners for their pro rata parts of the cost Of improving the said SANTA FE STREET the applicable law; and, , as provided by IV (W) - SP -1 6680 • WHEREAS, said property owners were duly notified in accordance with the terms of the applicable law by notice being duly published in The CORPUS CHRISTI TIMES, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Corpus Christi, to appear before the City Council, at a hearing set by said Council on the 17TH day of OCTOBER, A.D. 1962 , in the Council Chamber, in the City Hall in the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, to then and there make protest and objection, if any, to said improvement, and the cost of the same, and any other objection that may appear to such property owners; and, WHEREAS, the agent or such property owners and attorneys and representatives of such property owners were also duly notified to appear at said time and place for the making of said objections, remonstrances, or protests-of any kind,; and, WHEREAS, the said hearing was duly had at said time and place, was thereafter from time to time continued in order to give a greater opportunity to the property owners or their representatives or agents to make protests or remonstrances or db- jections, as provided by the terms of the applicable law; and, WHEREAS, the following objections, protests, and remonstrances were made to -wit; (SEE ATTACHMENT and WHEREAS, said respective protests, remonstrances, and objections, after having been duly considered by the Council, are disposed of in the following manner: The objections, protests and remonstrances of the following property owners, on SANTA FE STREET are determined against them and overruled; and, WHEREAS, the Council, after fully considering the said assessments, and fully considering the benefits that each property owner and his property received from making said improvements, are of the opinion that the said assessments heretofore determined to be levied are fair and equitable, and represent the benefits that the said property receives in enhanced values from the making of the said improvements, and that the said assessments should be made; and, WHEREAS, the Council having no further protest, remonstrance, or objection before it, is of the opinion that the said hearing should be closed; Now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED By THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI SECTION 1. That the said hearing heretofore ordered has on the 17TH day` Of OCTOBER, A.D. 19 62 , and thereafter continued until the present date, be and the same is hereby ordered closed. IV (W) - SP -2 ' Sheet 1 FT V AT. STREF,T IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT SANTA FE - ROSSITER TO ROBERT DRIVE ASSESSMENT RATES CONCR_FTE CURB, CTN.R;_5mEWALKS Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2, C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R -2 $7.26 DRIVEWAYS & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT . Sidewalk per square foot 0.36 Driveway per square foot $0.75 HELDENFELS BROTHERS WEST SIDE ITEM • DESCRIPTION TOTAL NO. QUANTITY OF AMOUNT OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ASSESSED ASSESSMENT RATE AMOUNT V ASSESSED 1. RO Jos. A. Cohn WEST SIDE SITER STREET C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 4 608.04 4,6o8.00 0 LF Lots 1 thru 32 Block 414 P.A. Cliffs 800' Zoned R -1 & R -2 - 100% Assess. S CLAIR STR4T 800 IF 2. E. B. Baker C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 4,6o8.0o Lots 1 thru 32 3140 sF sidewalk $0.36 1,130.4o Block 415 P.A. Cliffs 800' Zoned R -1 or R -2 - 100% Assess. 151.26SF 15' Driveway $0.75 113.45 5,851.85 ROPES ST 100 IF 3.' K. R. Olsen C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 576,00 Lots 29 thru 32 Block 416 P.A. Cliffs 400 SF Sidewalk $0.36 144.00 720.00 100' Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2 100'% 4. J. F. Garza Lots 25 thru 28 Block 416 P.A. Cliffq 100' Zoned R -1 - 100 100 IF 332 SF 174.26SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 17' Driveway $5.16 $0.36 $0.75 576.00 119.52 130.70 826.22 5. Chas. McCrann Lots 22,23 & 24 Block 416 P.A. Cliffs -75' Zoned & Used R -1 - 100'% 75 LF 240 SF 151.26 si, C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 15' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 432.00 86.40 113.45 631.85 D. Lawrence J. Nelson 75 IF C.G. & Pvmt. ; $5.76 432.00 Lots 19,20 & 21 Block 416 P.A. Cliffs 75' Zoned & Used R -1 - 100% 220 SF 222.52SF Sidewalk 2 -10' Drives $0.36 $0.75 79.20 166.89 678.09 7. E. M. Poenish 75 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 432.00 Lots 16,17 & 18 Block 416 P.A. Cliffs 75' Zoned R -1 - 100% 256 SF 120.265F Sidewalk 11' Driveway $0.36 $0.75 92.16 90.20 614.36 3. G. L. Stewart at ux Lots 13,14 & 15 Block 416 P.A. Cliffs 75' Zoned R -1 - 100% 75 IF 240 SF 151.26SF C.G. & Pvmt. sidewalk 15' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 432.00 86.40 113.45 631.85 Sheet 7 x INAL . 8TRJ'm IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT SANTA FE - ROSSITER TO ROBERT DRIVE ASSESSMENT RATES CONCRETE CURB, GUTM,-SIDEWALIM Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2 C.G. & Pvmt. 5.76 Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R -2 7.26 DRIVEWAYS, & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Sidewalk per square foot $0.36 Driveway per square foot $0.75 BELDENFELS BROTHERS ITEM NO., OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION QUANTITY ASSESSED DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT RATE AMOUNT TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED i 48B. Max C. Kluge Sz of Lot 58 and Lots 59 thru 61 87-'ff' Zoned R -1 100% - P.A. Cliffs 87.5 LF 350 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 504.06 126.00 630.00 48C. W. C, Herndon, Jr. 75 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 432.00 Lots 62 thru 64, Block 314 300 SF Sidewalk $0.36 108.00 540.00 P.A. Cliffs - 75' Zoned R -1 100% INCLP,IR ST3EET 100 LF 49. Lennie B. Beckham C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 576.00 Lots 33 thru 36, Block 315 400 SF Sidewalk $0.36 144.00 720.00 Port Aransas Cliffs 100' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50. George E. Stevens Lots 37,38,39 & N 15' Lot 40 90 IF 320 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0,36 518.40 115.20 Block 315, P. A. Cliffs 90' Zoned R -1 - 100% 111.26SF 10' Driveway $0.75 83.45 717.05 51. H. L. Grove S 10' Lot 40 & all Lots 41,42,43 & 95 IF 340 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 547.20 122.40 N 10' Lot 44, Block 315, P. A. Cliff 95' Zoned R -1 - 100% 111.26SP 10' Driveway $0.75 83.45 753.05 52. E. J. Stevenson S 15' Lot 44, All lots 45,46,47 Block 315, P. A. Cliffs 90' Zoned R -1 - 100% 90 IF 320 SF 111.26SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 10' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 518.40 115.20 83.45 717.05 53. Bobby D. Means Lots 48,49,50 and N 15' Lot 51 Block 315 P. A. Cliffs 90' Zoned R -1 - 100% 90 IF 320 SF 111.26SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk lo' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0:75 518.40 115.20 83.45 717.05 54. Dr. R. 0. Best S 10' Lot 51, all lots 52,53,54,55 & N 5' Lot 56, Blk 315, P.A. Cliffs 115' Zoned R' -1 - l00% 115 IF 412 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 12' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 662.40 148.32 0.00 810.72 55. Anna Thompson 53 LF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 305.28 S 20' Lot 56 all Lot 57 & 8' Lot 58, 172 SF Sidewalk $0.36 61.92 Block 315, P.A. Cliffs 53' Zoned R -1 - 100% 111.26SF 10' Driveway $0.75 83.45 450.65 x Credit given for existing driveway • Sheet 8 FINAL STREET IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT SANTA FE - ROSSITER TO ROBERT DRIVE ASSESSMENT RATES CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALKS Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2, C. G. & Pvmt. 5.76 Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R -2 7.26 DRIVEWAYS & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Sidewalk per square foot $0.36 BELDENFELS BROTHERS Driveway per square foot $0.75 DESCRIPTION TOTAL ITEM QUANTITY OF AMOUNT NO OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ASSESSED ASSESSMENT RATE AMOUNT ASSESSED 56. E. Cox S 17' Lot 58, All of 59 & N 12' Lot 60 Blk 3151 P. A. Cliffs 54' Zoned R -1 - 100% 54 IF 176 SF 111.26SF C.G & Pvmt. Sidewalk 10' Driveway $5.76 $o.36 $0.75 311.o4 63.36 83.45 457.85 57. Helen Marie Kirchner S 13' Lot 6o, all lots 61 & N 15' Lot 62 Block 315, P.A. Cliffs 53' Zoned R -1 - 100'% 53 IF 172 SF 111.26SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 10' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 305.28 61.92 83.45 450.65 58. Mary V. Boscamp 6o LF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 345.6o S 10' Lot 62 all 63 & 64, Block 315 240 SF Sidewalk $0.36 86.40 432.00 P.A. Cliffs - 60' Zoned R -1 - 100% ROPES S T 100 IF 59. Carson G. Evans C.G. & Pvmt. $5.40 540.00 Lots 33,34,35 & 36, Block 316 P. A. .Cliffs 1O0' Zoned R -1 93.8% 400 SF Sidewalk $0.34 136.00 676.00 60. Henry A. Turner 100 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.4o 540.00 Lots 37 thru 40, Block 316 356 SF Sidewalk $0.34 121.04 P. A. Cliffs 100' Zoned R -1 93.8% 120.26SF 11' Driveway $0.75 90.20 751.24 576.00 144.00 720.00 61. Julia G. Norrell Lots 41 thru 44 Block 316 P.A. Cliffs 100' Zoned R -1 - 100% 100 LF 400 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 61A. Julia G. Norrell 100 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.36 536.00 Lots 45 thru 48 Block 316 P.A. Cliffs 100' Zoned R -1 93.0% 400 SF sidewalk $0.33 132.00 668.00 62. Jack Scholl 100 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 576.00 Lots 49 thru 54, Block 316 400 SF Sidewalk $0.36 144.00 720.00 P.A. Cliffs and Prt. Block 316 P.A. Cliffs 317.97' adjusted to 100' because of shape B�AWXER PAR AY 63. City of Corpus Christi Credit given for existing driveway FINAL STREET IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT Sheet 9 SANTA FE - ROSSITER TO ROBERT DRIVE ASSESSMENT RATES CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALKS _Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2, C.G. & Pvmt, $5.76 Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R -2 $7. 26 DRIVEWAYS & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Sidewalk per square foot $o.36 HELDENFELS BROTHERS Driveway per square foot $0-75 I NO. OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION QUANTITY ASSESSED DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT RATE AMOUNT TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED WNER PAREW 50 IF 200 SF 64. 71 Bessie T. Orr Lots 33 & 34, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 288.00 72.00 360.00 65,: James H. Wood Lots 35 & 36, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50 IF 200 SF C,G. & Pvmt, Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 288.00 72.00 360.00 66. James H. Wood Lots 37 & 38, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 60' Zoned R -1 - 100%i 50 IF 160 SF *126 SF C,G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 10' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0,75 288.00 57.60 94.50 440.10 288.00 57.60 26.25 371.85 67. Barney H. McBride Lots 39 & 40, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50 IF 160 SF * 35 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 10' Driveway $5.776 $0,36 $0.75 288.00 57.60 36.00 381.60 68. Ray H. McGuire Lots 41 & 42, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50 IF 160 SF * 48 SF C.G. & Pvmt, Sidewalk 10'Driveway $5,76 $0.36 $0.75 576.00 144.00 720.00 59. 1 a Oliver Bird Lots 43 thru 46, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 100' Zoned R -1 - 100�i 10Q LF 400 SF C.G. 4 Pvmt_ Sidewalk $5,76 $0.36 TO. Kenneth A. Owens Lots 47,48, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50 IF 200 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 288.00 72.00 360.00 1, E. M. Baker Lots 49,50 Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50 IF 200 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 288.00 72.00 360.00 '2• Wm. A. Eppes, Jr. Lots 51,52,53, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 75' Zoned R -1 - 100% 75 IF 218 SF 369 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 20.5 Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 432.00 78.48 276.75 787.23 288.00 72.00 360.00 3. S. L. Riecke Lots 54,55, Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 50' Zoned R -1 - 100% 50 IF 200 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5,76 $0.36 Credit given for existing driveway FINAL STREET IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT Sheet 10 MPR SANTA FE - _ROSSITER TO ROBERT DRIVE CONCRETE CURB GUTTER SIDEWALKS ASSESSMENT RATES Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2, C.G. & Pvmt $5 76 DRIVEWAYS & ASPMT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R,2 $7.26 Sidewalk Per square foot --$-0-.36 BELDENFELS BROTHERS Driveway per square foot $0.75 ITEM DESCRIPTION IDT� NO QUANTITY OF AMOUNT - 'SCRIPTTON AoQro- -__ 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. Joseph D. Henderson Lots 56 thru 59 Block 217 P.A. Cliffs 100' Zoned R -1 - 100% R. John Bull Lot 1 of Replat - P.A. Cliffs 125' Zoned R -1 - 70% Z. C. Birnberg Lot 7, Block 4, Hyde Park 158' Zoned R -1 - 90% Jennie V. Modesett Lot 6, Block 4, We Park 158' Zoned R -1 - 9O% Dave Isenberg Lot 7, Block 3, Hyde Park 158' Zoned R -1 - 90% Mrs. Marshall E. Skinner Lot 6, Block 3, Hyde Park 158' Zoned R -1 - go% Richard King III Lot 1, Block 2, Hyde Park 158.5' Zoned R -1 - 85% F.F. Rogers Lot 8, Block 3, Cole Place 156' Zoned R -1 - 100% * Credit given for existing dri 100 Iy C.G. & Pvmt. 360 SF Sidewalk 74 SF 10' Driveway 125 LF C.G. & Pvmt. 440 Sr Sidewalk 258 SP 15' Driveway )DRIDGE S T x 158 I.F C.G. & Pvmt. 564 SF Sidewalk *161 SF 17' Driveway 158 LF C.G. & Pvmt. 544,8SF Sidewalk *234.20SP 21.8' Driveway 158 LF C.G. & Pvmt. 544 SF Sidewalk 456 SP 22' Driveway 158 IF C.G. & Pvmt. 548 sr Sidewalk *345 SF 21' Driveway 158.5 LF C.O. & Pvmt. 570 SF Sidewalk *272 SF 16' Driveway 156 IF C.G. & Pvmt. 624 Sr aidewalk iN $5.76 576.00 $0.36 129.60 $0.75 55.50 761.10 $4.03 503.75 0.25 110.00 0.75 193.50 An7_ns 15.18 I 818.44 0.32 I 180.48 $0.75 120.75 5.18 818.44 0.32 174.34 $0.75 1 175.75 t5.18 818.44 .32 174.08 $0.75 342.00 1,334, 5.18 818.44 0.75 238.75 1,252, 4.90 776.65 0.31 176.70 $0.75 2o4.00 $0.36 228.64 Sheet FLTLAL STREET IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT CONCRETE CURB. GUTTER, SZDBKLM Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2 C.G. & Pvmt 95.7' Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R -2 $7.2i DRIVEWAYS & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Sidewalk per square foot $0.3' riveway per square foot 0.7. D P !T.TIF.NGPTA 'PPNVAT!RC DESCRIPTION TOTAL ITEM QUANTITY OF AMOUNT ASSESSED ASSESSMENT RATE AMOUNT ASSESSED BACRIDGE DR 156 IF 82. Crysuk Sory C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 898.56 Lot 7, Block 2, Cole Place 624 SF Sidewalk $0.36 224.64 1,123.20 156' Zoned R -1 - 100' $3. Nelson Wray 156 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 898.56 Lot 6, Block 2, Cole Place 624 SF Sidewalk $0.36 224.64 4123.20 156' Zoned R -1 - 100 %, YSIDE DR 156 IF 84. J. G. Brysom C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 898.56 Lot 9, Block 1, Cole Place 584 SF Sidewalk $0.36 210.24 156' Zoned R -1 - 100%i 228 SF 10' Driveway $0.75 213.26 '1,322.o6 898.56 224.64 1,123 -20 85. B. N. Coward Lot 10, Block 1, Cole Place 156' Zoned R -1 - 100% 156 LF 624 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 M TCHELL STRIET 176 IF 86. M.C. Wommack C.G. & Pvmt. $5.18 911.68 Lots I -1 & H -1 Block La Rue Place 176' Zoned R -1 - 90% 640 SF 276 SF Sidewalk 16' Driveway - $0.32 $0.75 204.80 207.00 1,323.48 649.73 87. S. T. Carpenter 112.8 LF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 Portion Blk 220 P.A. Cliffs 391.2 SF Sidewalk $0.36 140.83 - 112.8' Zoned R -1 - 100% 323 SF 15' Driveway $0.75 242.25 1,032.81 506.88 88. G. F. Brown 88 IF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 Portion Blk 220, P.A. Cliffs 312 SF Sidewalk $0.36 112,32 88' Zoned R -1 - 100% 22$ SF 10' Driveway $0.75 171.00 790.20 656.29 89. Victor Brock 113.94LF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 Portion Blk 220 - P.A. Cliffs 407,765F Sidewalk $0.36 146.79 113.94' Zoned R -1 - 100% 266 SF 12' Driveway $0.75 199.50 1.002.58 755.80 90. Ira A. Phelps 146.19LF C.G. & Pvmt. $5.17 Lot 1, Block 1, Ryan Addn. 524.76SF Sidewalk $0.32 146.19' Zoned R -1 - 88.65% 323 SF 15' Driveway $0.75 .167.92 242.25 1,165.97 RRAINE DRJE ITEM NO. 91. 92. 92A. 93• 94. 94A. 95. 96. 97• Sheet 12 FINAL STRr,T IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT _ SANTA FE - R08SIT_F.R T_0_ ROBERT_ DRTVE ASSESSMENT RATES CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALES Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2, C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or R -2 .26 DRIVEWAYS & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Sidewalk per square foot 0.36 HELDENFELS BROTHERS Driveway per square foot $0.75 OWNER &PROPERTY DESCRIPTION QUANTITY ASSESSED DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT TOTAL AMOUNT RRAINE DR 146.581F' 518.32SP 211.00SF R. L. Strewn Lot 15, Block 1, Ryan Addn. 146.58' Zoned R -1 - 100% C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 17' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 844.30 186.60 158.25 1 1,189-15 1,270.50 194.40 Dr. J. M. Spriegel A portion of Blk 221, P.A. Cliffs 175 IF 540 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $7.26 $0.36 175' Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 *556 SF 2 -20' Drives $0.75 417.00 1,881-90 345.60 64.80 242.25 1 652.65 Dr. J. M. Spriegel A portion of Blk 221, P.A. Cliffs 60' Zoned & Used R -1 - 100% 60 IF 180 SF 323 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 15' Drive $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 806.40 165.60 384.75 1,356.75 Santa Fe Swim Club A Pr. of Blk. 221, P.A. Cliffs 14o' Zoned R -1 - 100% 140 LF 46o SF 513 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 25' Driveway $5.76 $0.36 $0.75 403.25 Max Kluge 99.57 IF C.G. & Pvmt, $4,05 A Pr.of Blk. 221, P.A. Cliffs 99.57' Zoned R -1 - 70.33% 334.28SF 342 SF Sidewalk 16' Drive $0.25 $0.75 83.57 256.50 743.32 402.37 99.35 501.72 Max Kluge Portion of Blk 221, P.A. Cliffs Lot 8, 99.35` - 70.37% 99.35LF 397.40SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $4.05 $0.25 F. S. Price, Jr. Lot 17, Ocean View Estates 85' Zoned R -1 - 100% 85 LF 238.80SF *180.70SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 1 -15' & 1 -10' $5.76 $0,36 489.60 85.97 Driveways $0,75 135.52 711.09 518.40 129.60 648.00 J. G. Whitmore Lot 16, Ocean View Estates 90' Zoned R -1 - 100% 90 IF 360 SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 OCEAN VIEW 100 IF 400 SF D. M. Bickford All Lot 15 & N 10' Lot 14, Ocean View Estates - 100' Zoned R -1 - 100% C.G, & Pvmt. Sidewalk $5.76 $0.36 576.00 144.00 720.00 * Credit given for existing drivewa Sheet 13 FINAL S'T'REET IIIPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT ' SANTA IS, - .ROESTTER,TQ RORFRT TIRTVA'. ASSESSMENT RATES CONCRETE CURB, GUTTMI. SjDE41=. Zoned & Used R -1 or R -2, C.G. & Pvmt. $5.76 Zoned or Used Other Than R -1 or-R-2 $7.26 DRIVEWAYS & ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Zoned per square foot .36 RFT.TfF.NFFK a BROTHERS Driveway per square foot 0.75 DESCRIPTION TOTAL ITEM NO. OWNER & PROPERTY MSCRIPTION WANTITY of ASSESSMENT RATE AMQ AMOUNT ASSESSED 98. J. H. Martin 8 60' Lot 14 & N 30' Lot 13, Ocean 'View Edtated 90' Zoned R -1 - 100 90 IF 312 8V *242 Sp C-G, & Pvmt. Sidewalk 12' Driveway 5.76 0.36 0:75 518.40 112.32 181,50 812.22 1,058.98 239.54 277.88 1,576.40 99: L. J. Geisler S 40' Lot 13 All Lot 12 -Ocean View Estates - 183.85' zoned R -1 - 100, 183.85LF 665.40SF 370,50SF C.G. & Pvmt. Sidewalk 17' Driveway 5.76 .36 $0.75 1,140,18 100. A, H. Speer 197,95T' 'Coo. & pvmt, 5 76 Lots 11 & 10 Ocean 'View Estates 197.95' Zoned R -1 - 100%i 751,808P 85.28SF Sidewalk 10, Driveway 0.36 10-75 270.65 63.96 1,474-79 EEN llR 163.5 12 101, John C. Mitchell C -0, & ?V!m , 3,86 631.11 Lot 4, Bloch 2, Aberdeen Shores 163.5' zoned R -1 7� 654 OF sidewalk o,24 156:96 78$.07 102. ' Jahn Mendleski Lot 5, $lock 2, Aberdeen Sho�ee 165' �oiied M � 61- 165 tv 618,405' 178,888V O.G. & gvmt, 8iaewalk 101 Driveway $3.86 0.24 0.75 636. 90 148,48 13 r � 6 . _ _919 + 48 . OTRCLE bR 173 LF 588 8? 103: C.C, Morris t6t 4, Block 3, Aberdeen Shores 0.0, & pvmt, Sidewalk 3186 0,24 10-75 667.78 141.,1? 173' zoned M - 67� 397 -AeP 961 Drivdvay 714 :1:0 15 -,,36 _ .._ -. 46....1 097•.92 104: 0. A. kearny Lot 5y Block 3, Aberdeen Shored 185' zoned Rol -� 67� 185 iY 664 81, 299.285E C 0. & PVht: Sidewalk l9f D'r'iveway 08,86 0:24 0,7.5 160 LF 640 OF 105: rr. Y. baker Lot 6, Block 51 Aberdeen dhoree ' 160' zoned R -1 - 67� - Improver�entd end 151 dhort of PA C.6. & Fwmt," sidewalk 3,86 �o,24 617 do 1:53 4 Credit given Eor exidting drivdway TOTAL Plib 0s CONTRAdt PRtdt ERTY OwriE�t8 AdM S p0A!PiOE 8MSNTS 227, 50. r32 x852,21. , , 71 • s • , • • 1 City of Corpus Christi Regular Council Meeting October 17, 1962 Page #7 After a brief recess, Mayor Pro aem Swantner reconvened the meeting, directed that it be noted that the Council was all present, with the exception of Mayor McDonald who had been excused for cause, and announced the public hearing on the proposed assessments for the improvement of Santa Fe Street from Rossiter to Roberts Drive. Patrick J. Horkin, Jr., attorney, representing Bishop Garriga, owner of 6 1. acres of land at the intersection of Roberts Drive and Santa Fe, neither opposed nor approved the project as a whole, but restated his written request by letter to the Mayor that the sidewalk be deleted at this time and that t he assessment for that purpose be deducted, on the basis that the tract is undet//veloped and unplatted and that it is not known whether the land will be used for a/ /church or for some other purpose, and stated that the owner is willing to enter into a written agree- ment that when the property is platted and developed, a sidewalk uniform in size and specifications with those being built in connection with this project will be built along the property abutting Santa Fe at the owner's expense. Joe Cohn, attorney, requested that the sidewalk also be deleted on the west side of Santa Fe on the undeveloped block between Rossiter and Sinclair, now platted in 25' lots, until such time as development is planned and the property re- platted, and stated his willingness to enter into written agreement with respect to the future installation of sidewalk for this property. William H. Bloch, attorney representing some of the property owners abut- ting Santa Fe from Rossiter to Roberts Drive, presented a set of 4 petitions that the special assessment system for the improvement of Santa Fe be abandoned, for the reason that such proposed improvements do not enhance the value of their prop- erty, and further to eliminate the proposed sidewalks for the reason that they are not needed, nor will they enhance the value of their property. Jack Graham, Director of Public Works, testifying under oath, explained the,program proposed,for Santa Fe between Rossiter and Roberts Drive as provided for in the January, 1961,-bond election in accordance with information submitted ' • to the voters iri such election that all paving projects would be carried out with the assessment policy set forth under the City Code; explained in detail the nature,, i y ` ,. e i �i4! �e r d+ `" k sl. •yt , 1 • r r> . �, � 1 � +•`i City of Corpus Christi, Texas Regular Council Meeting October 17, 1962 Page #8 extent and specifications of the proposed improvements as approved by the City Council; the cost of construction in accordance with the low bid received and awarded by the City Council; the amount of cost to be borne by the City and the amount to be assessed against the abutting property owners; and the manner in which such pro rata share was computed. Mr. Graham called particular attention to a recommended adjustment in the preliminary assessment roll for a triangular shaped lot in Block 3169 owned by Jack Scholl, where the property comes to a very acute angle along the frontage of Santa Fe and does not have a useable depth; and pointed out that credit has been allowed for existing sidewalk, or curb and gutter, or con- crate driveway meeting normal City Code standards. Mr. Graham explained the various methods of payment which a property owner may elect to use for satisfying his assess- ment. Harold Carr, and Dick Turner„ each individually testified under oath as to his background experience which he felt qualified him as a real estate appraiser for both business and residential properties in this City; each individually testi- fied that he has personally viewed and understood the extend and specifications of the proposed improvements; that he had personally viewed the assessment roll and each of the properties to be assessed; and each testified that in his opinion, each of the properties so assessed would be enhanced in value at least to the extent of the proposed assessment against each property, with a few specific exceptions, and related some of the elements considered in forming his opinion. The following exceptions and recommendations made by Mr. Carr and by Mr. Turner were noted: The triangular shaped lot in Block 316, in the name of Jack Scholl, was recommended for adjustment for the reason given and as recommended in Mr. Graham's testimony; Item #61 on the assessment roll, in the 3600 block of Santa Fe, in the name of Norrell, was recommended for adjustment to 93% of the assessment on the South 100' only, on the basis that the 84' average depth and the setback requirements do not leave very much b6ildable area; Item #60, in the name of Turner, and Item #59, in the name of Evans, were each recommended for adjustment on the basis that in each case the depth of the lot was 881, and the enhancement should not be more than 93.8% of the assessment according to Mr. Carr's opinion, and should be about 93% in Mr. Turner's opinion; Item 41, 42 and 43, property in the Livingston Estate Subdivision, was recom- mended for adjustment on the basis that although the existing paving is not up to standard, some formula for pro rating the 'remaining value for credit should be worked out. City of Corpus Christi, Texas Regular Council Meeting October 17, 1962 Page #9 The following asked questions of a general nature of Mr. Graham: Dan Winship, 3044 Linden, speaking for his mother, regarding her property at 301 Peerman Place, questioned Mr. Graham as to the application of certain percent- ages to certain proposed improvements, and questioned the driveway calculation in particular; and was informed that any arithmetic error would be corrected; William H. Bloch, attorney, examined Mr. Graham at length for the purpose of determining whether an appraiser had been retained by the City to determine the ahancement in value to the abutting property prior to the January 1961 bond election and in the preparation of the preliminary assessment roll. Mr. and Mrs. George Kearny, 256 Purl, questioned the effect of street parking in the event a church is built across the street from their property on Bishop_ Garrigeb property, and were Informed that the City's Zoning Ordinance requires specific provision for off - street parking for churches. Their suggestion that a survey be made as to speed resulting from additional traffic on a widened Santa Fe converging on a narrower street at the and was noted; James H. Martin, 4228 Santa Pe, questioned the need for sidewalks, on the basis of usage and existing overgrowth of some sidewalk areas, Mrs. George Grains, 4020 Santa Fe, objected to no credit being given for side- walk not meeting the new grade for the street; Mitchell C. Womack, 257 Mitchell, auggested that dips be included in the road to slow down the traffic, Larry Nelson, 2631 Santa Fe, requested information as to the proposed plans where curbs were to be placed above present yard levels. The following asked questions of Mr. Carr: William Bloch, cross - examined Mr. Carr at length and in detail as to his affiliations with professional appraiser societies; date of employment by the City in connection with this particular assessment program; the method of approach he had used for this appraisal; and the basis upon which he had formed his opinion as to enhancement in value to abutting property of the proposed improvements. Mr. Joe Cohn questioned Mr. Carr as to the basis of his opinion that the increased traffic and speed resulting from the widened and improved street would enhance the abutting property. Charles Beu, 301 Santa Monica, objected to the assessment on the basis that his lots were both only 90' wide, and the question of footage was noted for checking. Assistant City Attorney James S. Tunnell announced the City rested, and Mayor Pro Tem Swantner declared a 10- minute recess. After a brief recess, Mayor Pro Tem Swantner reconvened the hearing, and announced the Council would now hear from anyone in the audience who desired to be heard in respect to these assessments. Attorney Bloch called Gilbert H. Isenberg as a witness, who testified under oath as to his background experience which he felt qualified him as a realtor and real estate appraiser for properties in this City; testified from data gathered in a study made in 1961 by himself and Scruggs Love, Jr., on the effect of paving South Staples Street, which was accepted in evidence and marked as Exhibit Ao which City of Corpus Christi, Texas Regular Council Meeting October 17, 1962 Page #10 compared sales prices of corner lots and of inside lots before and after the im- provement of Staples Street, and showed, based on the weighted average, that houses on corner lots had increased in value 2.01% and houses on inside lots had increased in value 4.07%. Mr. Isenberg stated that this study could be considered inconclusive since so many factors which could have caused these increases in value had not been considered, but that he believed the weighted average reflected the market value as it effects South Staples Street, and that in his opinion, based on his study of South Staples Street projected to Santa Fe, generally speaking there would be no enhance- ment in value, but that there might be enhancement on individual properties, but each property would have to be appraised separately to determine,it. In reply to Attorney Bloch's questioning, Mr. Gilbert stated that he recognized there was increased traffic on these streets after paving, but also recognized there was increased traffic every place due to the City's growth; and stated that without first making a study, he declined to comment as to enhancement in value resulting from curb and gutter or from sidewalk, but that in his opinion they are desirable. Mr. Isenberg requested permission to speak as a taxpayer, and stated that he wanted the Council to know that he was in favor of paving and recognized the problem involved in raising the necessary money; pointed out that the City bears a tremendous burden where County road tax is concerned; and suggested that the County be approached to assist financially in the paving of some of the major streets in the City used by the general public as evidenced by the increased traffic in and out of the City. Swantner Mayor Pro Tem/asked Attorney Bloch if he had other expert witnesses he wanted the Council to hear or any new testimony to offer, and after a brief discussion a9 to the witnesses Attorney Bloch stated he would like to have testify and the purpose of their testimony, it was agreed by City Attorney Singer and Attorney Bloch that the record would stipulate that the testimony of two witnesses, Scrugg Love, Jr., and Charles Lewis, also employed by Attorney Bloch's clients would be substantially the same as the testimony of Mr. Isenberg, if they had been present and had testified. Al Sppes, 3742 Santa Fe, identified the petitions, marked A, B, C and D. which had been submitted by Attorney Bloch at the beginning of the hearing, and stated that the printed named on the petitions had been printed there by him; that he did not have specific authority from each of them to do so; but that each of the persons City of Corpus Christi, Texas Regular Council Meeting October 17, 1962 Page #11 whose name so appears on the petitions had made a contribution to the fund raised for the employment of counsel and expert witnesses. Harold Carr was recalled for questioning, and referring to the study from which Mr. Isenberg had drawn his conclusions, pointed out that no study had been made on Alameda, Kostoryz, or Weber which are similarly improved streets; that having noted a plus 27.3% difference in value before and after, listed for Lot Lindale j3 Subdivision 20, Block 31d an inside lot in the study, that he had particularly checked with the present owner and found that the addition of a bedroom, bathroom, a fence, a sub -. stantial doll house, and a number of other improvements had been made, which he considered would justify the increase in sale price; that he had therefore removed this sale from the study, and took the weighted average of increase on inside lots which is 1.95% as compared to 2.01% on corner lots; that in checking corner lots, one that sold for less after street improvementr'than before was found to be a two - bedroom house with a one -car garage, which he considered would effect the decrease in value. Mr. Carr stated,that he considered Staples Street as having more traffic than Santa Fe, and furthermore that a study of Staples would be of no significance in a study of Santa Fe. Mr. Carr emphasized that 4is testimony was not an appraisal, but that he had walked up and down Santa Fe, had taken pictures which he submitted as evidence, and that after a study of the street to be improved, his opinion was as expressed. Everyone having been given an opportunity to be heard who so desired, Motion by Young, seconded by Barnard and passed that the hearing be closed. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned. f SECTION 2. That the objection, protests, and remonstrances of the herein - above respectively named owners, namely, (SEE ATTACHMENT) be overruled. SECTION 3. That the City Attorney be, and he is hereby directed to prepare an ordinance assessing against the several owners of property, and against their property abutting upon the streets hereinabove mentioned, the proportionate part of said cost that has been heretofore adjudged against the said respective owners and their property. That the said ordinance shall fix a lien upon said property, and shall declare said respective owners thereof to be respectively liable for the amounts so adjudged against them. Said ordinance shall in all respects com- ply with the applicable law in such cases made and provided. SECTION 4. That this resolution shall take effect from and after its pas- sage, as in the Charter in such cases is made and provided. The importance to the public of determining the assessments against property owners and thereby enabling construction to sooner proceed creates a public emer- gency and an imperative public necessity requiring the suspension of the Charter rule that no ordinance or resolution shall be passed finally on the date it is introduced and that such ordinance or resolution shall be read at three several meetings of the City Council, and the Mayor having declared such public emergency and imperative public necessity to exist, and having requested that such Charter rule be suspended and that this resolution be passed finally on the date of its introduction and take effect and be in full force and effect from and after its passage. _. PASSED AND APPROVED, the day of V C fie, , 19 ATTEST: City 0, 5 ary APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FdTHIS THE A �}y �DAY OF X- , 19 6 City Attorney rf IV (W) - SP -3 THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS g/ DAY OF CPO' /� I9` / TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE OF THE FORE- GOING ORDINANCE, A PUBLIC EMERGENCY AND IMPERATIVE NECESSITY EXIST FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE CHARTER RULE OR REQUIREMENT THAT NO ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION SHALL BE PASSED FINALLY ON THE DATE IT IS INTRODUCED, AND THAT SUCH ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION SHALL BE READ AT THREE MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL; 1, THEREFORE, HEREBY REQUEST THAT YOU SUSPEND SAID CHARTER RULE OR REQUIREMENT AND PASS THIS ORDINANCE FINALLY ON THE DATE IT IS INTRODUCED, OR AT THE PRESENT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL. RESPECTFULLY, MAYOR THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI,, TEXAS THE CHARTER RULE WAS SUSPENDED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: BEN F. MCDONALO /� _ GC•' JG.,- TOM R. SWANTNER ,C/• / DR. JAMES L. BARNARD GLy [--i .JOSE R. DEL.EON c/, � M. P. MA LDONA00 ( W. J. ROBERTS %��Q GC( 0 ,LAMES H. YOUNG C�i e+ THE ABOVE ORDINANCE WAS PASSED BY THE FOLLOWIN VOT BEN F. MCDONA LD TOM R. SWANTNER //_7 C4{l.�J DR. JAMES L. BARNARD GEC _ JOSE R. DELEON C 1 M. P. MALDONADO W. J. ROBERTS lk,2,� JAMES H. YOUNG Alf 0 p